Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Gravity powered devices => Gravity powered devices => Topic started by: hartiberlin on December 01, 2006, 12:11:41 AM

Title: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: hartiberlin on December 01, 2006, 12:11:41 AM
Hi All,
here is Mr. Milkovic,
who has invented a great new mechanical oscillation system,
that seems to output 12 times more energy than inputed into the system !
Very convincing video demonstration !

Maybe this is also one effect Bessler did use in his wheel ?


http://www.veljkomilkovic.com/OscilacijeEng.html (http://www.veljkomilkovic.com/OscilacijeEng.html)

44.MB Video at
http://www.veljkomilkovic.com/Video/Veljko_Milkovic_(video-1)_full_video_presentation.wmv (http://www.veljkomilkovic.com/Video/Veljko_Milkovic_(video-1)_full_video_presentation.wmv)


or here:

http://www.micropixel.biz/veljkomilkovic/videos/Veljko_Milkovic_(video-1)_full_video_presentation.wmv

Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: djancak on December 01, 2006, 04:32:50 AM
i just watched the video.  ;D

this is a very fascinating yet simple machine. he demonstrates it's ease of use to do a powerful amount of work several times.

however, he does NOT show the device powering itself, which is the best way to demonstrate overunity.
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: nwman on December 01, 2006, 06:19:25 AM
I agree! If he can show it powering itself then I will believe. It should be a relatively simple process to do. I'm surprised he went with a water pump instead of driving a motor. Plus, there is little math explained in the video that shows the flow of energy. Observations can be vary misleading. I'm still looking into it. Another note is it looks like he has had this setup for years and yet there is no coverage of it in the US? One would think if it really works and its as open sourced as it is that it would be well known by now. Just thoughts.

Tim
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: FreeEnergy on December 01, 2006, 06:41:37 AM
his machine does show over unity except it is not set up in a closed loop fashion. the massive lever does show more output than what is needed to keep the pendulum swinging.

(http://www.veljkomilkovic.com/Images/oscilator.jpg)
Figure 1. Mechanical hammer with a pendulum
1 - anvil, 2 - massive lever, 3 - lever axel, 4 - physical pendulum
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: hartiberlin on December 01, 2006, 07:07:53 AM
I now studied the underlying principle a bit
and it seems, it converts gravitational energy to
mechanical energy, so it taps the gravitational field.

Very interesting !

The example with the 2 dynamo flashlights is very convincing !
You see instantly, that he extracts more energy than he is putting
into the system !
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: hartiberlin on December 01, 2006, 08:00:00 AM
Have a look at this video !

This shows amazingly, how the gravity is used to light up
the dynamo flashlights, while very little
input power is used only
to keep the pendulum swinging:

http://www.veljkomilkovic.com/Video/Veljko_Milkovic_(video-7)_Universal_oscillator-generator.wmv
 (http://www.veljkomilkovic.com/Video/Veljko_Milkovic_(video-7)_Universal_oscillator-generator.wmv)
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: FreeEnergy on December 01, 2006, 08:06:29 AM
that is fantastic!
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: FreeEnergy on December 01, 2006, 08:32:58 AM
so i am guessing to close the loop we would place a magnet at the end of the massive lever arm where it swings back and forth close to some wrapped coil and that wrapped coil would feed a capacitor and that capacitor would run a small motor to keep the pendulum swinging so this way the system sustains itself in motion :)
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: Dingus Mungus on December 01, 2006, 12:09:17 PM
I would suggest transfering the kinetic energy from the striking end
of the lever to a fly wheel then you can add magnets and coils to it.

I'm attaching an animated version of my idea.
It's not to scale and I left out the connecting rods. (tired)
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: Dingus Mungus on December 01, 2006, 12:33:22 PM
Also:

How to electrostaticly run a pendulum for a lifetime...
http://www.sparkmuseum.com/PERPMO.HTM
http://www.physics.ox.ac.uk/history.asp?page=Exhibit1

I would assume like all working concepts it can be scaled up.
 ;D
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: pg46 on December 01, 2006, 01:39:34 PM
This dual mechanical oscillation system is so very cool  8)

 Nice to see strictly mechanical systems for a change. I think this one undoubtably works.
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: dean_mcgowan on December 01, 2006, 01:42:34 PM
lets just see how it is we close the loop on this system before we start declaring a victory .. slowly slowly ...
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: dean_mcgowan on December 01, 2006, 01:45:05 PM
ie .. how much energy does it take to observe and interact with the pendulum in just the way that a human can interpret the system to keep it going with what seems to be minimal effort ???

but loving it all the same  ....
Title: Energetic analysis
Post by: abassign on December 01, 2006, 02:40:24 PM
Observing the movies, I have made a calculation on the energy necessary in order to maintain the pendulum in oscillation:
I have noticed that it is a lot important that the pendulum maintains it the angle of oscillation beyond the 45?
I have noticed that it is necessary to give to an impulse of every energy 2 second ones.
From these data, estimating the weight of the pendulum it is of approximately 18 Kg, obtains the following appraisal:
For an oscillation that goes from 45? to 40?: 1,35 W-h
For an oscillation that goes from 45? to 35?: 2,57 W-h
Where:
Pendulum weight : 18 Kg
Length of the arm between the point of application and the barycentre: 25 cm
From all this, if the data from me gain to you are corrected, the apparatus is sure an exceptional converter of the energy of gravitational field to mechanical energy.
I would wish that someone can make a similar analysis, in order according  to comprise if my analysis is corrected,  by the observation of the movie:
Veljko_Milkovic_(video-7)_Universal_oscillator-generator.wmv

Ciao, from Firenze
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: Paul-R on December 01, 2006, 03:54:29 PM
In the end, we need a clear figure for work done, energy
output per second. We need a wattage.
Paul.
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: gyulasun on December 01, 2006, 05:21:49 PM
Hi abassign,

I am not so keen on mathematics but I found an analysis of this mechanical oscillation system, see link:
http://www.veljkomilkovic.com/Images/Mathematical_analisys_Tosic_english.pdf

Maybe you could figure out something about input/output ratio??

Gyula
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: stevewal2 on December 01, 2006, 05:24:59 PM
It would'nt be difficult to use an electromagnet to attract the pendulem in certain parts of it's swing to keep it going. But I'm thinking that any method for continuing the swing should not interfere with the up and down movement of the fulcrum.

Very interesting devise though.  Hopefully get some replications soon with electrical unput and output.
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: lltfdaniel1 on December 01, 2006, 05:53:27 PM
this is not about this but, you have to understand, that windows is a bugging device..

http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=279939&page=6

Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: mflynn44 on December 01, 2006, 06:03:25 PM
Interesting video. Well, appearances are often deceiving. You can bet that they have tried everything they could think of to close the loop. Since that apparently hasn't been done, it's probably another scam.
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: Gregory on December 01, 2006, 06:48:55 PM
Guys,

I am just wondering why are you jumping into this too deep...
Nothing new here. This is a lever and a heavy pendulum, not as special. Every child out of primary (or maybe secondary) school can have the knowledge to throw together a similar device. This is the point.

It does what it does, exactly as He demonstrated. But not overunity. The loop cannot be closed just in that simple way...
However it brings on some interesting possibilities, which suggest that these experiments has real value in it, really worth to study and think about it deeper.

And "sadly" this is the best video I have ever seen about this kind of (gravity) devices.

Cheers,
Greg

P.S.: BTW, this is not 12 times more output than input.
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: mikestocks2006 on December 01, 2006, 07:04:29 PM
Interesting video. Well, appearances are often deceiving. You can bet that they have tried everything they could think of to close the loop. Since that apparently hasn't been done, it's probably another scam.

There is an easy way to prove if this is OU. Fully mechanical way too.

Build the setup as shown e.g. the one with the hammer.
1. Hold the hammer (output arm) down fixed with a screw or a tie or a vice so it is motionless
2. Move the pendulum to a fixed height from its resting position
3. Record the weight of the pendulum
4. record the height and let go
5. record the amount of time it takes to come to a stop.(only needed to measure friction losses on the pendulum side)

All the original energy put into the system will have been dissipated into friction (air, pivot etc) we can even calculate the amount of energy lost per cycle due to friction by counting the number of swings it takes to stop etc. (Ein = Mpend x G x Hpend)
Ein= energy in, Mpend= Mass of pendulum, G=acceleration of grav H = height

Next
6. Attach a flywheel/crancksafht link to the output arm. (convert linear movement up/down to rotational)
7. On the shaft of the flywheel tie a string and a known weight and let it hung
8. Measure the distance (vertical) the weight has moved by the action of the string being wrapped around the shaft. When the system comes to a stop.

Eout=Mweight x G x Hweight

With claims of energy out is 12 x energy in, friction is non important for all practical purposes.

If Eout is measured greater than E in then it is an OU device.

If that?s the case  one can easily couple the flywheel back to the pendulum to give it ?small push? on every cycle to assure self sustaining system plus energy to spare.
An interesting system nevertheless, with frequency and harmonic resonance implications.

Note if one wants to measure friction losses on the rest of the system (main output arm, flywheel, other bearing surfaces it's easily done too.) Again with 12 to 1, friction is basically non issue here.
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: allcanadian on December 01, 2006, 07:28:53 PM
I read Mr. Mikovic's web site about a year ago and found this machine very interesting. As well it relates directly to gravity wheels,I made a post here in the forum describing how a mass can dissapear from a rotational system(a circle).
Basically if the pendulum is at the far left upper position, the center of rotation see's no mass acting downward, it produces a force to the left only,so the center of rotation does not move. When the pendulum is at the bottom of the swing it has centrifugal force plus gravity acting downward on the mass, moving the center of rotation downward. Next when in the upper right position, as the pendulum stops it again becomes massless relative to the point of rotation.
So how does this machine differ from known systems?
One asymetrical system not conservative is the centrifugal force component which acts only in line with gravity. Another asymetrical system is gravity acting on the mass "only" in the lower position, as I said when the mass is in the upper positions decelerating it losses all mass relative to the center of rotation.
This machine has zero resemblance to conventional pendulum systems when you alalyze it properly.
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: konduct on December 01, 2006, 07:58:18 PM
I've got a non scientific test for this device!  I'll stick my finger in the pendulum side and a cynic can stick their finger in the hammer side and we can see who wins!
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: pg46 on December 01, 2006, 08:10:15 PM
Good one konduct!
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: Katalinski on December 01, 2006, 08:15:46 PM
HA HA HA HA HA !!! ( :D :D :D :D :D)

http://www.veljkomilkovic.com/Tok_i_rezultatiEng.html
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: mikestocks2006 on December 01, 2006, 08:26:30 PM
A common mistake, is equating force with energy. Take an example of a common straight lever (ends A, B) with pivot at point C between A and B.
Place the pivot close to A so e.g. AC=1/10 of CB.
It will take a force of 10 times more at A to hold B
1 pound at B will require 10 pounds at A. Is this common lever OU?
Just an illustration :)
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: allcanadian on December 01, 2006, 08:35:46 PM
It could be if the 10 pounds at A was not supplied by gravity but the so called no-existant force of cetrifugal action.
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: FreeEnergy on December 01, 2006, 11:51:35 PM
yes i like the flywheel idea. still we would have to build it to see some real results.
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: nwman on December 02, 2006, 12:27:42 AM
Another thing that makes it fishy beside being around for so long is that he is trying to sell things on his site. A man with such a potentially grate device should be rolling in the money and not selling books at $3.77US. Just saying this to keep grounded. I still wont rule it out. It can quickly get confusing when you have multiple rotational forces acting upon each other. So much so that you can confuse data. I do believe gravity is a power source. I'm still working on it.

Tim
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: nwman on December 02, 2006, 12:38:15 AM
One thought on how to make it a loop:

Use the flywheel setup to generate electrical power.

Make the pendulum have a small electric motor on it that can pull the weight on the pendulum up the pendulum arm.

Then you could keep lifting the weight up to maintain the pendulum action without disturbing the swinging. I think?

Anyone know how afficient you can get a generator to motor transfer? I saw one online that was only 60% but I would imagine given higher quality components you could get up to 95%?

http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/magnetic/genmot.html (http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/magnetic/genmot.html)

Tim

 
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: hartiberlin on December 02, 2006, 01:14:52 AM
Hi Gregory,
please explain,
why you think it is not 12 timesmore out than in ?

Have a look at this:

http://www.veljkomilkovic.com/Images/Measurement_with_oscilloscope.pdf

Here is a Power comparison,
unfortunately not in english language from a professor,
but you can see, that the output in Watts is much higher than the input !

http://www.veljkomilkovic.com/Images/Analiza_dinamo_lampe.pdf
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: hartiberlin on December 02, 2006, 01:33:36 AM
I read Mr. Mikovic's web site about a year ago and found this machine very interesting. As well it relates directly to gravity wheels,I made a post here in the forum describing how a mass can dissapear from a rotational system(a circle).
Basically if the pendulum is at the far left upper position, the center of rotation see's no mass acting downward, it produces a force to the left only,so the center of rotation does not move. When the pendulum is at the bottom of the swing it has centrifugal force plus gravity acting downward on the mass, moving the center of rotation downward. Next when in the upper right position, as the pendulum stops it again becomes massless relative to the point of rotation.
So how does this machine differ from known systems?
One asymetrical system not conservative is the centrifugal force component which acts only in line with gravity. Another asymetrical system is gravity acting on the mass "only" in the lower position, as I said when the mass is in the upper positions decelerating it losses all mass relative to the center of rotation.
This machine has zero resemblance to conventional pendulum systems when you alalyze it properly.

I fully agree,
in the 90 deegrees uphill position the mass of the pendulum
has no weight onto the fulcrum and only, if it is
at the downhill positionit is heavy enough to pull
the fullcrum up.

So it seems it is a phase shifting device,
which interacts only in one position with gravity
and thus both motions are independant of each other
or spoken in "electrical" terms, the output
has no real back drag onto the input,
cause the input is already almost 90 degrees out of phase...


I wonder, if it is possible to build an electrical "equivalent compensation"
circuit, that acts like the mechanical device ?

Normally every mechanical oscillator system could also
be simulated via electric analog oscillators coils and caps...

But as the gravity field is here the powering field,
we would have to see, how a constant gravity field
could have any impact onto a 2 tank  LC circuit.

Maybe with LC oscillators we can use a permanent magnet field
instead and draw power from it in a simular way...

Pondering away, Stefan.
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: allcanadian on December 02, 2006, 01:53:40 AM
It's interesting as well that as the pedulum is moving up and away from the hammer side, the heavy end while falling has a fling effect on the pendulum accelerating it upward.
I saw a site called the soup can pendulum, the weight has fluid in it, and the so called scientists said they cannot accurately predict its movement or period. So our best and brightest can't even figure out a pendulum with a soup can on the end- wonderful!
I think we have a lot to learn.
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: hartiberlin on December 02, 2006, 02:01:32 AM
Here is a try to translate the text into english...


Original:

ANALIZA DINAMO LAMPE
 
(sa kojom se odr?ava oscilacija klatna kod dvostepenog oscilatora i koja predstavlja u isto
vreme i izlazni rad kod istog dvostepenog oscilatora)
 
Prvi rezultati ka?u sledece:
 
Za pun stisak
 
1. kada sam pritiskao 25 punih stisaka za 10 sekundi (2,5 u sekundi) dobio sam
efektivnu vrednost struje 0,103 ?
 
I - efektivno = 0,103 A
U - efektivno = 3,6 V
P (usrednjeno) = 0,384 W
 
2. Za jedan pun stisak u sekundi sam dobio (jedan pun stisak u sekundi)
 
I - efektivno = 0,085 A
U - efektivno = 2,54 V
P = 0,225 W
 
 
Za pola stiska
 
1. 25 polu stiskova za 10 sekundi (2,5 u sekundi)
 
I - efektivno = 0,059 A
U - efektivno = 1,22 V
P = 0,065 W
 
2. jedan polu stisak u sekundi
 
I - efektivno = 0,043 A
U - efektivno = 0,65 V
P = 0,030 W
 
3. jedan polu stisak za dve sekunde
 
I - efektivno = 0,021 A
U - efektivno = 0,55 V
P = 0,009 W
 
Meren je napon na ulazu i struja na ulazu. Otpor ?-metra je 0,1 om, a V-metra 10 mega
oma, ?-metar nije uticao jer je otpor hladne sijalice oko 4 oma. Instrument ima ugraden
vatmetar, tako da koristi mereni napon i merenu struju za merenje snage. Kako se
ocitavanje vr?i jednom u dve sekunde razlikuje se proizvod U * I od prikazane snage.
 
Signal je malo deformisana sinusoida cija se amplituda menja sa brzinom vrtenja diska, a
i ucestanost se menja iz istog razloga. U praznom hodu (bez sijalice napon vrha do vrha
je oko 15 V, a ucestanost oko 200 Hz, a kad se stavi sijalica napon padne na oko 10 V od
vrha do vrha, a ucestanost padne blizu 100 Hz.
 
 
Prof. dr Slobodan Milovancev
 
Univerzitet u Novom Sadu, Fakultet tehnickih nauka
Institut za energetiku, elektroniku i telekomunikacije 
Katedra za elektricna merenja
                                                                                               
Novi Sad, 02.12.2005

===============================================


Online translation via InterTran:


ASSAY DINAMO LAMPE
( from an coyote does conservator oscillation klatna with dvostepenog oscillator plus which is introducing into a invariably worldly plus outgoing workmanship with invariably dvostepenog oscillator )

Leading upshot ka?u sledece : For teeming clutch 1. when unattended pression 25 amply clutch for 10 second (2,5 into a second dobio unattended assets vrednost tide 0,103? PLUS effectively = 0,103 And INTO A effectively V P usrednjeno W 2. For the day teeming clutch into a second unattended dobio ( some teeming clutch into a second ) PLUS effectively = 0,085 And INTO A effectively V P W For half learn 1. 25 semi learn for 10 second (2,5 into a second ) PLUS effectively = 0,059 And INTO A effectively V P W 2. some semi clutch into a second PLUS effectively = 0,043 And INTO A effectively V P W 3. some semi clutch for dve second PLUS effectively = 0,021 And INTO A effectively V P W Fisherman's net had tension at the threshold plus tide at the threshold. Resistance? footage had 0,1 ohm , and V - footage 10 meg oma ,? meter is not uticao because had resistance shade sijalice about oma. Leverage has a ingraft vatmetar , so that I use fisherman's net tension plus fisherman's net tide for fisherman's net vigour. How does ocitavanje vr?i sometime into a dve second the difference is does the product INTO A * PLUS with specter vigour. Signal had few deformisana sinusoida cija does amplituda menja from an brzinom vrtenja disk , and plus ucestanost does menja through invariably reason. Idle ( free of sijalice tension vrha up to vrha had about V , and ucestanost about 200 Hz , and when does to put sijalica tension padne at an about V with vrha up to vrha , and ucestanost padne near site 100 Hz. Prof dr Free Caress University from New-fashion Sadu , Faculty tehnickih discipline Institute after energetics , electronics plus telecommunications Chair after electricity measurement Late At once , 02.12.2005


Hmm, maybe someone who speaks Serbian language can translate this some better ?
Many thanks.
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: supersam on December 02, 2006, 08:38:32 PM
hey everyone,

what if we simply used the dual ociating principle to move the shield in and out of a torbay motor?  seems like it couldn't hurt.

lol
sam
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: Gregory on December 02, 2006, 10:11:20 PM
Quote
Hi Gregory,
please explain,
why you think it is not 12 timesmore out than in ?

Hi Stefan,
Yes, those measurements and explanations are looking very fascinating, but this is not enough to prove the machine producing 12 times more output than input. If it really does that, then Mr. Mikovic can show as a machine all running by itself. Only after this happens can he measure correctly how much excess energy output is provided by the machine. He also said mistakes are possible.
I think there are some confusing thing about force and energy. If we take a 12:1 ratio lever, we can lift a 12 times heavier mass by one unit of mass, but we don't say the lever puts out 12 times more energy, because we know that the lever is only a force-distance conversion device.

Mr. Mikovic's device is not a lever, only contains one. I think the best thing about his device is the principle, that he uses the momentum and inertia of the heavy horizontally oscillating pendulum to make the hammer move vertically. When the hammer going down gravity helps to it, so only need to be lifted while the motion of the hammer does not affect and slows down the swing of the pendulum. Clever idea, I really like it. As he compared to the gears and cogwheels his system does not work the same way back and forth and very different than gears.

Other things... Maintaining the pendulum's movement looks very easy when we see it maintained by a human being, but doing the same with a mechanism is not the same task and usually harder.
The pendulum oscillating through a much further angle than the hammer, and also it has more weight. That is a good amount of kinetic energy (by gravity) compared to the hammer.

I can say I love Mr. Mikovic's ideas, and I think they show good possibilities regarding Gravity devices and the action-reaction connectivity, but I also think if the machine finally can work in a closed loop (in its present form) it won't produce 12 times more output than input.

I wish a nice weekend to everybody!

Regards,
Greg
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: FreeEnergy on December 02, 2006, 10:24:15 PM
:)
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: NerzhDishual on December 03, 2006, 02:58:49 AM


Hi clever overunity.com crowd!

Thanks a lot to Harti_Berlin for these vids (and, BTW, for his web forum).

Just my 2 cents:
The  Reidar Finsrud's (overunity) device is using pendulums (and magnets). Is it not?

Else :
The output is 12 times more important than the input?
If this has been seriously measured we must agree or trying to do our own replication and measurements. Do not we?

My guess is that discovering any overunity device (output>input) is not so easy but having it self running should be another huge job.

Best
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: Dingus Mungus on December 03, 2006, 05:11:10 AM
I would assume a tiny electro magnet should be able to lift the pendulum to its optimum fall hieght. A pendulum maintains 99% of its energy in each cycle so the magnetic power required to help it reach its original fall hieght should be minimal. Also since pendulum swing times are basde on the length of the pendulum a control curcuit for the EM should be simple.

Hope that makes sense to those thinking about replication...
I'm actually considering it since mechanics is more my speed.
I'm just waiting to see what other members do with it first.

Great thread!
~Dingus
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: pg46 on December 03, 2006, 11:33:26 AM
Somebody's probably already thought about this or mentioned it perhaps so sorry if its repeated.
 How about using a mechanical spring wind up unit like as in a mechanical clock mechanism to power the pendulum. Then using the work end of the lever to mechanically connect to and thus rewind the pendulum spring?
 The same can be done electrically instead also.

Best,
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: Dingus Mungus on December 03, 2006, 02:31:29 PM
Wow... Thats a great idea. Wind up a little key and see how much
work we can extract from it. Actually Bill mahess can refer us to a
clock kit for a 28 day wind up pendulum clock and dc rewinding
module. That would make calculating the extacted energy over the
next 28 days easy! Hmmmmm I'm spent right now because I'm
investing in the Dr Linnard Griffin cell, but I really want to build this
now too. So many really interesting devices getting posted lately!!!
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: FreeEnergy on December 03, 2006, 10:30:12 PM
It would'nt be difficult to use an electromagnet to attract the pendulem in certain parts of it's swing to keep it going. But I'm thinking that any method for continuing the swing should not interfere with the up and down movement of the fulcrum.

Very interesting devise though.  Hopefully get some replications soon with electrical unput and output.

great idea as well! nice first post of yours!

peace
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: Katalinski on December 04, 2006, 12:39:19 AM
I know work of Milkovic.

That is FAKE.

First:

Find somebody to see realy mesurmens.

Second:

Milkovic work just to self promote. For example -
Whay Milkovic is only on english version of Wikipedia?
"Academic" whit no colege.
Some of Milkovic's acknowlegments are letters from Washintowns library. (Milkovic send his book to library, and thanking replay find plane in his town newspapers in title "America first acknowlage Milkovics work".

Milkovic just have good marketing NOTHING ELSE!

See also some other text on his web page and you will see that Milkovic is not "lunatic" or "creasy", Milkovic is "retard".

example:
http://www.veljkomilkovic.com/ArheologijaEng.html

Ask him milkovic@neobee.net
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: gyulasun on December 04, 2006, 01:08:37 AM
Hi,

Do you think this video is also fake?
 http://www.veljkomilkovic.com/Video/Veljko_Milkovic_(video-7)_Universal_oscillator-generator.wmv

18 lamps are operated by the energy from 1 lamp...  Is this a fake video??  Please speak up if you know facts.
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: allcanadian on December 04, 2006, 01:16:17 AM
@ Katalinsk

It's interesting that this person you call a "retard" has a very nice website with lot's of valid content such as the earth home and such. As well I have done some math on his pendulum and quite frankly I find it very innovative as well as his understanding of it's complex movements. So overall I find it very hard to believe anything you have said, with no proof whatsoever being offered.
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: FreeEnergy on December 04, 2006, 04:25:42 AM
:)
Title: Re: A "golden fish" in your hands...
Post by: konduct on December 04, 2006, 05:45:57 AM
I have built a wooden replication of the device and it works just as it appears in the video.  I still need to re assemble the pendulum with a fixed hinge or bearing.  Just as the Serbian inventor said, an elliptical swing of the pendulum doesn't give the same amount of kinetic energy.  I have been thinking of methods of closing the loop...

It seems that it will take the least amount of energy to push the pendulum once every swing.

The power of the device is basically the difference in weight on either sided of the pendulum...

The "RPM" seems to be mostly related to the length of the pendulum.

The machine almost needs a work load to run...It runs better with resitance (up to max load) on both up and down strokes.

Title: Re: A "golden fish" in your hands...
Post by: konduct on December 04, 2006, 05:50:43 AM
The "C" Clamp in the picture is to hold the vertical wooden plank on as a temporary "hammer" It also gave me a little extra weight.  The pvc pipe is filled with steel shot and the hanger in the picture is irrelevant.  The little black things toward the front are lead fishing weights coated in rubber.
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: konduct on December 04, 2006, 05:54:54 AM
I built one ... http://www.overunity.com/index.php/topic,1769.new.html#new
Title: Re: A "golden fish" in your hands...
Post by: hartiberlin on December 04, 2006, 06:08:43 AM
Konduct,
great !
Could you please try to couple aspring based thread ( ishing line
for example with a spring) to the pendulum weight and
pull with the line the pendulum and fix it via a roll
somehow to the hammer side and thus keep the device going and going ?

Will this never slow down ?
Many thanks.
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: Katalinski on December 04, 2006, 09:20:00 AM
@ Katalinsk

It's interesting that this person you call a "retard" has a very nice website with lot's of valid content such as the earth home and such. As well I have done some math on his pendulum and quite frankly I find it very innovative as well as his understanding of it's complex movements. So overall I find it very hard to believe anything you have said, with no proof whatsoever being offered.

Earth house is his only good idea.
Milkovic have "very nice website". So, it?s making content better??? I don?t think so.
Its only good marketing nothing else!
His web site is full of craps. Exactly 100 craps.
Other content is full of solving World misterys (pre-historic civilization) in Danube region (civilization more then 1.ooo.ooo years old  - UGA-UGA civilization), some alian rocks, stupid misterys about Petrovaradin fortress?
In past 10 years Milkovic just promote his own work.
If Milkovic make presentation on University of Novi Sad and on beginning of presentation all professors leave room, what this can tell to you.

Batter ssk someone te translate this text for you:

http://forum.krstarica.com/showthread.php?t=81090&page=1&pp=15
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: Katalinski on December 04, 2006, 09:22:16 AM
And last:

remember:

principle of persistency of energy
Title: Re: A "golden fish" in your hands...
Post by: konduct on December 04, 2006, 03:28:42 PM
I was actually thinking of using a shield / unshield with magnets in repulsion to give it a kick each swing.  (I need to fix the pendulum to only swing back and forth first.)  The machine has a lot of power! 

What kind of string and spring setup do you mean?  I can't really visualize the setup. 

It definately puts out more force than in I believe, it's just a little bulky!  You won't find one of these inside of a cell phone anytime soon! =) 
Title: Re: A "golden fish" in your hands...
Post by: pg46 on December 04, 2006, 07:52:50 PM
Thats very cool Konduct and speedy construction too I might add !

I look forward to hearing more of your project.

Best,
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: shipto on December 04, 2006, 09:34:39 PM
so if the pendulum moving back and forth is (or should we say "maybe") capable of doing more work on the hammer side (all this hammer talk reminds me of baggy trousers LOL) could a pendulum swinging in a circle do the work too?
If it was it would be simple to attach the pendulum to a low powered motor surely?
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: Dingus Mungus on December 04, 2006, 09:55:20 PM
It's possible in theory, but a non linear pendulum movement will lose energy more rapidly then a linear pendulum.
Title: Re: A "golden fish" in your hands...
Post by: supersam on December 04, 2006, 10:32:23 PM
hey konduct,

if this thing has overunity,  why can't you just take a ratchet gear on the fulcrum axel and use it to swing a gear on the pivot axel of the pendulum?  if the fulcrum axel has enough torque to do this and continue to operate then put another gear on the front to load it if neccessary to turn another gear to spin a generator!

lol
sam
Title: Re: A "golden fish" in your hands...
Post by: konduct on December 04, 2006, 10:39:25 PM
Hmm...I've got some one way bearings...lemme think....same size shaft...have to add a shaft to the pendulum which I need to do anyway...One problem...It would work on the downswing on one side but would be "against the flow" and slam on the brakes on the opposing downswing.  Hmmm...
Title: Re: A "golden fish" in your hands...
Post by: konduct on December 04, 2006, 10:53:56 PM
I'd like to hook it to one of these!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a49d5cJOGQ0&NR
Title: Re: A "golden fish" in your hands...
Post by: supersam on December 05, 2006, 12:14:51 AM
konduct,

that would be awsome!!  but first lets just close the loop.  do you have an old bicycle laying around?  why not use the crank in it with it's bearings for the fulcrum, pivot and the free running back wheel bearings and axel for the pivot on the pendulum.  you should also have all of the gears nesseccary for making it all work, including the chain? 

just a stupid thought.  because we have all been taught that it is impossible! ;)

lol
sam
Title: Re: A "golden fish" in your hands...
Post by: supersam on December 05, 2006, 12:32:28 AM
 ???
Title: Re: A "golden fish" in your hands...
Post by: iacob alex on December 05, 2006, 02:46:53 AM
Hi Konduct!Your promotion of Felix Wurth's  "yourtube" movie is an excellent stage entry.If you click   www.evert.de/eft377e.htm  you can find informations,regarding his "Centrifugal-Power-Spider Flop" using the sling effect.He made a public demonstration(1999) at a Swiss Forum,that is a lot of time ago.His aim was to proof overunity.Prof Evert is  very explicative at this site.All the Bests!/Alex
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: Marcel on December 05, 2006, 06:34:33 PM
Working Model 2D simulation
Lever Mass=25 Kg
Pendulum mass=40Kg
Lever length= 1m
Springs force=40kg/m

You can downsize the weights:
Lever Mass=12.5 Kg
Pendulum mass=20Kg
Lever length = 1m
Springs force=20kg/m

I will built it very soon!!
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: lltfdaniel1 on December 05, 2006, 11:51:46 PM
Working Model 2D simulation
Lever Mass=25 Kg
Pendulum mass=40Kg
Lever length= 1m
Springs force=40kg/m

You can downsize the weights:
Lever Mass=12.5 Kg
Pendulum mass=20Kg
Lever length = 1m
Springs force=20kg/m

I will built it very soon!!

this sounds like the magic ''3'' to me,by x on the turbo tpu forum,with something to keep giveing it ''kicks''.

what do you think, would you prefer to call it waves ?

yeah i was thinking of permanent magnets to keep it running,as was a nother.
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: Dingus Mungus on December 06, 2006, 12:39:04 AM
Kinda different, since there are only 2 oscillating frequencies in this system and both are oscillating at a close interval. Hence no harmonics created. But this idea does share one similarity which is multiple independent oscillators in the same system can assist each other in such a way that excess energy as a biproduct.
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: hartiberlin on December 06, 2006, 02:04:45 AM
Working Model 2D simulation
Lever Mass=25 Kg
Pendulum mass=40Kg
Lever length= 1m
Springs force=40kg/m

You can downsize the weights:
Lever Mass=12.5 Kg
Pendulum mass=20Kg
Lever length = 1m
Springs force=20kg/m

I will built it very soon!!

Marcel,
very nice animation in the movie !

What is the "black fly" in the movie ?
What does it show ?

Is that the center of gravity of both of them ?

Where is exactly the fulcrum point in the blue big unit ?
Many thanks.
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: Marcel on December 06, 2006, 02:09:01 AM
Kinda different, since there are only 2 oscillating frequencies in this system and both are oscillating at a close interval. Hence no harmonics created. But this idea does share one similarity which is multiple independent oscillators in the same system can assist each other in such a way that excess energy as a biproduct.
There are more 2 mechanical oscillators: the Pendulum, the Lever, and 2 springs.
I will try with 2 different springs forces to get harmonics.
The black fly is the center of the mass of the whole system.
The fulcrum is at 1/3 of the lever length.
Marcel.
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: djancak on December 06, 2006, 03:55:37 AM
Working Model 2D simulation
Lever Mass=25 Kg
Pendulum mass=40Kg
Lever length= 1m
Springs force=40kg/m

What did you set the coefficient of friction to? I am having a hard time understanding what is happening in this video.  ???

I'd like to hook it to one of these!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a49d5cJOGQ0&NR

that looks awesome! ;D i really hope that you can manage to get this thing to power itself. the video demonstrations are VERY convincing. however, as it was mentioned before, a change in FORCE is NOT a change in POWER. Power = Force * Velocity. There definately seems to be a dramatic change in velocity, but I've never seen a machine powered by a pendulum...

Good Luck!  :o
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: supersam on December 06, 2006, 11:20:52 PM
konduct or anyone,

have you had a chance to think about my bicycle crank and free running back axel idea for closind the loop?  i have had to be out of town for a couple of weeks, and then i discovered this thread.  with no way of working on this, the ideas are eating a hole in me. i just can't see why it will not work.  konduct, thanks for the support.  marcel, do think the ratchering gear connected to a free floater could keep the pendulum swinging?  can you possibly run a simulation like yours that also takes a measure of torgue on the pendulum axel, if one was incorporated?  i love idea for adding the two springs and the generator in your simulation.  i guess that just gives one more level of interconectivity, in a different way, that seems to have a positive effect!!

let me know what you think.  i think this machine might be brought to overunity and close the loop.

lol
sam
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: supersam on December 07, 2006, 08:00:29 PM
marcel,

what three frquencies ended up being used to create the perfect machine in your sims?  i was just wondering if these might be used in a soid state setup?  have you even thought about what might be accomplished if you didn't have the restrictions of friction that you will have in a mechanical deevice?  just wondering!!!!

lol
sam
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: Marcel on December 07, 2006, 10:38:32 PM
marcel,

what three frquencies ended up being used to create the perfect machine in your sims?  i was just wondering if these might be used in a soid state setup?  have you even thought about what might be accomplished if you didn't have the restrictions of friction that you will have in a mechanical deevice?  just wondering!!!!

lol
sam
I think 3 frequencies are a minimum to generate harmonic oscillations. Maybe using strong magnets instead springs to avoid frictions.
The software WM2d cannot compute repelling magnetic fields. ( The repel force between two magnet is not linear instead springs... It is inverse square of distance... and I cannot define this parameter in WM2d.)
Friction forces of the bearings and air friction have been added in simulation. So the system stops after 1 hour! And never stops if frictions are set to 0.
I have to find a system to power a little bit the pendulum ( when it is at his higher position ) with an electro-magnet or a little motor.
For me, the Milovik's videos are very convincing and the question needs to be examined in more detail to achieve overnunity.
Anyway, simulation can help for design but it will never affirm the system will work as expected.
A new design will be added very soon.
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: FreeEnergy on December 10, 2006, 11:46:48 AM
im thinking of building this in a vertical fashion. :)
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: gyulasun on December 10, 2006, 12:56:38 PM
im thinking of building this in a vertical fashion. :)

The upper bar would move like a metronome, right?

Ok, but:

I think that in the Milkovic system the basic property of a swinging pendulum is used what I cannot see in your vertical setup.

This property is as follows: when you start a pendulum in rest at 6 o'clock to swing towards either 9 or 3 o'clock by your hand, the weigth of the pendulum's mass changes from its maximum weigth at rest to an almost weightless state at the 9 or 6 o'clock positions. And if you suspend/hold the pendulum's thread in you own  hand, you could feel this periodically changing force and THIS CHANGING FORCE IS what moves the lever up and down.
In your vertical setup, if I see it well, there is a pivot (the upper one) which holds the bar and also takes up the force the pendulum's changing weigth exercises so most of the force the swinging gives is absorbed by that pivot. Of course your upper bar will swing but somehow I feel you lose a lot of force the pendulum can provide with a movable pivot solution like in Milkovic setup.

rgds
Gyula
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: dean_mcgowan on December 10, 2006, 01:07:47 PM
is that 12 times metric or imperial  ::)
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: dean_mcgowan on December 10, 2006, 01:11:48 PM
when i pulled my sister back on the swing before i gave her that first push .. i kinda remember that that!!! was the hard part, the little pushes afterward were quite easy.. maybe i should watch the video again .. to see if i am missing where that original work is being dones in this equation ...
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: dean_mcgowan on December 10, 2006, 01:17:35 PM
i remember another equation that may come in to play in this illusion .. work/time =  ...
maybe the battery pump lever (spring) can transfer the energy to the external system over that time where as in short burst the resistance of the spring in the lever cannot transfer the work done to an external system, hence we see the light .. well .. light up..  maybe ?

still a nifti and convincing slight of hand in my books .. but overunity .. maybe not ?
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: FreeEnergy on December 10, 2006, 01:19:30 PM
thanks for the input. either way i have to try it out.

peace
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: dean_mcgowan on December 10, 2006, 01:22:32 PM
when i finally crack the da vinci code of this overunity stuff .. i think i will refrain friom lighting bulbs to convice anyone as it seems that it is becoming quite the trendy thing to do to wow the crowds these days ..

hmm .. come to think of it its been around for some time .. us humans love a good light show hey ;)
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: dean_mcgowan on December 10, 2006, 01:24:06 PM
FE,

please do .. really had to take my time chewing on this idea, really liked it myself there for a while.

Cheers,

Dean
 
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: allcanadian on December 10, 2006, 06:57:52 PM
I use a computer fan to measure load or output, fans do not lie- it takes a known amount of energy to turn them. A light bulb can be rigged- pulsed high voltage input gives the illusion of high power consumption with a small input. smoke and mirrors.
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: dean_mcgowan on December 10, 2006, 11:56:07 PM
AC,

Have you seen the pyramid resonating coil video posted here in overunity a while ago, he had fan running from that, I particularly like pyramids, like most of us fringies, i got quite hooked on them as a kid. I especially like the video where that gentleman proposes the power plant idea.

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-3182229760005676897&q=pyramid+power

All in good fun ofcourse, find him a little hard to take seriously.

Regards,

Dean

Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: Dingus Mungus on December 11, 2006, 12:04:27 PM
I've been working on this in WM2D now for roughly 2 days and I wanted to report what I have found so far:

A component of the device does violate the law of conservation of energy, but NOT in a way that I can say is overunity yet. I can say it violates the conservation of energy in a simulated environment because I tested it by using two separate pendulums one stationary and one attached to a flexible lever. Both pendulums ran for the same amount of time so no power was taken from either pendulum by any force other than gravity and wind resistance, but the pendulum attached to the lever was able to supply a ample amount of power to a damper. The kinetic energy supplied to the dampers was somehow taken during interaction but the energy was taken in such a way as to avoid taking any kinetic energy from the pendulum. If the energy that was supplied to the dampers was taken from the kinetic energy of dropping the pendulum the pendulum would not be able to swing for as much time or at the same amplitude as the mirrored yet stationary control pendulum.

Am I missing something simple here? Is this really a violation of thermodynamics?

If anyone has a explanation for my findings or suggestions please respond with @dingus.

Thanks to all,
~Dingus
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: dean_mcgowan on December 11, 2006, 11:33:26 PM
@Dingus

The sum of the initial position and the resting states are still the same for each solution ?

Can you confirm that the damper did not impart the same amount of energy back to the system ? (or at least most of it)
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: bsrinon on December 11, 2006, 11:57:23 PM
Here's a link that shows the tension force produced by a pendulum that starts 90 degrees from equilibrium position.

http://www.vernier.com/discussion/index.html?topic=54

Basically, the tension force is 3 times the weight of the pendulum as it swings to it's lowest point, or equilibrium point.

It only takes a fraction of this force to keep the pendulum swinging. Maybe only 1/12 the power, as Milkovic mentioned. So everytime the pendulum swings, you get 3 times the force pulling down on the lever with only a fraction of the power needed to keep it swinging. One only needs to tap that power on the other end of the lever.

Maybe a crank connected to a flywheel could be used to tap that power. Then connect the flywheel to a generator using gear ratios to generate enough RPMs to run the generator. A fraction of that power produced is then fed back to solenoids to sustain the pendulum swing of about 90 degrees.

Of course in the process of converting mechanical to electrical you will loose some due to inefficencies, but with a ratio of 1 to 12 input to output, we have a lot of room for it.

Below is a diagram of a system that might work.
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: gyulasun on December 12, 2006, 12:28:43 AM
Hi Brian,

Very good catch on your link, thank you! At least they verified in practice the calculations and surely this 3 times as much force acting on the lever's arm is what could be utilized.
I fully agree with your drawing I wish I had all the mechanical means to test it. Hopefully others may get involved in it too.

rgds,  Gyula
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: bsrinon on December 12, 2006, 12:51:58 AM
Hi Gyula,

I'd really like to test the drawing also. Maybe my wife will let me convert her old HealthRider excercise machine into one of these pendulum devices.

http://www.healthrider.com/?BN=13350&GCID=S14083x016&KEYWORD=healthrider

There's lot's of lever points and places to put weights on it. I just have to stand it on end and maybe do some cutting and welding to convert it. But she would probably kill me if I messed around with it.

Brian
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: Dingus Mungus on December 12, 2006, 03:04:03 AM
@Dean
The starting and ending positions of the objects are all sightly different. But those changes were imparted only after dropping the pendulum. I do know a significant portion of the energy is coming from the flexible levers self oscillations when the  pendulum drop occurs. The dampers will resist when stretched or compressed. So I assume they put no energy back, and they only take energy as I understand it. I'm new to this app, and I don't have a full copy of WM2D so I can not save yet! :(

BTW I tried coupling this system to a flywheel for days and discovered that since the frequencies of each component are dropping in value constantly, it is very difficult to keep the wheel and lever working together in a unidirectional manor.

~Dingus
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: supersam on December 12, 2006, 04:41:31 AM
HEY,

has anyone given any consideration to tapping the lever power at the axel with a one way gear, like a crank shaft bearing, on a eighteen speed bicycle?  the free running back axel could be used to swing the pendulem on the down sroke or the upstroke, depending on how you sat it up and you would have aq number of gears to play with as well.

i know i can get these bicycle's for about a dollar u.s. at any goodwill store.  it even looked like one of milkovic's set ups was made with a frame off an old bicycle.  i don't know if he ever tried to use the crank and back axel to swing his pendulem to close the loop.

i can,t wait to get back to my shop to give it a try!!!!

lol
sam
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: bsrinon on December 12, 2006, 06:42:00 AM
Sam,

Excellent idea with the one way bicycle gearing. That would work perfectly for this setup!

Brian
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: 2tiger on December 12, 2006, 11:14:42 AM
Hi all
If you are trying to close the loop don?t use a crank with a flywheel. The mass of the flywheel will create a back drag on the lever and influence the swinging pendulum.
In my opinion the pendulum has to swing free in order to create this effect (12 times more ...).
The crank will also synchronize this device and I?m sure that this is not what we are looking for.
Stefan mentioned this before in one of his replies, that here is a kind of phase shifting in play.
The idea with the one way gear in the center of the lever seems very good to me.
But I would also try this one you see in the pic. With parts of a harddisk-drive, the read/write head.

add:
In that way you can tap the energy directly form the coil and mantain the swinging motion.

You can also align a few of them. In series or even in parallel if you want.

kr
2Tiger
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: FreeEnergy on December 12, 2006, 11:24:30 AM
Hi all
If you are trying to close the loop don?t use a crank with a flywheel. The mass of the flywheel will create a back drag on the lever and influence the swinging pendulum.
In my opinion the pendulum has to swing free in order to create this effect (12 times more ...).
The crank will also synchronize this device and I?m sure that this is not what we are looking for.
Stefan mentioned this before in one of his replies, that here is a kind of phase shifting in play.
The idea with the one way gear in the center of the lever seems very good to me.
But I would also try this one you see in the pic. With parts of a harddisk-drive, the read/write head.

add:
In that way you can tap the energy directly form the coil and mantain the swinging motion.

You can also align a few of them. In series or even in parallel if you want.

kr
2Tiger

so i am guessing to close the loop we would place a magnet at the end of the massive lever arm where it swings back and forth close to some wrapped coil and that wrapped coil would feed a capacitor and that capacitor would run a small motor to keep the pendulum swinging so this way the system sustains itself in motion :)

or have the coil wrapped around the massive lever arm where it swings back and forth close to some magnets. the coil would feed a capacitor and that capacitor would run a small motor to keep the pendulum swinging so this way the system sustains itself in motion  ;)
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: bsrinon on December 12, 2006, 05:28:31 PM
I think you guys are correct about not using a flywheel wheel with a crank. However, I believe a flywheel will work if it is freewheeling, as in the back wheel of a bike. It's freewheeling relative to the crank in one direction so it does not interfere with the pendulum as much. The back wheel would be the flywheel. That's why I like Sam's the idea of the one-way gear.

Also, in the drawing where there are coils and neo magnets near the pivot point of the lever, maybe it was left out on purpose, but there should be a counter weight to the pendulum, such as a massive left arm, or an arm connected to a counter spring.

Below is another diagram using bicycle parts. Thanks for the ideas.

Brian
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: bsrinon on December 12, 2006, 07:03:29 PM
Hey guys,

I just emailed the inventor himself, Veljko Milković.  Hopefully, he will respond with some good advise and suggestions.

Here's what I emailed:

Hello Mr. Milkovic,

In the www.overunity.com discussion forum, we are discussing your pendulum invention. Thank you for sharing it with us in your website.

Attached is an idea that we came up with using your concepts of the pendulum.

Can you give any suggestions or improvements on it? From this link we know that we can get a force on the pendulum side that is 3 times the weight of the pendulum, assuming it starts at 90 degrees:

http://www.vernier.com/discussion/index.html?topic=54

Looking forward for any input you can give us.

Best Regards,

Brian
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: gyulasun on December 12, 2006, 07:57:56 PM
Hi Brian,

I think that was a good idea from you and from my part I look forward to see the outcome  ;)

Probably you have noticed Veljko Milković's patent references at his site,  http://www.veljkomilkovic.com/PatentiEng.html and the good thing is he also considered to generate electricity with his lever+pendulum setup, see http://www.veljkomilkovic.com/Images/Patenti/Patent3.jpg    and a modification of the basic setup: http://www.veljkomilkovic.com/Images/Patenti/Patent18.jpg where he replaced the pendulum with a electric motor and an arm attached to the electric motor's shaft to utilize gravitational and centrifugal forces transformed to the other side of the lever.

Supersam's idea is also excellent with the one way gear, I do agree and the notices/suggestions from 2tiger are also very very good.

Thanks to you all!

rgds,  Gyula
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: supersam on December 12, 2006, 08:36:02 PM
KONDUCT,

where are you man?  this keeps looking better and better! i think with just two spare bikes 2$ u.s. we can not only keep the pendulum moving with brians idea we should be able to generate excess power.  where are you?  with your speed in replication this thing could be put to bed before i even get back to my shop!!!!  i hope you are still watching this. or maybe someon else can jump on this.  it would sure be a nice christmas present for me!!

lol

sam
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: supersam on December 12, 2006, 08:55:19 PM
hey brian,

if the system seems to work best when loaded why not use the downstroke to power the pendulum and the upstroke to power the generator, or a flywheel to keep the generator, spinning at a constant speed for optimal performance.  if we really have 12 times more power out than in it seems to me like both could be accomplished!!!

lol
sam

ps.  if you need alittle more from my downstroke, to swing the pendulum i am sure there is plenty of power to spare and my center shaft at the fulcrum does have two sides? :o  all we need is a few more gears.  i have already figured we needed to do something with the extra energy after we put just a little in to swing the pendulum.  no matter how we gear it.
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: supersam on December 12, 2006, 08:55:40 PM
hey,

can somebody do a simulation on these setups combined? 

LOL
SAM
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: lltfdaniel1 on December 12, 2006, 09:04:47 PM
hey brian,

if the system seems to work best when loaded why not use the downstroke to power the pendulum and the upstroke to power the generator, or a flywheel to keep the generator, spinning at a constant speed for optimal performance.  if we really have 12 times more power out than in it seems to me like both could be accomplished!!!

lol
sam

ps.  if you need alittle more from my downstroke, to swing the pendulum i am sure there is plenty of power to spare and my center shaft at the fulcrum does have two sides? :o  all we need is a few more gears.  i have already figured we needed to do something with the extra energy after we put just a little in to swing the pendulum.  no matter how we gear it.

To me , this sounds like a hybrid, where that does more work than that,also sounds like a pulse gravity motor :-).

With the coil , and capacitor, when it moves in to the loop point, you could have a thing where it fires of the capacitor, to fire the motor(?) for automatic pulseing,unless you use a manual timer.....then you got to think about, how much electric motor power it requires to make the machine to start of again,

just an idea.
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: supersam on December 12, 2006, 09:56:23 PM
daniel,

not really, we already have enogh power without charging a cap!  think about it.  if we have more than enough to swing the pendulum on the downstroke, and extra to feed the fly wheel, then the upstroke is there for nothing but free energy conversion to flywheel nd then electrical power, and of course the frictional losses of such a mechanical system.

lol
sam

ps:  but with 12:1, what is wrong with giving 10% back?
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: konduct on December 12, 2006, 09:58:23 PM
Hey guys!  This thing is just taking up space in my kitchen right now! I need to do something with it. Lol!  

The free wheeling flywheel should work fine.  Someone earlier mentioned it would take the pendulum out of phase.  Not so...the pendulum's phase is independent of the lever.

The main thing holding me up is figuring out the generator / solenoid setup to push the pendulum.  Any suggestions?  (Sam, I like the idea of using one stroke for excess energy and the other stroke for pendulum input!  The machine should like it as well.)

I'm assuming I can hook some sort of DC motor up and crank on the shaft to get some juice out?  Any idea how much juice I'll need to push that pendulum back and forth? I was thinking along the lines of a jig saw type motor since I can get one for about $20 from Walmart but I don't know if its actually a DC motor since it gets plugged into the wall?  (Maybe incorporate Flynn's Parrallel Path into the solenoid for grins.  Conservation is half the battle in OU sometimes.)

Help me fill in some of these blanks and I'll gladly hook it all up!
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: konduct on December 12, 2006, 10:03:05 PM
I've got some roller switches I think will work to fire the solenoids.  I figure I can put them at an optimum height and let the pendulum control the timing.  From what I understand, a pendulum's oscillation time remains constant, regardless of its "amplitude".
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: supersam on December 12, 2006, 10:39:34 PM
hey konduct,

i am thinking two different bicycle gear setups on either side of the center shaft at the fulcrum, then you can gear with the bicycle gears the output to the pendulum one way and use any excess out of the otherside of the shaft geared differently to use up the power spining the flywheel setup brian sugested to help boost the flywheel.  with brians setup you can also use the bicycle gears to speed the flywheel to make extra power.  does any of this make since?

lol
sam















Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: bsrinon on December 12, 2006, 10:43:32 PM
Below is another diagram with a real bike. This is what I had in mind.

Yes we should make use of both up and down strokes so energy is not wasted.

To make use of the downstroke, maybe the energy can be stored in the spring as in the diagram. This is what is in the pump invention. I think it had two springs.

Brian
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: bsrinon on December 12, 2006, 10:46:29 PM
By the way, maybe the front suspension should be replaced by a solid fork!!!  ::)
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: supersam on December 12, 2006, 10:49:16 PM
NOW!

stupid question of the day, why can this not also be used to overcome the sticky point?  some of you magnet guys need to jump on this!!!

lol
sam
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: supersam on December 12, 2006, 11:06:46 PM
brian,

nice setup, however if you don't want to swing the pendulum, we have got to figure out some way to swing the pendulum, when we are not around.  i think your idea of having a selinoid kick it is great, but what are you going to do with the excess mechanical energy?  boy doesn't that seem like a stupid question?  but at 12:1 there have to be some answers to something.  i know my system wastes it in mechanical energy, due to friction, and other mechanical problems, but all the energy must be used in the end!!! i was only trying to close the loop for now, and then start working on extra efficiencies for an overunity system.

lol
sam
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: bsrinon on December 13, 2006, 12:45:22 AM
Sam,

To keep the pendulum swinging while we are not around, I was thinking of using a sprinkler solenoid like this:

http://www.starnursery.com/images/items/938401.jpg

The power from a generator on the back wheel could power this solenoid.
Maybe a generator like this can fill up some capacitors to power the solenoid:

http://www.aztlanbicycle.com/images/products/lowrider-accessories/series-00123-lights.jpg

Brian
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: supersam on December 13, 2006, 01:48:08 AM
brian,

don't get me wrong,  maybe two setups like yours will be best.  i just wanted to take advantage of the power on the upswing and the downswing of the lever.  i had posted a stupid idea at the top of page 3.  that i have since gone back and made a smiley face because i couldn't figure out how to make the single direction bicycle crank work in both directions, maybe you have come up with the solution.

i don't think milkovic ever used the spring for anything but providing a, LOAD, to keep the machine running optimally.  if we can figure out aq useful way to load the machine without a spring, then?  if you think a spring is helpful, then two springs, added to our setup as in the earlier post on this site might be something to consider in conjunction to these other things.  in other words i don't see having a top and bottom spring driving a circuit could hurt anything with 12:1 input to output.

is any of this making any scense?  is a hybrid the way to get to overunity?  can it be done with one disciplen alone?  it seems nobody is getting there by themselves, but alot of people are getting close!!!!!

lol
sam
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: supersam on December 13, 2006, 01:56:38 AM
hey everyone,

i guess what i am trying to convey is the old story of the man with ten sons.  the old man passes a bundle of ten sticks tied togeather around to each of his ten sons, and asks each of them to break the bundle.  of course none of them is able to do so.  he then takes the bundle apart and hands each of them one stick to break, and all ten of the sons is able to break his stick.

i guess my point is in which case did the work get done??

lol
sam
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: pg46 on December 13, 2006, 03:34:09 AM
Hi All-

 If you want to run a generator why not use what the inventor demonstrated in his videos - the hand held flashlight dynamos?
They can produce power from the verticle linear motion and can also be used as a spring. You can place them under and above the lever to take advantage of both strokes. You can tie as many together as you would require to increase the spring strength and to increase power production levels.
 These flashlights are made in large quantities in China and are inexpensive to buy.

Just A Thought
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: supersam on December 13, 2006, 03:40:54 AM
hey brian,

if you find a cheap used bike that has front shocks, why not just throw out the spring, you now have two, remove your strut to hold the spring, and just drill a hole in your lever to accept a axel through the front fork and the lever arm.  does this not seem like the same thing?  maybe you need a block under the haqndle bars.  but maybe not.  but at least you will be getting closer to the possible crank at the axel of the lever.  so i would call this a move in the right direction.

lol
sam
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: supersam on December 13, 2006, 03:49:35 AM
hey page 46,

that isn't a bad idea, i hadn't even thought about the spring tension of one of those little flashlights.  however small the voltage when you multiply it by eighteen, using a mehess type setup, why couldn't you keep the pendulum swinging?  great idea. i think what we need here is a few simple builders.  i just can't see why with x input being so small why y output can't close the loop in some way.

lol
sam
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: Vortex1 on December 13, 2006, 03:59:22 AM
 ;)
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: Vortex1 on December 13, 2006, 04:13:41 AM
 ;D
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: supersam on December 13, 2006, 04:37:44 AM
ramesh,

this was a simple story to get the point across that when we work together we can accomplish more than we can by ourselves!!!!

lol
sam

there are alot of people that are looking at this site that are also working on other devices that might be "overunity" if they can just find a way to jump one hurdle.  i was thinking this might be some help.
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: iacob alex on December 13, 2006, 05:13:45 AM
Hi Brian!If a simple experiment(   www.vernier.com/discussion/index.html?topic=54   )proves that ,if you intend to go swinging ,from a 90 degrees angle from the equilibrium position,you must make sure ,that the cable can withstand 3 times your weight,here we have a resembling case with Milkovic's  device,machine(12 times more output....).But,far-out,the difference is more provocative,interesting :an usual pendulum has a stable fulcrum(bearing,pivot),Milkovic's pendular lever has a swinging one.Here is the point:unlike trajectory of the bob.When you say trajectory,you say inertia.The "in-box" action for the bob,is the same(gravity pull or push...as you like).If the "out-box" reaction for the bob ( the same falling height) is different...here we have a problem to think about.The very small creatures,let's say insects,are "ignorant" about inertia ,but they are controlling masterly their  trajectory.Again, must we  go back to nature, for information?          All the Bests!/Alex
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: supersam on December 13, 2006, 05:34:49 AM
o.k. mramos,

gramatical point well taken.  i must ask however why we are all here if not for the possibility?

lol
sam

ps: two heads are still better than one.  imagine with ten.
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: bsrinon on December 13, 2006, 06:20:36 AM
Hi Alex,

Yes there is that added complexity when you're talking about pendulums with moving fulcrums. You're talking about a dynamic system within a dynamic system...hard to calculate, unless you use a computer to do the job like Dingus's Working Model. That is one expensive software!! Real nice though...I wish I had one to play with.

Brian

Hi Brian!If a simple experiment(   www.vernier.com/discussion/index.html?topic=54   )proves that ,if you intend to go swinging ,from a 90 degrees angle from the equilibrium position,you must make sure ,that the cable can withstand 3 times your weight,here we have a resembling case with Milkovic's  device,machine(12 times more output....).But,far-out,the difference is more provocative,interesting :an usual pendulum has a stable fulcrum(bearing,pivot),Milkovic's pendular lever has a swinging one.Here is the point:unlike trajectory of the bob.When you say trajectory,you say inertia.The "in-box" action for the bob,is the same(gravity pull or push...as you like).If the "out-box" reaction for the bob ( the same falling height) is different...here we have a problem to think about.The very small creatures,let's say insects,are "ignorant" about inertia ,but they are controlling masterly their  trajectory.Again, must we  go back to nature, for information?          All the Bests!/Alex
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: bsrinon on December 13, 2006, 06:33:22 AM
Sam,

That's a good option to start off with just for testing the concept. But later on when you need a bigger, heavier pendulum, we may need those extra extension with some metal tubing.  I'd like to get started right away, but this is final's week at the college.  :(  I should be studying now...but this is too much fun.

Brian


hey brian,

if you find a cheap used bike that has front shocks, why not just throw out the spring, you now have two, remove your strut to hold the spring, and just drill a hole in your lever to accept a axel through the front fork and the lever arm.  does this not seem like the same thing?  maybe you need a block under the haqndle bars.  but maybe not.  but at least you will be getting closer to the possible crank at the axel of the lever.  so i would call this a move in the right direction.

lol
sam
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: konduct on December 13, 2006, 08:26:10 AM
Hey Brian. Great graphics and input. What school are you attending? 


~slightly edited~

Sam, I misunderstood you earlier on the lever strokes.  For each pendulum swing, there are two "work" duty cycles by the lever and one "reset" cycle (at the bottom of the pendulum swing.)  If you restrict or tap the reset cycle too much, it will be limiting the next work cycle's distance and counteract the 12:1 ratio. (Taking away from input power will drastically reduce your output when it is at 12:1!) On the other hand, the lever has to stay within a certain angle on each stroke to maintain a good rhythm so there is some energy to "catch" at the end of the reset stroke.  In addition, reading some earlier post on tension as well as my own research, I believe that the pendulum has nearly twice as much power needed to reset the hammer IF  the pendulum is heavy enough to balance the lever at rest. 

If the lever is balanced so that the pendulum is up in the air at rest, than there would be little energy left over for any work on the reset cycle.  If the pendulum is "heavy" and the hammer is in the air at rest, then you are directly diminishing the leverage of your hammer since the pendulum already has a weight advantage.  I think the balanced at rest setup is the easier to work with. 

If we could temorarily store the excess energy when the pendulum is at the bottom of its swing, and return nearly that same amount as it comes back down, WE'LL BE IN BUSINESS!

The power of a device like this comes from the weight on the "hammer" end of the lever interacting with gravity.  All the pendulum does is use its natural potential to kinetic energy cycle to offset the weight of the "hammer".  We need the hammer to go up to come down.  The actual "work" is being done by gravity on the hammer so to restrict anything that gets the hammer back in the air seems counterproductive to this particular setup.  ???  When I said the machine works better under load, it is only on the work cycle...HOWEVER......If we were to use some 1 inch neos (included in the design as "work" weight.) and pump those puppies through some coils on the up and down strokes...I think the inductive coil forces would be negligible to the "reset" cycle and would make use of the back and forth nature of the machine to assist in powering some solenoids.

Make sense?       
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: konduct on December 13, 2006, 08:51:49 AM
Can someone slightly stronger in the electrical field give me an idea on the best way to construct a linear inductive coil / dynamo?
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: bsrinon on December 13, 2006, 08:56:18 AM
konduct,

Thanks! I'm attending 3 different colleges right now in Southern Calif. Trying to get into the nursing program.  I was a software engineer for several years until I got laid off. Studied Electrical Engineering before that at CSUF. 

I caught the free-energy bug after listening to Art Bell radio program talking about the Hamel 3-cone device that imploded. I never was able to replicate any free energy devices since. I'm hoping this pendulum thing might work!

Brian


Hey Brian. Great graphics and input. What school are you attending? 
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: bsrinon on December 13, 2006, 09:09:51 AM
konduct,

What comes to mind is one of those flashlights you shake that charges up a rechargeable battery. Use cylindrical neo magnets in a pvc pipe and wrap 24 guage wire around the pipe. The up and down motion should induce current in the coil. Use caps and full wave bridge rectifier to capture the energy. Some of those key words mentioned could be looked up in the internet for more details I guess. Hope it wasn't too simplistic of an explaination...

Brian

Can someone slightly stronger in the electrical field give me an idea on the best way to construct a linear inductive coil / dynamo?
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: konduct on December 13, 2006, 09:59:31 AM
Wow...imploding 3 cone device!  I'm more of a magnet guy so that sounds juicy! 

I was thinking exactly what you did about the shake lights scenario but I need the Eletrical Engineering part!  I'm so dumb with juice that I'm pratically afraid to touch a capacitor out of the box! =) I'm a whiz with gadgets, software, mechanics, website building, yadda yadda yadda... but...What the heck does a "full wave bridge rectifier" do?  I'll try and figure it out...Do you think I could take apart a one of those flashlights and add some caps and or batteries to it for more juice? I like the idea of charging batteries for mere evidence of overunity! One of my main problems is figuring out what components will hold enough juice to power the solenoids.

Thx   
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: 2tiger on December 13, 2006, 10:26:38 AM
Hi Konduct

Quote
Can someone slightly stronger in the electrical field give me an idea on the best way to construct a linear inductive coil / dynamo?

Please look back in the thread, I gave you an idea how this could be realize with read/write heads from a harddisk drive.
For a simple experiment it would be enough.

Someone replies that I forgot the springs in my drawing. Yes he is right. Sorry but it was a fast drawing. Of course there have to be springs to create the effect.

And here is one more advantage with the coil-magnet  setup compairing it with the crank-flywheel-setup.
With the coil-magnet setup you will be able to tap out some energy out of the system by driving the load i.e. with a microcontroller, switching resistance on and off.
Remember that the springs have dynamic properties. So if you want to tap some energy out of the system I suggest that you have to stay tuned with this dynamic curve in order to not disturb the motion timing of the system.
With the microcontroller you will be able to tap in the right moment with the right load.
I hope you understand what I am trying to explain.


kr
2Tiger
 

Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: corpsegravy on December 13, 2006, 12:39:47 PM
Movement of the pendulum's fulcrum is a potential problem as it might transfer damping energy to the pendulum.

But the addition of the springs is what helps eleviate this.  The springs store energy AND limit motion.  They then return this energy to the lever as an increase in velocity as it moves from up to down or down to up.  Interesting to note that this energy returns to the lever and not the pendulum.
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: konduct on December 13, 2006, 01:30:54 PM
Corpsegravy is correct.  The springs are what I call an energy "recycler."

Hey Brian!  I now know what a rectifier is!  That helps me skip figuring out how to build a commutator!

To all...Bravo!!!  Per Tiger's suggestion, I have re-read the entire thread and am impressed by our little group here.  We have collectively stirred each other's minds to action and quite frankly, this little machine is so adaptable that there's not much it wouldn't do! =) We could stick coils 7 ways from Sunday!

Tiger Buddy...I just don't know enough about programming controller chips and such to make the thing too complicated electronically but I am sure there will be a time to implement your ideas.

Sam...thanks for the motivation!  I can't bring myself to rip up my only bike right now and I don't have room for any more...BUT...I think once I've got the "little junior" version down...We can go ahead and build the "Big Momma" with lots of weight and 21 Speeds or possibly a torque converter. (I love torque converters...they're starting to use them in Nissan transmissions.) I'm trying to hook a saw blade up and cut a tree in half for a demo of the Big Momma and put that on YouTube! Power! For Free!

Alas, I keep thinking Brian's over all setup seems the most feasible to me for right now.  Simplicity...I have plenty of 1/4" one way ID bearings already on hand...I already have a decent wooden flywheel that I will throw a bunch of neos in and run past a coil.  As long as Brian helps me figure out the caps/wiring/solenoids etc without getting me electrocuted, then we should have a pretty cool little generator to show for our efforts.  I'll buy all the stuff.

Anybody know of some kind of meter like the power company uses to hook up so we could take a running measurement of total power generated over the course of time?  Basically a read out of total watt hours?  It would be cool to say how much juice something like this can put out over certain intervals.

One last question...When you guys mention 90 degrees in reference to the pendulum, do you mean a total swing of 90 degrees, 45 on each side of 6 oclock?  Or 90 to each side adding up to 180? 

Thanks again guys!  I'm truly proud of what everyone has made from the thread...from the start of the golden fish metaphor! We rock!   
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: supersam on December 13, 2006, 07:00:36 PM
hey everyone,

i don't know if anyone has taken a look at the milkovic web site in the last few days, but it seems like a whole lot of new downloads of patent information has been added since i first saw it last week.  most of the patents are written in a language that i can't read.  but there are several with english translation for us monolinguists.  great stuff though the pictures alone can really stimulate alot of thought.  even have one with a generator, driving a motor driving the pendulum.  good theory page also that i either missed or has been added since my last visit. 

i am chomping at the bit to get back home so i can get to work on all the ideas i have already.  well i guess i'll be home for christmas, to get my christmas gift.  can't wait.  you guys had better get started.  cause i'm going to come on strong then.

@konduct,
i think with two springs we can get two power strokes,  take a look at the video on milkovic's site, where he powers the eighteen dynamo lights, nine on the downstroke nine on the upstroke.  and he is pushing the pendulum with the trigger of another that doesn't even light up except on the start.

great stuff and ideas to everyone.  lets close the loop!!! i think it is simply a matter of replication at this point but still would be great to see.

lol
sam
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: konduct on December 13, 2006, 10:02:10 PM
I'm thinking of using caps.  Batteries seem to make skeptics even more skeptical.
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: supersam on December 13, 2006, 11:38:30 PM
hey everyone,

how much power could we generate if we wrapped a coil around the bicycle wheel,  as in brian's design, and then placed fixed permanent magnets at various points around the wheel?  i wonder if the toroidal coil will give us more power?  just my stupid thought of the day stuck out here on the road.

lol
sam
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: dean_mcgowan on December 14, 2006, 12:01:57 AM
I am still mentally trying to calculate how many joules of brain power it would take to keep pushing the pendulum at the "correct moment" to account for a 12:1 overunity efficiency.

It is a real conundrum and a great testimony to the abilities of the human mind to be able to observe and interact with the physical universe in such an efficient manor.

Imagine the computing power it would take to observe the swing of the pendulum and interupt it only when the addition of force would be effective in the positive moment.

wow.. "big blue" stand aside .. chess champion you may be, but that !! .. i would love to see happening real time in a mechanical system .. ;)

Good luck guys :D


Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: dean_mcgowan on December 14, 2006, 12:08:37 AM
http://world.honda.com/ASIMO/

better chance of this guy beating us all at a game of touch footbal :D
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: supersam on December 14, 2006, 12:38:38 AM
hey dean,

i don't think it takes that many joules of brain power.  all you have to do is keep the damn pendulum swinging and the rest of the system takes care of it's self.  maybe you should use some of those joules of yours investigating that!!!!

lol
sam
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: konduct on December 14, 2006, 12:46:11 AM
OMFG ITIFIO! You know guys...I've been thinking about the pendulum's method for multiplying kinetic energy.  It is basically building up inertia as gravity pulls on it until it hits the bottom of it's swing.  It's just like dropping a ball straight down except that it "falls" on an incline because of the "string". Then, it "rolls" back up the "ramp" and recycles the energy back into the next swing.  The swing or "ramp" of the pendulum gives it centrifugal force which is obviously different from linear force. A lot of the centrifugal force is lost if not converted into energy or used...it actually works against the pendulum if it is absorbed back into it since the centrifugal force is about 90 degress from the linear motion.

What I believe to be true is this...
      -A linear magnetic motor is like dropping a ball.
      -A magnetic ramp is like a pendulum swinging into a brick wall.
      -Two magnetic ramps in a linear opposing configuration is like a  pendulum by itself, with losses each swing due to the sticky spot and the lack of recycling the excess energy.  The excess is there but the damn machine eats it back up.
      - NOW...Two magnetic ramps in a opposing circular configuration make use of the cetrifugal forces by using them to slide past the sticky point!  The increasing magnetic field decreases equally on the other side of the sticky spot so the excess energy is more than enough to get to the "top" of the next ramp!  I know this is hard without pictures but comparing the fundementals of Mikovic's device with the Mikell Device at http://www.fdp.nu/mikelldevice/thedevice.asp has led me to these conclusions.  I believe the  Mikell device to be the most "honest in description" compared to other inventors claims.  The kid didn't really even understand why it worked because he just explained how he built it. BUT, I have a feeling his Father and Uncle did know why it works!  

Basically...the "free" energy in a magnet motor will not be directly from the magnets' power, but by the amount of centrifugal power the magnetic differences can generate!  Thanks Sam!  I asked myself, "How can a pendulum and lever get past the sticky spot?"  The magnetic ramps are the pendulum and the rotor is the lever.  

Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: Dingus Mungus on December 14, 2006, 12:50:51 AM
I got an idea for detecting when to push the pendulum...
Don't even need a processor. How about a mercury switches?
Only trigger when the pendulum is in down swing and the lever is up or vice versa...

Good luck apriciated but not needed,
~Dingus
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: bsrinon on December 14, 2006, 12:55:29 AM
Hey Sam,

That probably wouldn't be the most efficient or easest way of doing it. I would prefer glueing neo magnets on the wheel and then have stationary air core pickup coils around the wheel, with the space between the magnet face and the coil end as close to each other as possible.  In this setup, you don't have to worry about commutating the output of the coils wrapped around the wheel, as you would if the coils were on the wheel.

Here's a setup that might work (I don't think this setup has aircore coils):

http://freeenergynews.com/Directory/Inventors/JohnBedini/SG/Feb2005/images/Bedini_Feb2005_big_guy.jpg

A toroidal coil would give more power if the magnets were moving inside the toroidal tube. But that would be hard to make.

Brian

hey everyone,

how much power could we generate if we wrapped a coil around the bicycle wheel,  as in brian's design, and then placed fixed permanent magnets at various points around the wheel?  i wonder if the toroidal coil will give us more power?  just my stupid thought of the day stuck out here on the road.

lol
sam
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: supersam on December 14, 2006, 01:10:49 AM
@ brian,

great pickup on bedini, i wouldn't have thought of that for a ten dollar bill!  there are afterall ring magnets aren't there.  that sounds great.  with your setup there are lots of ways to go.  have you looked at milkovic's patent idea's? iknow i can't read them but as they say a picture is worth a thousand words.

lol
sam
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: Dingus Mungus on December 14, 2006, 01:18:53 AM
http://world.honda.com/ASIMO/

better chance of this guy beating us all at a game of touch footbal :D


http://world.honda.com/HDTV/ASIMO/New-ASIMO-run-6kmh/
4 miles per hour is just fast enough to lose me...
(I only run when chased)

~Dingus
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: supersam on December 14, 2006, 02:20:26 AM
hey  dingus,

i think bill mehess, is scheduled to release all his info and demo video on christmas morning.  can you post some pictures or video of the results you have gotten with the bicycle setup?  that would be great!! i still can't understand why it will not work maybe you can enlighten us.  or maybe we can help you to figure out why.  either way bill's idea with winding a spring to keep the pendulum moving may make or break the idea of closing the loop.  however if you take a look at milkovic's patents i think you might find it has already been done.

lol
sam
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: Dingus Mungus on December 14, 2006, 02:32:11 AM
A level mercury switch on the pendulum should be able to make a connection any time it is level... Also you could tie in a secondary switch to make sure the pendulum was only assisted when the lever was at a certain point along its path.

As for the extraction of energy from this set up:
I have made 50+ simulations only 2 of them showed violations of the first law. The only thing those two configurations had in common was the fact that the x plane velocity of the pendulum match that of a control group pendulum. I would suggest every one experiment with two pendulums at all times. One on the lever and the other stationary. If you can get them to match pace and phase only then you have began to scatch the surface of this device. I will try to post more sim data but I would advise others to just start working in WM2D with the two pendulum concept as to demonstrate the kinetic energy gain and the configuration it was found in.

Good luck to all,
~Dingus
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: konduct on December 14, 2006, 02:42:35 AM
Mramos...A SMOT actually seems to work better backwards.  I built a rotary 12 inch smot with sticky spots at 180 degrees from each other and the motor had more torque backwards than forwards.  Each magnet got about 1/8th of an inch farther away from each other.  You can go right past a sticky spot if you are going backwards!  The problem you now have is the "original" smot direction causing drag.  You get more energy in a backwards smot at the beginning as opposed to the end, due to the quick difference in field strength.  Trust me, I will put a video up if needed.  

Folks, I can get my 180 rotary smot to go past the stick spot by at least 120 degrees with no input!  I believe I could get it to go all the way around but I have a big dropoff where the flux of the last few mags gets sucked up into the beginning of the reverse smot.  >:( I think Tom Ferkos 45 degree track demonstrates these principles in a linear way using straight inertia as opposed to centrifugal force.)  I am real close to going ahead and putting together some diagrams and starting a new thread combining all of this knowledge in a simple enough way to actually design a build a working model.  Probably is going to be a 2D Version of the Mikell device if anybody wants a head start on understanding the design.  Actually, I think my "reverse" smot (already built) can be fitted with a slightly different rotor and made to do the same thing.  The beauty is there are several different configurations that will work on the same priciple!

  
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: konduct on December 14, 2006, 02:47:11 AM
Another principle to keep in mind with the Mikovic device is that it is constantly immersed in a field...gravity.  The pendulum "rides" the "polarity" of gravity...With that in mind...I think a working smot will have to constantly remain within a flux field, just surfing the polarity changes and picking up excess energy from each wave.
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: konduct on December 14, 2006, 03:40:54 AM
Polite correction...The pendulum swings on a "straight" axis...Its trajectory is a circle. What happens if you swing a pendulum all the way around?  It makes a circle. 
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: konduct on December 14, 2006, 04:12:38 AM
I'm not trying to breed the smot with the Mikovic Device. What I am saying is the Mikovic priciples will apply to a magnet motor! Using centrifugal force to reset the cycle in a smot.  No pendulums in the magnet motor!  Do you understand what I meant earlier?
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: dean_mcgowan on December 14, 2006, 04:18:15 AM
hey dean,

i don't think it takes that many joules of brain power.  all you have to do is keep the damn pendulum swinging and the rest of the system takes care of it's self.  maybe you should use some of those joules of yours investigating that!!!!

lol
sam

thats just what i am saying .. how is it your are going to interact with the pendulum without absorbing back any energy and also impart added energy to it to keep this baby going ..

I honestly think you guys are oversimplifying closing the loop here ...

ok the mercury switch gives you timing but you still need to know the angles, velocities and you need to also retract the the device that has exerted this new momentum (ie it has to be stopped as well as imparting force) .. keep doing your sums ...

Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: dean_mcgowan on December 14, 2006, 04:21:38 AM
think it through .. just how simple is it to keep the "damn" (subconcious concern) pendulum swining
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: dean_mcgowan on December 14, 2006, 04:41:50 AM
I already tried to explain this before .. now this is very important ..

when he pushes using the single torch the spring transfers the force to his hand without absorbing the energy into the torch (system) the lever dynamo in the torch thereby is not engaged and the little light you guys are all standing in amazement at (lol ...not shining) should not light afterall so no magical 12:1 here .. please move on all...
 
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: dean_mcgowan on December 14, 2006, 04:47:35 AM
P.S .. I am still trying to work out how to stop people from assuming I am SH .. i was going to say I got a PM from him but that would prove nothing at all .. speaking of damned conundrums :(
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: dean_mcgowan on December 14, 2006, 04:52:21 AM
I agree, I like the smot and the hydrogen cell ideas best at the moment.

Never say Never !!!
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: supersam on December 14, 2006, 06:16:21 AM
hey dean,

meanwhile back at this site we are discussing, dual mechanical oscillation systems.  maybe you got this site confused with some halfbaked idea that you may have swiped or something.  maybe you should put a little more effort into a vortex motor or something.  it definitely sounds like a more sound place for you to concentrate your efforts or maybe you would rather join daniel back over at kosol's sight again.

lol
sam


ps: can't wait for your smartass retort.  waiting patiently till you finally run out of hot air.  hmm. that gives me a thought for a fool proof overunity device. how can we harness all of your negative hot air?
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: dean_mcgowan on December 14, 2006, 06:43:45 AM
i am not being negative .. just rational.

yeah ... its half baked .. and its in the appropriate section.

show me why my idea has got no steam, then we will look into your original idea.

Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: dean_mcgowan on December 14, 2006, 06:47:43 AM
swiped ... hmmm ... i wont even bother defending myself on that point .. you can just humbly apologise at some point when you get the courage up again
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: Alfang on December 14, 2006, 07:17:54 AM
Hi all, love this site, I finally found a bunch of guys who think like me.
One of the first things that came to my mind about this machine. it's like a grandfather clock that never needs the weights pulled back to the top.And it doesn't tell time, yet.
I envision setting a spring mechanism like a ballpoint pen clicker through wire or cable, each time the hammer drops( pendulem straight down). Then when the pendulem swings to either extreme, the spirng release is triggered and it gives the "swing" a little shove.
I dont think you will be able to capture any energy from the pendulem.
It's not gonna take a whole lot of push to keep the pendulem swinging.
I know I'm comming in late, I've spent hours today reading the whole string. And I skipped some, so if someone else already had this thought, sorry.
Make it run nonstop first, then figure out how to harness the energy.

Thanks John
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: corpsegravy on December 14, 2006, 08:53:59 AM
Hammer?  A hammer and anvil are useful tools but waste all the energy if we are looking for overunity.

Better to move a big magnet up and down in a big coil of wire.
Bigger the better maybe.
Remember; the less the lever moves; the less the pivot on the pendulum moves; the less feedback energy to damp the pendulum.

Might not even need any springs to limit motion with a big enough coil and magnet.

To prove over unity, we just need to get more electricity than the input energy.  The input on a free swinging pendulum is still E=mgh, isn't it?
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: sevich on December 14, 2006, 02:39:09 PM
The swinging of the weight gives an amount just short of over unity, but still reaps double to triple the power needed to do stamping in a factory enviroment
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: supersam on December 15, 2006, 09:00:04 AM
HEY SEVICH,

you are right there.  i think, though, if you were able to take a little bit of that stamping energy and put it back into the pendulum then you could have your stamper and run it too.  do you see what i mean?

lol, and happy holidays to all,

sam
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: FreeEnergy on December 15, 2006, 09:57:33 AM
this thing is driving me crazy! closing the loop should not be so hard. i already mentioned before how to do it and now all i need is the parts.
all i need is an electrical motor pendulum, voltage regulator, coils, and some magnets. the voltage regulator will keep the pendulum at a certin speed and excess energy will be outputed elsewhere to a load.

peace
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: Dingus Mungus on December 15, 2006, 12:18:01 PM
hey  dingus,
can you post some pictures or video of the results you have gotten with the bicycle setup? 

Not my rig...

 ???

Maybe you should go reread. Also I WAS the one who said I found no sucessful way to couple the lever to a flywheel in a simulation. WM2D has a free demo, go get it! I used a dampener in the simulation that converted the kinetic to watts I posted screen shots a few pages ago, but I have not built a prototype of this device. My time is being devoted to a more apealing project right now.

No moving parts...
Totally scaleable...
On demand endothermic reaction!

 ;)

Everyone is talking anout a hydrogen economy, maybe you should start looking in to more eficient electrolysis.

BTW
Here is a a more visual explanation of my mercury switch idea:
Switch is level when the pendulum is at its starting drop point,
Tiny electro magnet... badda bing badda boom you know?

Hell we could even scrap the mercury switch and add a reed switch behind the EM core.
Then attraction lifts pendulum and a cap discharge pushes it. I hope this makes sence.

Just my 2 cents...

I need sleep,
~Dingus

(click to animate)
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: Dingus Mungus on December 15, 2006, 12:38:26 PM
For those who are wanting to work on this:

WM2D free download:
http://www.design-simulation.com/WM2D/download.php (http://www.design-simulation.com/WM2D/download.php)

My only screen print of something semi-enticing:
(http://www.overunity.com/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=1763.0;attach=4514)
(http://www.overunity.com/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=1763.0;attach=4516)

NOTICE THE PENDULUMS MATCH VELOCITY! (no lost kinetic energy)

Now download it and go test your own configurations of this idea!
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: supersam on December 16, 2006, 06:17:48 PM
hey everyone,

has everyone abondend this project, just because dingus said it COULD BE DONE, according to his sims?  what is wrong with this picture? SCARED SAY SCARED.   the sims even show it can be done.  i am not a firm believer in sims, but they are what they are.  and according to this one it can be done.  so where are the experimenters?  just my stupid question for the day. 

i'll be home for christmas, to get my christmas gift!

lol, and happy holidays to all

sam
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: Dingus Mungus on December 17, 2006, 01:30:45 AM
Where are your sims and experiments Sam?

Like I had said I only found 2 out of 50+ sims that would show any promise at all. Now go download WM2D and do your own sims and see if you can get a moving pendulum to match or out run a stationary pendulum. Only then is the rig useful...

~Dingus

Mahess super chistmas or just buying time...
We'll see for sure soon.
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: bsrinon on December 17, 2006, 08:39:37 AM
For me, it's finals week at school...I'm scared to fail my exam.

I did download the WM2D. What a cool program! Thanks Dingus. Too bad the demo version can't save the work.  I have to start over every time. :( 

I did several scenarios, including one with a 2 N-s/m damper, and a 1.8m lever with the fulcrum 1/3 from the pendulum on the right. The damper and some springs were placed on the left. The amplitude of the oscillations definately were dampened using a damper as expected. I did not turn on real-world friction/air resistence. Without any springs or dampers on the left side of the lever, the oscillations can become erratic if not properly balanced, but oscillations definately continue forever--agreeing with Newton's three laws of motion. To make it oscillate nicely, the working side must be equal or just slightly heavier than the pendulum side.

I haven't figured out how to place the meters to read dynamic forces on the simulation. Maybe it's only available on the full version. I would like to test it on WM2D if the moving pendulum really does produce tension about 3 times the weight of itself at its equilibrium position.

There's definately some promise to this.

I will play with program some more after the finals are done in a couple days, with screenshots.

By the way, I also looked at the Linnard Griffin patent (pdf) on H2 production using the "galvanic" process. I skimmed through the thread also. Looks interesting. Just a few weeks ago, before becoming interested with this pendulum thing, I had just finished playing around with electrolysis using Frank Roberts immersed cells method. I kind of gave up trying to find any resonant frequency because I couldn't find any using the circuit in the D16.pdf document. I did get some cool HHO production with 10 amps running through the cells...

Brian


hey everyone,

has everyone abondend this project, just because dingus said it COULD BE DONE, according to his sims?  what is wrong with this picture? SCARED SAY SCARED.   the sims even show it can be done.  i am not a firm believer in sims, but they are what they are.  and according to this one it can be done.  so where are the experimenters?  just my stupid question for the day. 

i'll be home for christmas, to get my christmas gift!

lol, and happy holidays to all

sam
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: Dingus Mungus on December 17, 2006, 10:49:33 AM
@bsrinon

Make sure you have air resistance turned on in the world menu first and foremost. Then to measure anything, select the object to measure then click on the measure menu and select what to measure. Also always use two pendulums that are exact dupes and you will be able to easily measure the fulcrum powering pendulum efficiency. I got a demo here too... I wish I could save and upload these demos for others to play with. I might buy a copy after the holidays are over but right now I'm super stretched... 5 flights in the next 2 weeks. :(

@everyone

The latest simulation I've been tweaking IS exhibiting excess power, but yet again I can not conclude that this is overunity in any way. Though it does at least in my opinion clearly violate the first law of thermodynamics aka conservation of energy. I believe this because I used two identical loaded pendulums to use as baseline comparison units of input energy, and the pendulum powering the fulcrum actually gains energy when compared to the stationary pendulum. Also this rig turned a steel fly wheel in one direction for just over 4 minutes.

If anyone here can truly explain how power is extracted from the fulcrum and power is added to the pendulum they would probably be quite rich already. Hmmm I wonder how one would close the loop though? Tricky business... Gotta hate not linear mechanics!

Screenshots:
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: fantasyl on December 17, 2006, 03:28:51 PM
Hi to all! First post here, my name is Roberto.

I'm in no way an engineer or a scientist, but I'm really intrigued by the overunity stuff and I'm trying to put my best effort in it.

Howewer.....using WM2D and my own replication of the original Mikovic scheme I found a machine that is never in equilibrium (at least in the simulation).

I receive the very same internal limit error Mingus is receiving, but the strangest thing is that the rotation on the polygon in my case and with my proportion is increasing!!!

Is this overunity ?

From a near equilibrium point the pendulum and the whole machine starts to move and keeps the same oscillation rate for about twenty minutes, and then the rotation of the fulcrum INCREASE of one (VERY LITTLE) step and remains costant for about 5 minutes, then the program gives me an "internal limit reached" error.....

I start to feel really excited because I heard many times that an overunity machine should "power on" by itself....maybe I'm just a fool, but please help me to make some light.

I attach the images of the simulation and the enlarged graph of the motion of the polygon........please note the increase in rotation is VERY LITTLE, but it's there  :o!

Please don't be rude as I registered on the board, but I feel I'm the most ignorant person around here, probably  :-[

And my work is a slight modified COPY/CLONE of Mikovic, so credit to him!
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: stonrman401 on December 17, 2006, 04:08:42 PM
Hello all.

Steorn, the company that claims they have working free energy devices, hosted a party in which forum members were invited to.

At the party was a steorn "toy" demonstrating free energy, according to the members.

They have all come together with pictures, and I noticed on a few of them, pendulums are actually part of the device! Do you guys think this is related? Have a look for yourself, Im sure someone here can connect this...

http://www.steorn.net/forum/comments.php?DiscussionID=31741&page=1

Also, apparently steorn (who has said they will stay away from the forum to do work) DELETED a thread and BANNED a member when apparently they got "too close" to figuring it out. Steorn lost a LOT of support when they did this, because it's obvious by now theyre fools drunk and bent on getting money. Though I know I wont buy a damn thing because everyone here will be replicating it soon! Steorn will make pennies, then flop over and their forum will destroy them from the inside out. Theyre making bad moves and really should have just shared with the public a long time ago.

I hope some of you can make sense of these pictures. Im off for now.
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: Dingus Mungus on December 17, 2006, 08:10:50 PM
@fantasyl

#1 Did you turn on air resistance/friction? probably not.
Go to the world menu and select air resistance.

#2 Where is your baseline pendulum? How do you know your moving pendulum hasn't lost energy without a stationary pendulum to compare it to?

Please completely read the posts!
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: fantasyl on December 17, 2006, 11:26:59 PM
@ Mingus

#1 Ouch....you are right.  :-\ What is the coefficient I should use for "real world" simulation.... 0.100?

#2 In fact I used another approach. I always start with the pendulum not oscillating. If the machine (not the one above.....I did many different attempts/projects) can increase the rate at which the pendulum and the whole polygon rotates on the fulcrum.....this machine would clearly OU. Is this approach also valid?

Now I'm trying to get the work to move the pendulum done by the hammer (as all here), but maybe we should look in depth (as you suggested) the two pendulums project, which should generate harmonics and resonances, could you post or at least suggest the 2 configuration in which the pendulums were violating the 2nd law?
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: Dingus Mungus on December 18, 2006, 01:07:46 AM
I don't think you're understanding the 2 pendulum concept at all. One pendulum is attached to a lever like the patent states. The other pendulum is an exact duplicate of the first but hung stationary and not inertacting in any way with the experiment. The second pendulum has nothing to do with energy or harmonics or any of that theoretical garbage, its sole purpose is to allow you to compare which pendulum runs out of energy first first.

If the pendulum that interacts with nothing but air resistance stops before the pendulum which is also adding energy to the lever then clearly it has gained energy from somewhere and that violates the first law of thermodynamics or conservation of energy, I believe this because the energy added to the system is outweighted by the work returned by the system. You can clearly see this in my sim posts. The pendulum adding energy to the lever actually gains energy in comparison to the stationary pendulum.

Starting with a dead rest pendulum is an interesting concept but there is no energy to capture if it is indeed at a dead rest. The pendulum shouldn't move at all if the lever is balanced RIGHT?I would assume your lever balance is off, but there could be many factors leading to a falling pendulum gathering x velocity.

The DEFAULT air resistance is probably your best bet... Why would you even want to lower the resistance? Want to make your machines run longer or something? Whats the point in turning it on if you're going to lower its overall resistance by two thirds? I use high speed resistance or 0.300 kg/m^2 as it will allow for the most default resistance and makes the sim more realistic to earths air resistance as well. Lowering resistance and friction in your sims discredits us all so please be careful to make sure all sims are sent through a worse case senario when it comes to friction.

I can't save my work yet but the easiest way to under stand my 2 examples posted is to go look at them and attempt simuated replication...

~Dingus Mungus
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: fantasyl on December 18, 2006, 02:56:35 AM
Yes, I understood the 2nd pendulum was for comparison purposes only!

IMHO If you start trying to be close to the equilibrium as you can, and the pendulum (and polygon, the whole machine!!) increase it's oscillation rate in time, then you have OU.

I start with the with the lever NOT PERFECTLY balanced (as you said). I do this way because I found easier to look at small increment in oscillation rate of the machine.....

Please Mingus to capture my questions as they are.....simply questions! I didn't have the slightest idea of what was the "real world" value....that's all......
Now I putted it to .300 as you said.
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: Dingus Mungus on December 18, 2006, 12:38:04 PM
Sorry the "maybe we should look in depth (as you suggested) the two pendulums project, which should generate harmonics and resonances" line confused me. I had a lot of trouble expessing its purpose and what it measured. So I apoligise if my response was short.

A sugestion: a lever imbalance (in length) can be compensated with added weight (thickness) then you can balance your lever. This is important unless you find a way to make an energy comparison. A duplicate lever in the same starting position could work much in the same way as a dupe pendulum. Try it out if you get a chance but I think you'll find comparing the overall energy output for each lever will be quite difficult since only one lever would operate as a pendulum and the other as a restricted oscilator.

Good luck on your experiments and thanks for your interst in this project.
 ;)

~Dingus Mungus
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: Alfang on December 19, 2006, 05:53:24 AM
Fantasy, I am with you, I am new to the WM2D program, and although I have set air resistances, gravity, friction, I really dont know what the real world values shoud be.
I dont know if I can set the program defaults to real world, so that each time i start a new project , everything is on that should be and values set.
Or, can someone set up and post a WM2D blank with the correct real world values set, so we can save that as a starting page template. dont forget to save as is under another name so as not to lose your Blank template.

Next question,,, I have found This pendulem machine dificult to ballance.
I will figure it out,,,, but if someone already knows the ideal ratio of weights, lengths, fulcrum points etc....please share the formula, I expect theres one ideal formula and that all scale ups or downs will be directly proportional, I hope.

Heres another thing for those that dont know.  a pendulem at a certain weight will travel the same distance per minute reguardless of the length of the pedulem. I'm gonna make up some numbers for explaination purposes.  lets say a 10 pound weight is suspended 12 inches down and is swung, if you could measure the total distance that the weight travels in 1 minutes time.
It would equall the distance traveled by the same weight if it had been hung on a 2 foot pendulem. I cant quote you the scientist who discovered this, probably newton.

And to be honest, this info doesnt do anything for me, except when someone says that their system works so well the pedulem picks up speed, That will NEVER  Happen in a pendulem powered anything. Why do you think they make clocks with them, once the length of the pendulem is determined, the clock keeps perfect time. at least 19th century perfect.
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: supersam on December 19, 2006, 06:13:05 AM
well,

maybe, you will want to discover, what   is availeble?  i know as dingus say's i need to make, my own experiments'.  i will!!!!!

lol
sam
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: fantasyl on December 20, 2006, 11:11:54 PM
Ok, I set the friction to 0.300 (high speed), and doing my own experiment I tried this setup (which I named TRIPENDULUM  ;D ).

It's indeed a "non linear" motion (you find the speed of the ropes, they sure are NOT decelerating), and the machine in the simulation NEVER stops. After about 30 minutes the program gives an internal error (the same in a dingus post before), but the machine would keep going ;D .

I'm going to realize it for sure, but hope someone could give some advice on why this device should / should not work.

IMHO it's a good idea. In the attach you see two box with springs, not connected with the machine. You can extract energy from the device in multiple ways. First idea came to mind is springs connected to magnets, when the machine is "overloading".
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: FreeEnergy on December 20, 2006, 11:57:04 PM
Ok, I set the friction to 0.300 (high speed), and doing my own experiment I tried this setup (which I named TRIPENDULUM  ;D ).

It's indeed a "non linear" motion (you find the speed of the ropes, they sure are NOT decelerating), and the machine in the simulation NEVER stops. After about 30 minutes the program gives an internal error (the same in a dingus post before), but the machine would keep going ;D .

I'm going to realize it for sure, but hope someone could give some advice on why this device should / should not work.

IMHO it's a good idea. In the attach you see two box with springs, not connected with the machine. You can extract energy from the device in multiple ways. First idea came to mind is springs connected to magnets, when the machine is "overloading".


need more details
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: Dingus Mungus on December 21, 2006, 12:10:12 AM
The velocity measured definitetely shows the system has great trouble finding a point of equilibrium which is exactly what this system is dependent on. Basically the non linear inbalance creates a sort of improbability drive. What I mean is the probality of every component being in the propper alignment to find the equilibrium zone is such a low probability that the device is powered by chaos in a sense.

My only critique is you are not extracting any power from the system with dampeners, and you have no way of proving that your arangement is putting out more kinetic energy the what you put in to the pendulums.

Also what is the pursose of the ancored blocks attached to springs?

Quite an interesting and perplexing new example, and if indeed the pendulums are picking up velocity despite resistance this example may prove to be a big step in the right direction.

Great work and I look forward to hearing more about your tripendulum experiments.
~Dingus
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: FreeEnergy on December 21, 2006, 05:47:32 AM
Perpetual Motion Pendulum

http://www.supyo.com/home/artworks/saic/perpertual_pendulum/pendulum.htm
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: fantasyl on December 21, 2006, 09:05:04 AM
Perpetual Motion Pendulum
http://www.supyo.com/home/artworks/saic/perpertual_pendulum/pendulum.htm

Ehm.......but it's electricity driven  :'( ; became interesting if the energy for the solenoid could be supplied from a milkovic setup (hammer).

What other details should I write?

The setup is soooooooo simple!! I will try to realize it.......but if someone is faster please confirm or deny the simulation data, and everyone we'll have some free energy soon  ;D

Please keep in mind that the weight of the 2 pendulum vs the lever weight (and the rope lenght) is really important to achieve the non linear oscillations.
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: fantasyl on December 21, 2006, 09:05:16 AM
Double post....sorry, but was receing the DB error.....ARRGGHH  ::)
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: FreeEnergy on December 21, 2006, 09:19:31 AM
Ehm.......but it's electricity driven  Cry ; became interesting if the energy for the solenoid could be supplied from a milkovic setup (hammer).

that is what i meant ;)
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: FreeEnergy on December 21, 2006, 09:20:16 AM
Database Error: User 'hartiberlin1' has exceeded the 'max_updates' resource (current value: 30000)
File: /mounted-storage/home4/sub002/sc11940-GNVW/overunity/Sources/Subs.php
Line: 2513
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: FreeEnergy on December 22, 2006, 10:28:44 PM
Earl has a good points on this...check out the link below. he says the pendulum should be aerodynamic shaped and that the ball bearing(s) should be magnetic bearing for best results (near zero friction).

he also thinks this system won't work in a purely mechanical way and that we should apply electromagnetic coil(s). still i think we should try both ways and any other way possible. there is more details so check the link out below.

peace

http://peswiki.com/index.php/Directory:Milkovic_Two-Stage_Mechanical_Oscillator
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: fantasyl on December 23, 2006, 01:35:52 AM
Could someone suggest me a good simulation program to verify my results? Better if it's available in free trial.

I attached two spring with light tension (5kgf/m)at the lever edges, the power of only one of them (in W) is the first graph on the left, so this machine is able to put some work out while the pendulums keeps oscillating....

Tensions on the ropes would be very high.....mhhhhh.

Howewer today I bought all the needed stuff to build and verify my setup.......so soon we'll know IF and HOW the strange simulations data reflects the real world.....
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: Dingus Mungus on December 23, 2006, 07:46:30 AM
I don't have enough info to replicate your starting position... Is the sim still open? If you could please describe the starting postion and component dementions, I would like to replicate your results. The graphs are really exciting to see! I hope you had air restance turned on... You do have to turn it on each time you start a new project. Also the springs don't extract that much energy, but if you replaced them with dampeners then you could more readily extract energy from the system. If you get similar results while extracting energy then I would try physical replication. My attempts to replicate your results yeilded a sim that would self oscillate, but its a glitch not sponstanious energy... Fun to watch though, the balls bounce up and down and spin on their own.
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: FreeEnergy on December 23, 2006, 12:03:57 PM
check this out. i leave the system at equilibrium state and still the massive lever starts to pick up speed. and yes the air resistance is set to high. is it because of the horizontal track?
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: FreeEnergy on December 23, 2006, 01:38:08 PM
am i doing something wrong? or is it the software?
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: hartiberlin on December 23, 2006, 03:59:34 PM
Hower asked me to post this:

Hello again.

Topic related to Milkovic's oscillator:

I also found this link was not functionally well

http://www.veljkomilkovic.com/Video/Veljko_Milkovic_(video-7)_Universal_oscillator-generator.wmv

here is the alternative link for the video link on pages 1 and 3 (add it under the previous)

http://www.micropixel.biz/veljkomilkovic/videos/Veljko_Milkovic_(video-7)_Universal_oscillator-generator.wmv

I found on Milkovic's website the translation of dynamo flashlight analysis.

Put it on page 2 and inform the others about this news.
http://www.veljkomilkovic.com/Images/Analysis_of_the_dynamo_lamp.pdf

Best regards.

Hower
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: pese on December 23, 2006, 10:11:02 PM
http://www.ecosustainablevillage.com/pendolum_pump.htm

@ All
Nice Christmas !

Pese
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: fantasyl on December 24, 2006, 04:27:50 PM
If you could please describe the starting postion and component dementions, I would like to replicate your results. The graphs are really exciting to see! I hope you had air restance turned on...

Air resistance was set to High Speed, I put a value of 0.500 just to test if the real matter for this device to work was air resistance and friction, but nothing changed (in the way the machine was self sustaining).
I'll give you the latest data I'm working on for the REAL test.

Lever = 1 metres
Fulcrum = center (0.50m) seems the best bet.

2 Lateral Pendulums data: weight = 4kg each; rope lenght (center of disc to lever)= 18cm ; Disc Diameter = 12cm

Rope connected to fulcrum at the lever's centre = have yet to experiment, best results SEEM obtained whit shorter lenght  = 7 cm

My attempts to replicate your results yeilded a sim that would self oscillate, but its a glitch not sponstanious energy... Fun to watch though, the balls bounce up and down and spin on their own.

Yes, I know the effect, fun to watch.....to avoid excess of energy from the lever, you can just connect the sides of the lever to 2 dampeners, but you have to connect the dampeners in a way they will be "active" only when the lever reach a certaing degrees in rotation, and not before, otherwise the machine will not self sustain.

Please beg my english, I'm trying to do my best.

I tryed to realize a real world experiment with the TRIPENDULUM setup, but the steel lever I have seems too weak (!!!) and not adequate. I stopped the making as soon I realized the two lateral pendulum would have braken the lever after few oscillations.

PS If you try the real test be careful with the ropes.....in the simulation I measured very very high tension......
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: ring_theory on December 24, 2006, 05:21:10 PM
I would suggest transfering the kinetic energy from the striking end
of the lever to a fly wheel then you can add magnets and coils to it.

I'm attaching an animated version of my idea.
It's not to scale and I left out the connecting rods. (tired)

The problem is friction. when you start adding yet more moving mass to the system your dragging down the total entropy of the system. It would be much more efficient to magnetize the swinging mass and induce voltage swinging by induction coils.
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: FreeEnergy on December 24, 2006, 10:13:05 PM
I would suggest transfering the kinetic energy from the striking end
of the lever to a fly wheel then you can add magnets and coils to it.

I'm attaching an animated version of my idea.
It's not to scale and I left out the connecting rods. (tired)

The problem is friction. when you start adding yet more moving mass to the system your dragging down the total entropy of the system. It would be much more efficient to magnetize the swinging mass and induce voltage swinging by induction coils.

yes the massive lever's energy needs to be put back into the pendulum as direct as possible for best results.
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: btester1 on December 26, 2006, 07:27:21 AM
http://www.callowayengines.com/
Has some information on pendulum gravity wheels.

Also off topic.
 :o
http://www.impactlab.com/modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid=10168
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: CoquiDave on December 27, 2006, 08:27:10 AM
Hi Folks,

Not an engineer or physicist, but just a guy who's good at jury rigging stuff...

I've seen folks in the thread trying to figure out the timing to push the pendulum.  What about a simple light source, (LED,) and receptor trigger that the bar on the pendulum would break, which would trigger an electromagnet to repel a fixed magnet on the pendulum as it passed the bottom of it's arc?  It'd give a little push twice per cycle.

Don't know how you'd generate the power for the electromagnet, but am thinking a link that drives a wheel, (like on a steam engine drive wheel,) that would be geared to run a generator with a capacitor to store the power until trigger time.

For whatever it's worth...

Dave
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: nwman on December 27, 2006, 09:54:02 AM
One question I would have about using the whole electromagnet idea to push/pull is how efficient is an electromagnet?

Tim
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: hallo on December 27, 2006, 09:39:54 PM
@konduct,


what happened with your rebuild machine ?

Does it work overunity ?
Thanks.
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: FreeEnergy on December 28, 2006, 04:12:07 AM
try it this way guys...login to see picture

it is hard to find the center point of equilibrium between the lever and the pendulum.
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: a19grey on December 28, 2006, 04:24:39 AM
Umm.... this is painful to watch. This isn't even close to being over unity.  The key here is to recognize the difference between force and energy.  At one point he shows how with one hand he can easily keep the pendulum going but his assistant can?t stop the machine with BOTH hands.  This is because the pendulum moves over a very large distance (the length of the arc) whereas the hammer moves over a very small distance.  Thus, the force-per-distance is different, but the energy is not. His machine performs essentially the same function of a pulley system. I hope this site can help explain this.
http://www.phys.unsw.edu.au/~jw/blocks.html

Also,  this explains the flashlight scene.  He pushes lightly on the flashlight next to the pendulum (for a longer distance) while on the other end the hammer pushes hard (for a short distance/time) on the other flashlight.  One shouldn?t be surprised that pushing lightly for a long time doesn?t have the same effect on something as pushing hard for a short time (rest your hand against a wall for an hour, then punch it to see the difference) but this doesn?t mean more energy is going in than coming out. The first flashlight doesn?t light up enough for us to see it or it doesn?t light up at all because of the flashlight?s own inefficiency?s. This does not show that it is an over-unity device.

Also, it should be noted that the diagram showing the forces on the pendulum is wrong.  The force due to gravity does not change as the pendulum goes through its swing as indicated.  The force from gravity is constant (neglecting, of course, the fact that gravitational force decreases with the square of the distance, since the distances involved are so small as to be negligible). 

This is not an over unity device.
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: Dingus Mungus on December 28, 2006, 07:07:26 AM
For those who are wanting to work on this:

WM2D free download:
http://www.design-simulation.com/WM2D/download.php (http://www.design-simulation.com/WM2D/download.php)

something semi-enticing:
(http://www.overunity.com/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=1763.0;attach=4514)
(http://www.overunity.com/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=1763.0;attach=4516)

NOTICE THE PENDULUMS MATCH VELOCITY! (no lost kinetic energy)

Now download it and go test your own configurations of this idea!

First off this is just a simulation so I understand that will be the first argument you'll fall back on, but it is important to acknowlegde that energy is being extracted from the lever and it removes no kinetic energy from the pendulum. Roll that arround in your head for a moment, and I mean really think about the physical forces acting on the two masses. Now there are three things too understand about my method of replication. First the lever is balanced, second the weights on each end are balanced when in full rest, third there is an exact duplicate pendulum running independant from the device to act as a baseline guide to examine transfer of kinetic energy to the lever thus slowing the pendulum.

So then the question is why would the lateral exesion of gravity on a unbalanced lever cause a pendulum to lose any energy... If you think about it, you should come to the conclution I did which is: there is no reason for any kinetic energy to be taken from the pendulum from any force but wind resistance and gravity provided the lever and pendulum are in a similar phase. Yet excitingly enough it does not remove the fact that the lever gains its own kinetic energy. Do you see where I'm going with this? The element that gives the lever its kinetic energy does not lose any extra kinetic energy of its own... No transfer of kinetic energy...

I will say this; I can not in anyway say this device is overunity, but I believe deeply that this is an example of a first law violation. If this idea was propperly nurtured and worked on by group of dedicated and inginuitive individuals this could be proven and perhaps even matured to an overunity status, but very few people know enough about the device and its operation to "know" anything for sure. I would venture to guess that you are not one of those few.

These technologies can never be developed if nay sayers dismiss them without doing their own extensive research. Since that was your first post I can only assume this is the first time you've even read this thread (did you also read the full patent and test logs?), and that you've done no actual research of your own (physical or simulation experiments). That an uneducated opinion. I'm sorry if that sounds harsh but with all due respect it is the truth of the matter. If my assumption that this was the first time you've read anything about this device is wrong I applogise but thats usually the story.

~Dingus Mungus

P.S. If you would like share evidence or an experiment that would prove my hypothysis of a first law violation false I would be quite intriged to hear more.
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: Dingus Mungus on December 28, 2006, 07:12:32 AM
check this out. i leave the system at equilibrium state and still the massive lever starts to pick up speed. and yes the air resistance is set to high. is it because of the horizontal track?

Did you use a duped pendulum to ensure that energy wasn't taken from the drop pendulum?
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: FreeEnergy on December 28, 2006, 07:25:55 AM
check this out. i leave the system at equilibrium state and still the massive lever starts to pick up speed. and yes the air resistance is set to high. is it because of the horizontal track?

Did you use a duped pendulum to ensure that energy wasn't taken from the drop pendulum?

i don't remember and i could not save my work.

peace
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: a19grey on December 28, 2006, 10:16:32 AM
Ok, Mungus, first, thanks for the chance to think about this. Also,  I wasn?t sure what you had meant by ?exesion? but I hate it when people complain about spelling or grammar mistakes instead of paying attention to the issue, so I?ve assumed you meant ?lateral expression of gravity.?

The motion of the lever does rob the pendulum of kinetic energy.  First, what causes the lever to lift up? Well, it?s an unbalanced lever so naturally it tends to fall with the right side (hammer-side) down and the left side (pendulum side) up. In other words, when there is no motion, there is a greater net downward force on the hammer side than on the pendulum side.   The hammer raises when the pendulum is in motion.  More specifically, it raises when the pendulum is on it?s downswing since this is when the pendulum is pulling downward the strongest (to prove this to yourself just hold out a pendulum on your arm, in my case I used my laptop charger).  So, what overcomes the net downward force on the right-side (hammer) is the increased downward force on the left side from the pendulum?s motion.  As the hammer swings up, the left side of the lever swings down which causes the entire motion of the pendulum to be shifted downward by this amount.  So, the falling of the pendulum causes the raising of the hammer, i.e. the pendulum loses gravitational potential energy and the hammer gains gravitational potential energy.  The pendulum then swings through the bottom of its swing and begins to swing upward; as it does this, the total downward force on the left side (from the pendulum) decreases, and the hammer falls. As the hammer falls it loses gravitational potential energy and the pendulum shifts upward- gaining gravitational potential energy.  The question now is, what happens as the hammer falls again.  Assuming we don?t care about doing any work, we put a perfect spring (one that does not lose energy to heat and obeys hooke?s law exactly)  under the hammer.  Now, with the spring in place, as the hammer falls, it gets bounced back up to the exact same height it started from. Assuming we have the spring so designed that the time it takes the hammer to bounce back up to its starting height is the same time as it takes the pendulum to go from the highest point (and lowest force) in its motion to the lowest point (highest force).  So, the hammer will be back at the top of its swing when the pendulum is pushing down the hardest and thus the hammer will raise up to a new height and fall back down to the spring with even more energy.  Every time the hammer raises higher, the pendulum falls down farther, an exact exchange of gravitational potential energy, until either the pendulum hits the floor or the hammer swings past 90o inclination.  So, the only way to make the hammer go up higher (and thus fall down with more energy) is to raise it up higher and the only way to do that is to make the pendulum?s motion shift downward.  Nothing special here; again, just a modified pulley system.

However, there is kinetic energy transfer between the two systems, the hammer and the pendulum.  Imagine a pendulum attached to a rod about which it is rotating without loss to any frictions.  If the rod is raised or lowered while the pendulum is in motion, the pendulum will continue rotating in the same way (same frequency and amplitude) just shifted up or down with the rod. In other words, the shift in the rod?s height doesn?t affect the kinetic energy of the pendulum attached to it.  The obvious case of this is if we have a motionless pendulum pointed straight downward and we move the rod up and down.  The pendulum bob won?t start to swing back and forth, it?ll just move up and down with the rod and string we?ve attached it to.
Now imagine the hammer; the only way the hammer can have useful energy (in this example) is from its kinetic energy. The only way (in this example) for the hammer to get that kinetic energy is to fall a certain distance.  The greater the distance, the higher the change in potential energy, the greater the kinetic energy. So, imagine the hammer/lever with the pendulum attached, but motionless, in its rest position (pointed straight downward).  If we raise and lower the hammer (with our hands, or whatever) the pendulum will begin to swing. Why?  The pendulum didn?t begin to swing earlier when I imagined it being raised up and down, but now the pendulum is swinging. This seems contradictory, but the difference is that the left end of the lever isn?t moving ?straight? but is rather following a slightly curved path since it is, of course, rotating about the fixed point in the middle. 
Therefore, if the hammer starts to do useful work (instead of hitting our perfect, perfectly timed spring form earlier) it will have to slow down (e.g. from hitting a flywheel or being in the presence of a magnetic drive, etc.).  Since now the hammer is slowing down it won?t be perfectly in sync with the motion of the pendulum and so there will be times when the hammer is falling and the pendulum is falling downward and to the right (or counterclockwise if that?s easier to keep straight;  in this part the direction of the pendulum?s falling is important).  The hammer falling downward causes the left end of the lever to raise (or rotate clockwise), but the pendulum is now rotating counter-clockwise and will thus be slowed since they are moving in opposite directions.  So, the hammer doing work, causes it to be out of sink with the pendulum and thus it ?robs? energy from the pendulum and causes it to slow down.

Also, I did look at some of the website?s data figures.  The first one:
http://www.veljkomilkovic.com/Images/Measurement1.JPG

where he actually reports the sensational over-unity gain of 11.9% is a flawed experiment because he is measuring, again, force differences, not energy distances.  Without going into the details because this post is already the longest on this thread, I?ll note that the first key to realizing this confusion between force/energy is that the reported over-unity amount is exactly the same as the ratio between the two forces listed in 1) and 2) at the top of the image.

And yes, that was my first post and I apologize for any perceived flippancy.  I hope this helps and I?ll be happy to answer the questions that I?m sure will follow.
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: allcanadian on December 29, 2006, 07:50:04 PM
@ a19grey
Your rationalization of the pendulum system is quite good and very conventional, but incorrect.
Here is why, you have delegated all working forces to the bottom of the pendulum stroke where gravitational forces and centrifugal forces combine, what if 99% of the pendulum stroke was conservative and did no work in the system? what then?
We know all about pendulums don't we? We know and can predict what a pendulum will do when attached to a lever, any grade school student can do this- nothing new here.
The question you have not asked is what happens when all accelerations on the pendulum have stopped at the top of each stroke? The system does not produce work from the forces developed during 99% of the pendulum swing, but from a very small window when a mass (pendulum)becomes massless in the system.
As well most everyone has assumed the hammer side must move a substantial amount of distance, what if the hammer side moved only 1/8 inch, and only when the pendulum became massless in the system during 1% of it's stoke.
If you really want to understand this concept stop asking how this relates to known systems? and start asking how it is different.
And why, like wesley Gary, did it take Milkovic years to perfect a seemingly simple machine, which you have supposedly mastered in one afternoon?
Let's apply some more logic here, which is more likely?
-That Milkovic has worked years and has multiple patents on a technology that you and anyone can disprove in a matter of hours.
OR - you have missed something.
This put's things in perspective I think
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: supersam on December 29, 2006, 08:00:56 PM
hey grey,

have you taken into consideration the whip action of the lever moving up and down?  apparently not!  if that action is not enough for you to get to the most efficient machine you have ever seen then hang another pendulum off the bottom of the first pendulum and see what happens.  i bet you get her a swinging then.  i think you must be out of your mind with math if you can't see it then.

lol
sam
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: supersam on December 29, 2006, 09:36:15 PM
hey grey,

ask an astronaunt, gravity doesn't work with standard mathmatics!! just try it and see, the light!!!!

lol
sam
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: supersam on December 29, 2006, 10:54:04 PM
hmmm!

what do you think about that tri occilator now?  whappaw!

lol
sam
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: a19grey on December 29, 2006, 11:58:20 PM
@allcanadian
Yes, I did make an oversimplification by only referring to the pendulum when it was at the bottom of its swing. However, this does not invalidate what I?ve said.  Any time the downward force from the pendulum is greater than the net downward force on the right (hammer side) the hammer moves up.  This would happen for some range of the pendulum?s swing around the bottom point.  The hammer falls whenever the pendulum is outside this range because the downward force from the pendulum is less than the downward force from the hammer side.  Without knowing the exact weights, lengths, and speed of the pendulum in the example, this range of angles can?t be determined exactly.

So, the hammer moves for more than 1% of the stroke. It accelerates any time there is a net force on the right side which happens at all times except for the instant that the force from the pendulum exactly cancels the force from the right side of the lever/hammer.  Therefore, the pendulum does work (through the raising and lowering of the hammer) throughout its motion.  Of course, the net difference in the work is 0 since when the hammer is raising, the pendulum does positive work, and when the hammer is lowering the pendulum does negative work.  This isn?t conservative work though since there is (as always) that damned friction at play.       

Also, at the top of its swing, the pendulum DOES have accelerations on it.  In fact, the acceleration on the pendulum is greatest at the top of its swing, and least at the bottom of it?s swing.  This is because the acceleration on the pendulum is the difference between the z-component (straight up and down direction) of the centripetal force and the force of gravity.  When the pendulum is at the top of it?s swing, the centripetal force is the most out-of-line with the directly downward force of gravity and thus there is the highest acceleration at this point.  The reason the pendulum seems to ?hang? there as if it were massless is that at the top of its swing, for exactly an instant, the pendulum has zero velocity.  If, in fact, at the top of it?s swing there was no acceleration (and it?s clear since it changes direction that it has no velocity at this point) then the pendulum would hang at that point forever.  It would have no velocity, nor any acceleration, therefore it wouldn?t move.

Also, in my first post I made the point that the key to understanding this system is that the hammer does move such a short distance compared to the distance over which the pendulum moves.

@supersam
Please excuse me, but I?m afraid I don?t understand what exactly you mean by the ?whip action? of the lever.  That said, I would admit that this is an extremely efficient and possibly useful machine. I just don?t believe it is overunity.
Also, I?m not sure what you mean by the statement that gravity does not work with standard mathematics.  One, I would note that standard mathematics was sufficient to get the astronauts into space. Secondly, note that I didn?t actually use any mathematics, standard or otherwise, in any of my explanations of this system.
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: allcanadian on December 30, 2006, 02:27:22 AM
@ a19grey
Your arguement is true that gravitational acceleration is maximum at the top of the swing, but when the pendulum stops it falls into the realm of freefalling bodies, relative to the point of rotation and the z axis the pedulum has no mass and no acceleration relative to the system(the point of rotation). When the hammer falls the point of rotation of the pedulum moves upward with the pendulum so there is zero relative velocity between the two, hence no interaction. Supersam was refering to the fact that if the point of rotation was rising faster than the pendulum there is a swing effect, imagine yourself on a swing and just past the bottom someone pulled the point of rotation upward, the swing accelerates upward -because of the interaction.
In any case there has been absolutely no research done on this subject, Duel oscillator pendulum systems, I have checked. The closest papers I could find stated the complexities involved would require a supercomputer to analyse. So anyone stating this is impossible is basing it on opinion only, which we know rarely resembles reality. I can't get around the fact that hundreds of man hours and thousands of dollars have been spent by Milkovik on patents and machinery- for a hoax? That everyone seems so willing to disprove without facts? I find it a little hard to swallow personally, so I will assume there may be something here, remember at one point the world was flat and then it wasn't.
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: a19grey on December 30, 2006, 02:56:26 AM
Hey, I hadn't realized we were using other reference frames.  I'll give a real response later, but the whole thing has reminded me of this comic which I find incredibly funny.

http://xkcd.com/c123.html
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: nwman on December 30, 2006, 03:50:12 AM
@allcanadian

 I agree. By best guess if this isn't an OU device is that it is simply a form of pulley. However, its complexity is more then I can calculate/visualize in my head. With so many parts moving inside of parts it makes it vary difficult for a novice like myself to analyze the machine in with a vector diagram. One thing the bugs me about it though is there hasn't been any conclusive tests that show power input to power output. Given the timing that needed in the device I see how it would be hard to test. I still haven't thought of an idea that would really test the power yet. Keep thinking!

Tim
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: corpsegravy on December 30, 2006, 08:33:02 AM
The really interesting aspect of this machine is that it operates more efficiently the more it's loaded rather than less.  Damping effects arent transmitted to the pendulum.  If anything they make it run longer.

If you only saw the example of the machine being used as a hammer, you saw the most inefficient application.  Nearly all the energy is just absorbed by the anvil.

The rotational/tortional pendulum action of the lever has a period that can be tuned to the period of the swinging pendulum to allow the system to reinforce itself and run longer.

I'm still curious how much DC electricity can be rectified if a bar magnet is hung from the lever and allowed to bob up and down in a coil of wire.
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: FreeEnergy on December 30, 2006, 01:14:35 PM
what if we set a pendulum swinging in vacuum?
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: nwman on December 30, 2006, 11:15:15 PM
Questions I have that I was wondering if someone can answer? They are simple and stupid but I just want to ask.

Whats more efficient at converting mechanical energy to electrical energy? A standard generator motor or the induction field thing with a magnet passing through coiled wire?

Whats more efficient at turning electrical energy  into mechanical energy? A electric motor or say a electromagnet (push / pull)?


Tim

P.S. I am interested in this design. I'm not convinced it works yet but I'm also not convinced that is doesn't. I am looking at possibly getting a few dollars in research grant money to study alternative energy sources and I might be interested in funding a professional study of this. It seems Milkovic has patented a lot of stuff which if it works makes it hard for any money to be made off of it for anyone else. I would hate to fund the development and then have him take all the rights. However that is my second objective. I know the U.S. will not approve a patent of a PMM unless there is a working model. From what I know they don't have any patents for PMMs yet. So long story short I hope I get this money as soon as late Jan 07.

Check out this link on Generators to motor setups (video at bottom of page). This one is only a 60% efficient but with better quality motors it could be around 90%.

http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/magnetic/genmot.html (http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/magnetic/genmot.html)
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: neptune on December 31, 2006, 06:47:54 PM
Hi there, this is my first post, and I have followed this thred with interest. I am no mathematician, but I am a practical man and an engineer by trade. I feel this device MAY be overunity. Some of Milkoviks demos are to me unconvincing, because he seems not to take into account Work=force times distance. there is no obvious measurement of distance. If we are to close the loop, I think we can forget electrical feedback systems. You would be lucky to acheive more than 20 or 30 per cent efficiency overall. The problems of closing the loop, are problems of phasing.The out-put pulse of the lever occurs at the wrong time to feed back immediately to the pendulum. We nead to harvest and store this pulse, by compressing a spring , a bit like loading a popgun. the gun/spring is then triggered just as the pendulum begins its downward swing. I have designed a system on paper. Hope to build it in the new year as work allows.
                Among Milkoviks patents is a patent, with diagram, entitled " Mechanical Toy with pendulum and 3 oscillating levers".This looks to me like an attempt at a perpetual motion Machine. Why was it given this title? Was it perhaps because patents for perpeyual motion machines are not permitted? No one else seems to have noticed this. Someone asked about the relative efficiencies of electric motors versus electromagnets. I would say the electric motor would win, but doesnot lend itself to this job. I beleive purely mechanical is the way to go.
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: a19grey on January 02, 2007, 02:14:59 AM
Well, if this machine really achieves an overunity ratio of 1 to 12 then an electrical feedback system with only 20% efficiency would still be sufficient to prove the device was over unity because 0.2 * 12 = 2.4 > 1.  However, to save everyone some time, I would point out that the only indications that we have of this device being over-unity are a video with demonstrations in which the inventor clearly confuses work done with force exerted. Also, in the calculation for the coefficient of work input to output
http://www.veljkomilkovic.com/Images/Measurement1.JPG
he seems to have made the same error since his calculated coefficient is exactly equal to the ratio of the forces necessary to push down the two plungers.  This may just be a coincidence, but since he doesn't explain his experimental procedures one can't be sure.   In the following experimental results pages,
http://www.veljkomilkovic.com/MerenjaEng.html  Milkovik makes the force/energy mistake again. 
As an example, in this experiment where  he compares the deformation of two sponge cylinders - http://www.veljkomilkovic.com/Images/Measurement4.JPG
The deformation of objects is not linearly dependent upon the force exerted upon them.  For example, tap your finger on your table for two or three hours,  then hit it with a hammer.  The deformation of your table (unless you have a really good metal table) will clearly not be related to the net force, or even the net energy expended upon the table top, but is instead related to the energy per second (power) delivered to the table.
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: gaby de wilde on January 02, 2007, 07:24:55 PM
the only indications that we have of this device being over-unity are a video with demonstrations.

I still have my common sense. The inventor did everything he should have done. People ask "why didn't he close the loop", makes me giggle, it's as-if they cant tie a knot? Building a pendulum isn't exactly rocket science?? Where did your replication fail? Do you have a video of your device? I just cant applaud welcoming innovation with "puh, it's probably nothing".

After building a few pendulums I find it incredibly hard to debunk his theory. Don't think I'm not trying. You say "safe your time", but for what exactly? I cant think of anything more exiting as this. ha-ha ;D

Quote
The deformation of objects is not linearly dependent upon the force exerted upon them.

It still makes it very easy to see the difference.

http://www.micropixel.biz/veljkomilkovic/videos/Veljko_Milkovic_(video-7)_Universal_oscillator-generator.wmv

The hand lights light up 4 times for every push. The push is short and not strong enough to light the torch. On the other hand we have 18 torches burning 4 times.

I'm convinced if he hooks up a volt meter people will find new excuses. :'(

I think the trick is to not-believe anyone and measure it yourself. Of that I am convinced.
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: neptune on January 02, 2007, 09:17:25 PM
Hi there, still surprised no one commented on Milkovic Patent entitled Mechanical toy etc, see my last post. I found the torch demo fairly convincing, but not 100 per cent. Any future progress will probably be acheived by practical rather than theoretical effort. Being self employed, I have little time to spend personally, But members of our gang are working on two machines. Both machines at this stage consist just of pivoted beams and pendulums, all on ball bearings. Experiments are ongoing,  but it would seem that for the effect to be pronounced, a pendulum weight of at least 28 pounds[say 12 kilo] is preferable. The attraction of an electrical feedback system is its ease of controll using standard components, despite its low efficiency. Higher efficency is acheivable using a mechanical system, but this demans tools like a lathe, welder etc, and the skills ofa model engineer or clockmaker. There seems little info on optimum design of the basic machine, dimensions, weights etc. Assuming overunity is possible, it will take a high degree of skill and persistance to acheive it.Heres Hoping...
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: arbus on January 03, 2007, 02:55:38 AM
Hi, i am not a scientist. Just an engineer. I was reading the posts here and decided to try this experiment.
Here's what i found.
The oscilation effect caused by the pendulum is caused by the weight of the pendulum bending the spring(in the simple example).  This energy is transfered from the pendulum to the spring.
This is similar to when you are on a swing. You move your legs out and in and the energy is transfred to the swing.(ok its reverse, but same principle. Your legs are oscilating)

If you make a simple pendulum on a spring wire you can oscilate the wire and make the pendulum go back and forth. ie reverse the process using the energy of the oscilation and the stored energy of the spring.

The trick in the viedos where he is banging the hammer is that he has a BIG HEAVY pendulum and the energy is being stored in the pendulum stroke and cracked down using energy transferance.  He is putting in alot of energy to push the pendulum as it is losing energy fast!

Think of it this way. 1 person can push a car and if that car hits you even slowly it can crush you. But if the person was simply pushing you directly you wouldnt be hurt.

with a heavy pendulum you could bruise your finger near the high point of travel if you got it stuck between the pendulum and something hard.

The picture of the poor Africans pushing a pendulum to pump water isnt new. THe energy is being stored and released. The pushing of the pendulum takes lots of energy!

If you put 2 identical pendulums next to each other, one swinging on a spring the one on the spring will stop first, because it is using energy to oscilate. If you exert oposite force on the spring the pendulum will stop quicker.

A pendulum is very efficent but you cant get more energy  from it then you put in.

Think of this.  In a clock wound by  a spring, you can swing a pendulum for days or weeks.  The clock has lots of moving parts but sooner or later the pendulum must stop.

The claim of 12 times the energy is absolute garbage. 
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: sevich on January 03, 2007, 03:57:42 AM
It really should read:

"when using Milkovic's mechanical device to pump water, the involved individual will save 12 times his/her sweat"

He's confusing the "pressure energy" of a womans high heals being sufficiant to raise her off the ground!


Nevertheles Milkovic should be congradulated for his discovery of "gravity assist" in todays mechanics.




Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: FreeEnergy on January 03, 2007, 08:01:17 AM
"He's confusing the "pressure energy" of a womans high heals being sufficiant to raise her off the ground!"

is the woman at a current momentum like the pendulum? or is she at a dead stop?
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: bsrinon on January 03, 2007, 09:01:09 AM
I think the key to Milkovic's system is mechanical RESONANCE.  Tesla was obsessed with both mechanical and electrical resonance and was successful in creating excess energy using the resonance principle.  I think most of you have seen the video of the bridge that collapsed because it didn't have proper damping. The cause of its collapse was due to wind that resonated with the bridge! By using resonant frequencies you can split water with very little energy, like what Stan Meyer did.

Here's a link showing a string moving a giant column pendulum using resonance:
http://www.exploratorium.edu/cmp/exhibits/r/resonant_pend.html

It looks like by resonating with the giant pendulum, one can build up a huge potential and kinetic energy by just using little force x distance.

Brian

Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: pese on January 03, 2007, 06:17:13 PM
Even some more links tha shown WAVES and his forces,  Even better to understand when they came in resonance als with here harmanic waves....

Copies 1:1 from my collection (with remaks)
-------------------------

27.12.06
http://www.geocities.com/rolfguthmann/index.html
http://www.zayra.de/soulcom/physicsofphi/PhysicsofPHI.html  phsik
http://www.kettering.edu/~drussell/Demos/superposition/superposition.html  wellen erkl?rt
http://www.glafreniere.com/matter.htm  wellen erkl?rt
http://www.glafreniere.com/sa_electron.htm
The Electron
It can also be considered as one half of an electron. ... Mr. Milo Wolff's static electron and its full lambda core, according to the ...
www.glafreniere.com/sa_electron.htm

das zeigt ganz klar , dass wenn wellen (bei dir 3 ! , nicht in harmonie laufen,
FEHL-LEISTUNGEN (Schatten) haben !!

Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: a19grey on January 03, 2007, 10:08:22 PM
@gaby de wilde
I?m going to have to agree with arbus on this one.  When I said that ?we shouldn?t waste our time? I meant that we should move on to other possible OU devices.  I?m as excited by this stuff as anyone else, it?s just that it?s clear to me that this particular device, while novel and interesting, is not an OU device. 

However, there is a way to show the actual power input-output.  It would require buying some equipment (and owning a computer)  but it should absolutely answer the question.  Take two dynamos and hook each one up to a voltmeter and an ammeter.  Now, they have voltmeter-ammeters that will go to a hub then through a USB port to plot the values directly on screen.  So, since Voltage * I (current) = Energy take one dynamo and place it under the hammer and take another dynamo and simply hold it to push the pendulum back and forth (like in the flashlight examples).  Set the computer up to plot V*I for both dynamo setups and then take the integral of the two curves. If the integral of the energy expended is 12 times the integral of the energy put in, then the matter has truly been shown.  The thing to be careful of (and why the example with multiple flashlights is flawed)
http://www.micropixel.biz/veljkomilkovic/videos/Veljko_Milkovic_(video-7)_Universal_oscillator-generator.wmv

is to make sure that one doesn?t push so hard that the dynamo stops producing any voltage/current since the end of its range of motion has been reached.  If you look at Milkovic?s hand when performing the example above you will note that indeed the flashlight that he is using to push the pendulum DOES indeed light up, but only for a moment.  You can?t see the flashlight lighting up but really need to look at the light on his hand because flashlights are designed to shine light mostly straight ahead and the camera is at an angle to the direction the flashlight is pointing.  If you also note, the flashlight stops shinning BEFORE Milkovic stops pushing on the pendulum. This is because the handle of the dynamo/flashlight can move only so far and he pushes the handle all the way in and once the handle is all the way in you can use the flashlight to push the pendulum and do work without it lighting up which is the problem that I mentioned earlier. 
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: supersam on January 04, 2007, 03:41:53 AM
the way i see it , since there is plenty of power from the crank shaft of the 21 speed scrap bicycle, used as the fulcrum, in my setup, to keep the pendulum swinging as long as you want it to, i just can't see what the question is?

lol
sam

ps:  happy new year
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: supersam on January 04, 2007, 03:49:12 AM
hey everyone,

SHIFT THE GEARS IN YOUR MIND AND YOU JUST MIGHT LIKE IT!!!!!

lol
sam
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: supersam on January 04, 2007, 04:27:42 AM
hey everyone,

all you have to do is keep the pendulum swinging, and everything else takes care of itself!!!! there are no more questions after that!!!!  just try it for yourself!!!  i think you will be amazed!!!!  i know i was.

lol
sam

ps: will i post anything?  NO.
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: FreeEnergy on January 04, 2007, 06:46:37 AM
supersam post pics/vids if you have achieved over unity. sounds like you did?
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: FreeEnergy on January 04, 2007, 06:47:02 AM
User 'hartiberlin1' has exceeded the 'max_questions' resource (current value: 90000)  >:(
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: allcanadian on January 04, 2007, 09:42:44 AM
I was thinking of that as well supersam, our wise friends talking about generators and computers really have no idea about engineering efficient mechanical systems. So you use a one-way bearing in the fulcrum and use springs on the hammer side to limit movement. Then you attach a flywheel to the one-way bearing shaft, when the pendulum hits the top of its swing on one side it hits the flywheel and momentum is transfered from the flywheel to the pendulum. If it works for more than 5 minutes you have your proof. Absolute simplicity in design and function comes from knowledge and understanding- not textbooks.
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: arbus on January 06, 2007, 08:57:47 AM
I tried this experiment.  You should try it too!
It is really easy to see that if you reverse it, ie oscilate the lever then the pendulum will gain momentum.
Please prove me wrong... :)

And no. the woman will not save 12 times the energy or sweat. She has to put just as much force on the pendulum as she would on the pump (more actually).  It is just a lever action.  Same when he is pushing the pendulum with the torch.  Remember the stationary torches are not moving.  The one in his hand is. 

And Yes the pendulum loses momentum when the lever oscilates.
Think about it... pendulum swings out, lever goes down.  Pendulum has lost energy. In the small demo video it dosent appear to lose energy because the Springiness in the lever stores the energy.

Again, Try it!!!

What is the first thing you would do if you really were generating 12 times more energy?
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: arbus on January 06, 2007, 09:07:58 AM
Please if there is something i am not getting here let me know...

But i believe the mystical resonance effect is better thought of as stored energy.
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: hartiberlin on January 06, 2007, 09:11:17 AM
@Arbus,
please post a few pictures yof your experiments,
so we can see, if you did the setup right ?
Many thanks in advance.
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: ChileanOne on January 06, 2007, 01:49:32 PM
Gaby de wilde has shared an idea of the arched smot (http://gabydewilde.googlepages.com/new-smot)
to improve the effect of the energy gain because of the centrifugal force. I have been thinking how to make a "perpetual pendulum" to use in the Milkovic two stage oscillator, by using a ball and magnets built within the pendulum pestle, and I think that the arched smot design could be used in favour of gravity as a way to keep the ball going on, taking advantage of gravitational, centrifugal and magnetical forces. I attach an sketch, could this work? Please don't get mad at me if the idea sucks, this my first post in this forum.
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: exnihiloest on January 06, 2007, 02:44:32 PM
...Some of Milkoviks demos are to me unconvincing, because he seems not to take into account Work=force times distance...
Hi Neptune,

I agree with you. So in order to evaluate the system, we have to calculate this work.
Firstly we don't have to care the lever as it is a well known not OU system but it only transmits forces.
Secondly we "just" have to calculate the work that an oscillating pendulum could do when its rotation point moves along a vertical line.
Unfortunately, as even the movement equations of a simple pendulum are very complex to handle I'm afraid with the mathematics we would have to develop here.
We can make a first approximation: we may think that almost all the work is done when the pendulum is near vertical.
At this position it is known that the centrifugal pseudoforce can reach more than twice the weight of the pendulum. So the work done when the rotation point of the pendulum is sliding down along a distance h can be more than twice the work of its weight alone.
As the displacement is perpendicular to the motion of the pendulum mass, no work is made against this motion, so the kinetics energy is conserved, no loss on this side.
Nevertheless the pendulum is now lower so we lost a potential energy mgh.
Thus the final result of the energy gain should be around:
(Fc - mg)*h where Fc is the centrifugal force (Fc = m*v?/l where l is the length of the pendulum and v the speed of the mass).
As Fc > mg then we should have OU (it's the first time I think it should perhaps be possible :-).



Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: bigface on January 06, 2007, 03:50:17 PM
Not much can be concluded from the video since we don't know the technical aspects of it, for example, how do we know that the pendulum weighs like 50 kg and the hammer only say 5 kg
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: ChileanOne on January 06, 2007, 04:46:38 PM
...Some of Milkoviks demos are to me unconvincing, because he seems not to take into account Work=force times distance...
Hi Neptune,

I agree with you. So in order to evaluate the system, we have to calculate this work.
Firstly we don't have to care the lever as it is a well known not OU system but it only transmits forces.
Secondly we "just" have to calculate the work that an oscillating pendulum could do when its rotation point moves along a vertical line.
Unfortunately, as even the movement equations of a simple pendulum are very complex to handle I'm afraid with the mathematics we would have to develop here.
We can make a first approximation: we may think that almost all the work is done when the pendulum is near vertical.
At this position it is known that the centrifugal pseudoforce can reach more than twice the weight of the pendulum. So the work done when the rotation point of the pendulum is sliding down along a distance h can be more than twice the work of its weight alone.
As the displacement is perpendicular to the motion of the pendulum mass, no work is made against this motion, so the kinetics energy is conserved, no loss on this side.
Nevertheless the pendulum is now lower so we lost a potential energy mgh.
Thus the final result of the energy gain should be around:
(Fc - mg)*h where Fc is the centrifugal force (Fc = m*v?/l where l is the length of the pendulum and v the speed of the mass).
As Fc > mg then we should have OU (it's the first time I think it should perhaps be possible :-).





Back on this thread is a link to a study of the forces in the pendulum, that states that at the maximum point if stress, the force exerted on the pendulum is 3 times it's weight. So, following your logic, this device is way OU.

Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: ChileanOne on January 06, 2007, 04:49:00 PM
Not much can be concluded from the video since we don't know the technical aspects of it, for example, how do we know that the pendulum weighs like 50 kg and the hammer only say 5 kg

One of the obvious things about this set up for being able to evidence the phenomenon discussed is that the pendulum has to be in balance with the lever, so if the pendulum side weights 50 kg the lever side has to weight 50 kg. duh.
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: arbus on January 07, 2007, 03:44:25 AM
I was going to build a large scale version with a LONG pendelum on my kids swing set same as the small Spring wire version, But 1 problem is that i cant find anything springy that will support its own weight (and a pendelum) at that sort of length.
But i was just looking at the documents again and see that there is a first class lever design there. That i can build with a counterweight.

anyway i can explain  where the energy goes. i think..

  This is using the spring wire 3rd class lever design.

  The pendelum is affecting the lever(wire) even when the wire does not appear to be oscillating. Because the pendelum at the centre of its swing has more downward force. At 90 deg it is almost weightless. This causes the wire to oscilate up and down twice per swing. (even if you cant see it) and this is a classic 3rd class lever

Now the oscillation in the wire is caused by the up and down movement of the pendelum.  Because the wire is long you get a wave oscillation effect. If the wire was short it only oscilates twice per swing.

OK here's where you lose energy..  The up and down movement of the pendelum is absorbed by the spring wire.... 
Try this... get a piece of string, tie something to the end of it and swing it. Now move your hand up and down. You can either make the pendelum move faster or slower(stop). When you make it slow down you are absorbing the pendelum energy.

This is the same with the piece of wire it moves up and down, pretty much in sinc with the pendelum, but it is absorbing the pendelum's energy.
If you stop the wire from oscillating the pendelum will swing more efficently.

I think one misleading point of the viedos is that they show HEAVY pendelums on a short swing.  But you can see with the torches video they have to put alot of effort into the swing to keep the thing swinging.


Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: Dingus Mungus on January 07, 2007, 03:53:50 AM
Not much can be concluded from the video since we don't know the technical aspects of it, for example, how do we know that the pendulum weighs like 50 kg and the hammer only say 5 kg

One of the obvious things about this set up for being able to evidence the phenomenon discussed is that the pendulum has to be in balance with the lever, so if the pendulum side weights 50 kg the lever side has to weight 50 kg. duh.

Not necessarily... Its now my belief that the hammer end of the lever might actually be slightly heavier to help match the pendulums phase. Basically it allows for the hammer to only be lifted when the pendulum is within 10 degrees of vertical. I have found in some simulations this slight imbalance allows for the system to run longer in phase while still allowing the pendulum to match velocities with its control pendulum. This means the pendulum is doing more work then when I was balancing the lever but runs longer and with more efficiency. As I have said before there is still lots to understand hidden in this seemingly simple device. Right now I don't have room or time to start working on a physical replication, but in the coming year I hope to start work on it.


@ all the naysayers
I have a challange for you the same I've issued to everyone. Download WM2D and do a few simulations where you have 2 identical pendulums one on the lever and the other running independant as a control for observation. Then add a damper to extract work. You will sooner or later find what I found which is examples of first law violations. The simulations and my hypothysis may be right or it may be wrong, but at least I'm testing it thuroughly before dissmissing it as junk.

~Dingus
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: dek on January 07, 2007, 05:53:04 AM
Dingus- please post your w2md model for others to checkout.

General comments:

It occurred to me that one way to test the peak power output would be to pump water up a column.  The maximum height would give the peak-force.

To measure the power output, you would simply pump water from one reservoir to a higher reservoir, and measure the time it takes to transfer a known volume.  The energy gain is given by PE=mgh, and divided by time would give most of the power output (less friction in pump, flow resistance, compliance, etc.).  The water pumped gains the usable energy.  This would be more accurate than sweeping magnets past coils I think.

I think that the best way to measure the input power would be to actuate the pendulum electromagnetically, and just measure the electrical input power.  It could even be triggered by a manual switch.  Could also use one of those slick parallel-path designs.

If I were asked, I'd recommend closing the loop using a fluid-only system.  The pendulum could be driven by a water-wheel I think.

It's striking to me that the input force to keep the pendulum swinging is perpendicular to the gravitational force, and the work is being done parallel to the gravitational force.

Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: Dingus Mungus on January 07, 2007, 09:12:38 AM
I already posted this I think, but I don't feel like looking for it...
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: Dingus Mungus on January 07, 2007, 09:29:31 AM
OK here's where you lose energy..  The up and down movement of the pendelum is absorbed by the spring wire.... 
Try this... get a piece of string, tie something to the end of it and swing it. Now move your hand up and down. You can either make the pendelum move faster or slower(stop). When you make it slow down you are absorbing the pendelum energy.

My spring line added kinetic energy to the pendulum, and beat matched it. (equal freq)
It also spun a flywheel with a rotational damper in one direction for over 4 minutes.

I'm planning on buying a legit copy next month, then I can upload the actual sims for you guys.
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: supersam on January 08, 2007, 06:47:03 AM
DID I MISS SOMETHING OR WAS THE MATH JUST NOT RIGHT?

lol
sam
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: supersam on January 08, 2007, 06:50:36 AM
and mine just keeps going boing boing boing!!!! best of luck!!!

lol
sam
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: Dingus Mungus on January 08, 2007, 07:48:25 AM
Another example of excess energy... Its not much and I'm not tapping any power from the system but it clearly shows there is more kinetic energy in the pendulum driven lever then in the control pendulum.

I got a copy of WM2D today.
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: FreeEnergy on January 08, 2007, 09:29:14 AM
 :(
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: ChileanOne on January 08, 2007, 03:21:26 PM
I downloaded a version of wm2d from a place a dare not to mention, It seems to be fully functional, but also sufficiently complex. Darn, don't know if to start with a real world model or study the software to build virtual models. Either way will take time and with something so interesting is hard to find patience.
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: Dingus Mungus on January 16, 2007, 09:19:33 AM
Compare the energy in the pendulums... Plus I took some kinetic energy and burned it with a damper. Clearly another violation.
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: iacob alex on January 17, 2007, 06:43:50 PM
          Hi!
     A new year and some fresh news about  the latest developments of Prof  Milkovic at     http://www.veljkomilkovic.com/AktuelnoEng.html 
       All the Bests! / Alex
 
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: mindsweeper on January 18, 2007, 07:13:53 PM
Hi everyone using Overunity.com

As this is my 1st post I thought I?d just say I know very little about OU, I came here while searching the net for Josef Papp. Found the posting on Mikovic and the buzz discussion, I was inspired.

I got to work with Wm2D and think that a good way to prove unity (+)? is use a flywheel to swing the pendulum?.

I?m using a 15Kg pendulum, 16Kg lever, 18,78Kg weight, 9Kg flywheel.

Could we not at least prove unity this way?

I?ve not managed to get more that 12 rotations of the flywheel but it seems that fine tuning the green weight on the lever can induce radical swing effects in the pendulum, causing it to speed up and then go out of sync for a few rotations then back in sync.

How hard would it be to get the flywheel rotations correct (resonant?) to induce a steady swing effect on the pendulum?

Should I just give up now?
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: FreeEnergy on January 18, 2007, 09:11:13 PM
Hi everyone using Overunity.com

As this is my 1st post I thought I?d just say I know very little about OU, I came here while searching the net for Josef Papp. Found the posting on Mikovic and the buzz discussion, I was inspired.

I got to work with Wm2D and think that a good way to prove unity (+)? is use a flywheel to swing the pendulum?.

I?m using a 15Kg pendulum, 16Kg lever, 18,78Kg weight, 9Kg flywheel.

Could we not at least prove unity this way?

I?ve not managed to get more that 12 rotations of the flywheel but it seems that fine tuning the green weight on the lever can induce radical swing effects in the pendulum, causing it to speed up and then go out of sync for a few rotations then back in sync.

How hard would it be to get the flywheel rotations correct (resonant?) to induce a steady swing effect on the pendulum?

Should I just give up now?

could you try and make it a one-way flywheel? i think that might make it better.
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: mindsweeper on January 19, 2007, 10:38:11 AM

could you try and make it a one-way flywheel? i think that might make it better.

OK but how would you measure the force needed to move the pendulum to start position and then measure the total force the flywheel takes from one release.

I know I can't get it going perpetually,

But, I'm not sure how to workout the correct start position so the most force from the initial pendulum release is absorbed by the flywheel. Is it quite difficult?

Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: Dingus Mungus on January 19, 2007, 10:54:56 PM
(http://www.overunity.com/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=1763.0;attach=4933;image)

I still don't know how I did it...

Unidirectional force on the flywheel for 4 minutes...
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: FreeEnergy on January 20, 2007, 02:03:17 AM
i am new to wm2d so i wouldn't know sorry
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: FreeEnergy on January 20, 2007, 04:32:37 AM
hehe look at this one.
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: Dingus Mungus on January 21, 2007, 06:18:04 AM
 :o

It checks out alright...
Very low input energy though, so it may be a glitch in the software...
We'll Have to blow it up to a larger scale to truely observe its energy flow.

I'm busy now, but this week I plan on dedicating a few hours to re-engineering
your design. Thanks for this awesome example of a vast first law violation!!!

~Dingus
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: FreeEnergy on January 22, 2007, 09:47:52 AM
hmmmm

Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: Dingus Mungus on January 22, 2007, 11:37:15 AM
I was going to examine that...
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: FreeEnergy on January 22, 2007, 12:11:19 PM
I was going to examine that...
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: Dingus Mungus on January 22, 2007, 12:33:29 PM
 ;D

Thank you...
Looks promising!
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: Dingus Mungus on January 22, 2007, 01:31:22 PM
I can safely say this simulation proves your system of pendulum assisting lever is 200-400% more efficient than the control pendulum. I added pin friction to ensure it, and your design scaled up is another clear violation. With the mass kinetic energy gain not only will your pendulum swing longer it'll swing harder!

Now you just have to find a way to extract energy from the system while maintaining these spectacular results...

Good luck and thanks again for this contribution,
~Dingus
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: FreeEnergy on January 23, 2007, 01:03:18 PM
i am getting some interesting kicks from this system!
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: FreeEnergy on January 23, 2007, 09:51:17 PM
lol look at this guys! tell me what you think! :)

crazy kicks!

Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: FreeEnergy on January 23, 2007, 10:51:33 PM
 :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o



Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: Dingus Mungus on January 23, 2007, 11:26:31 PM
I'm at work so I can't open the example from here, but I would recomend double clicking on the graphs and seting them back to automatic so your results aren't cut like that. Changing the graphs back to auto may help you better see whats happening.

Good luck and I look foreward to further examining your new concept.
~Dingus

@EVERYONE
Look at FE's simulation and the graphed kinetic energy results I had posted from it. This is a clear and rather egregious first law violation. Any nay-sayers want to help me understand how this isn't what I think it is? I would greatly appreciate any input that will help me understand how the pendulum can share its kinetic energy with the lever and come out with more energy than it started with...
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: FreeEnergy on January 24, 2007, 12:05:21 AM
how do i change it to auto?
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: FreeEnergy on January 24, 2007, 08:42:23 AM
more kicks with minor tweak to the system.  ;D
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: FreeEnergy on January 24, 2007, 09:53:49 AM
here
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: Dingus Mungus on January 24, 2007, 11:07:47 AM
how do i change it to auto?

Double click on and graph and click the auto box next to each table value.
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: Dingus Mungus on January 24, 2007, 11:09:34 AM
Those both seem to contain glitches that cause the excess energy...
 :-\
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: FreeEnergy on January 24, 2007, 11:46:36 AM
hmmm
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: Dingus Mungus on January 24, 2007, 11:55:25 AM
Hmmmm is right...
A little redesigning and presto! (>2 COP)

I think its the locking rigid arms you had attached causing the glitch, but if you watch it run you can see the glitches when they happen.

Check this out though...
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: FreeEnergy on January 28, 2007, 02:03:37 AM
:)
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: FreeEnergy on January 28, 2007, 02:51:09 AM
last one before i go to work/job. i think this one is the best so far...
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: a19grey on January 28, 2007, 09:05:33 PM
@EVERYONE
Look at FE's simulation and the graphed kinetic energy results I had posted from it. This is a clear and rather egregious first law violation. Any nay-sayers want to help me understand how this isn't what I think it is? I would greatly appreciate any input that will help me understand how the pendulum can share its kinetic energy with the lever and come out with more energy than it started with...

The fundamental problem with comparing the stationary pendulum's behavior with the pendulum-attached-to-the-lever's behavior is that you should EXPECT the latter to have more energy at some points even if the same input energy was given. This is because the pendulum attached to the lever moves downard in its motion as the lever swings. By moving downward, the pendulum exchanges gravitational potential energy for rotational/kinetic energy.  Also, note how in the energy vs time graphs the graph for the simple pendulum has a regular decreasing periodicity and the lines are really close together. However, in the pendulum-lever energy graphs the periodicity is very complex and the lines are more... rarefied or spread out.  This is because the system is more complex and so there are points (at the same value for time t) where, yes, the lever-pendulum has more energy, but there are also times where the lever-pendulum actually has less energy than the simple pendulum.  It oscillates more wildly and between a slightly higher extreme than the simple pendulum (since the lever-pendulum falls a bit and therefore the motion of the lever is connected to the motion of the pendulum) but there isn't any new energy being created. Or, at the very least, this example does not show an excess of energy. The difficulty here is, of course, that it's impossible to prove a negative, so no one's going to be able to 'prove' it doesn't create more energy.
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: FreeEnergy on January 29, 2007, 01:38:45 PM
is this a software glitch? i am sure we can use this kick if it is for real.
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: Dingus Mungus on January 29, 2007, 11:01:35 PM
It oscillates more wildly and between a slightly higher extreme than the simple pendulum (since the lever-pendulum falls a bit and therefore the motion of the lever is connected to the motion of the pendulum) but there isn't any new energy being created. Or, at the very least, this example does not show an excess of energy. The difficulty here is, of course, that it's impossible to prove a negative, so no one's going to be able to 'prove' it doesn't create more energy.

I think you are overlooking the biggest whole in your argument... If the pendulum on the lever is introduced with no kinetic energy, then the net kinetic energy for the whole device is zero. The pendulum lever has several times the friction pins and surface area to be effected by wind resistance, yet it swings for longer and with more intensity than the stationary pendulum. To phrase it another way the pendulum lever does more work to sustain its running tempo, yet it runs more efficiently then a standard pendulum that was given the same kinetic starting energy. If the lever pendulum is doing more work and is draining less energy to continue its swing; this is unarguably a improvement in comparison to a standard pendulum. We can agree on that right?

To debate this you don't need to prove a negitive, just that we are somehow giving more energy to one pendulum then the other. I'm pretty positive that we are not, but I encourage naysayers to download examine and test for themselves. Only through understanding will anything be proven. We don't understand why we are getting back kinetic averages of 100-400% of the introduction energy, but we aren't willing to assume its inconslusive without understanding it.

Thank you for your devotion to the quest for answers,
~Dingus
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: FreeEnergy on January 31, 2007, 02:30:56 AM
did anyone look at my last post.  the kick is different from what i was talking about before. so if you haven't looked please do so.


peace
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: Dingus Mungus on January 31, 2007, 02:45:19 AM
I looked last night but it appeared to be a glitch.
I'll check it out again tonight...

A little hint to save time though... If there is a physical constraint anomely, followed by a spike in kinetic energy or speed... Its a glitch. This 2 arm rigid balance system does not work correctly and is the source of these glitch pulses... Look for yourself and be honnest with yourself, you can clearly tell weather its slowly losing energy or if its magically creating it due to bad design... Basically what I'm trying to say is your last few examples have all been glitches based on the same mechanical glitch everytime... Time for a new approach.

~Dingus
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: a19grey on January 31, 2007, 06:24:45 AM

I think you are overlooking the biggest whole in your argument... If the pendulum on the lever is introduced with no kinetic energy, then the net kinetic energy for the whole device is zero. 
To debate this you don't need to prove a negitive, just that we are somehow giving more energy to one pendulum then the other.

While, yes, you are giving both pendulums the same initial Kinetic energy and therefore both systems have the same total kinetic energy to begin with, they have different Potential energies.  The pendulum-lever system has far more initial Gravitational Potential energy than the simple pendulum. This is, trivially, due to the presence of the lever. The lever has mass and is in a gravitational field and therefore has some potential energy associated with it. This gravitational potential energy is, at times, exchanged for the kinetic energy of various parts of the system. So, although you don't put in any more kinetic energy into either of the systems, the pendulum-lever system can, at times, have more kinetic energy than the simple pendulum.  The simplest example of this exhange between potential and kinetic- i.e. where there is no kinetic energy input, but the Kinetic energy increases- is the dropping of a ball. The ball falls and exchanges gravity-energy for kinetic energy. Of course, our system here is more like a really good bouncy ball since the system then 'bounces back' and exhanges kinetic energy for potential.

Yes, Mingus, at least we can all agree on that. We're all looking for truth. 
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: Dingus Mungus on January 31, 2007, 08:06:39 AM
Ok we're on the right track now.

First can we also agree that eventually the pendulum/lever will fully reset itself with the exeption of loading the pendulum, just like a stationary penulum would? Which would mean the only energy required to start again would be loading the pendulum.

Next can we agree that since gravity and not the user is adding kinetic energy to both the lever and the pendulum, that this device puts out more kinetic energy then you put in?
 
with a 'd' please,
~(D)ingus
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: allcanadian on February 01, 2007, 04:23:14 AM
This seems like the same old merry go round, people saying it will work because a simulation says it will, others saying it can't because there textbook tells them so. In the end you have to build a model and play with it, anything less is just opinion which amounts to approximately nothing. I can't wait until steorn drops his bomb on the scientific community so we can put the critics to bed, then we can finally talk about how and not if these machines will work.
In any case keep up the good work.
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: Dingus Mungus on February 01, 2007, 06:46:19 AM
I understand simulation is a poor excuse for evidence of anything... But, Measuring such variables in physical reality is infinitely more difficult and expensive. In the mean time I'm just looking for patterns in different configurations. I hope to eventually find the geometry required to match the oscilating pendulums and stationary pendulums phase. Once I can get them running in phase, it will further enforce my arguement, show a maxium output, and make a good guide for replication.

~Dingus
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: Fingal on February 05, 2007, 11:37:44 PM
A 'traditional' mathematical analysis of the problem.
http://www.gyogyitokezek.hu/fe/pendtutor1.htm,
done a few years ago.

Haven't seen this reference on the forum before, hope it is not a repost.
Conclusion in the analysis is, with standard laws applied no OU,
but do propose some method for measuring the effectivness of the system.

Fingal

Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: Dingus Mungus on February 06, 2007, 12:24:35 AM
That page descibes a stationary pedulum...
We've already realized they're not OU, but
to do the same math for this system would
be infinitely more difficult. Not it! :D

Thanks for the info though,
~Dingus
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: Fingal on February 06, 2007, 04:04:05 PM
Sorry, I gave the first link only.
http://www.gyogyitokezek.hu/fe/pendan1.htm,
http://www.gyogyitokezek.hu/fe/pendan2.htm,
http://www.gyogyitokezek.hu/fe/veljkomeasurement.htm
excercise the traditional math for the dual mechanical oscillation system.
The pages are linked with arrow on top and bottom.

My thought was that, if anybody use a SW simulation for the problem,
simulation softwares would probably be using the same mathematical basis.

regards
Fingal
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: Dingus Mungus on February 07, 2007, 12:16:04 AM
Well, the purposed method of measurement is nothing more than loads of friction... Spring loaded catch draggin over gear teeth. Each component would further rob the device of energy. So I don't see it as an accurate or even relevant experiment. Why not extract minimal power from it and see if it swings for as long or longer then a stationary pendulum...

You should ask that websites owner to do the math for my my last simulation and then post their excuses here. That way its clear to the other users there is no physical math backing up their/your position on the site. Only the laws of physics are on your side, and they've been updated and changed a few times...

~Dingus
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: Fingal on February 07, 2007, 07:50:55 PM
Well, it is not my position that is expressed on that website. If it was I would probably not be interested in visiting Overunity!

I scanned the forum once again and found that this exact method already has been proposed
http://www.overunity.com/index.php/topic,1763.msg18947.html#msg18947.
 (http://www.overunity.com/index.php/topic,1763.msg18947.html#msg18947.)
(very good description). Sorry for not seeing that earlier.

I think the only relevance of the measurement is to test the original claim ( 12 times more output than input, and I think we agree he means energy), when for example do a simple task of pumping (lifting) water.

If however the OU is very small or would not manifest itself as output from the lever, I agree the test would not be valid to do. So one could argue that the the test is only valid of it shows OU of great magnitude!

Also the test may not be relevant for your ongoing discussion. I didn't mean to interfere or interrupt you actions!

Last, why does the author of the website do these rather complicated calculations  instead of just building it and do the test. Of course, he doesn't believe it is OU, in the first place!

Myself, I am just a bit lazy and enjoy surfing the web for interesting ideas.

regards.
Fingal





Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: Dingus Mungus on February 07, 2007, 09:50:02 PM
I don't believe this is 1200% efficient. Its just not... I don't even claim this mechanical device is even overunity at all, but I do believe this device violates the laws of thermodynamics. Excess energy is being created by the lever and is transfered to the pendulum. When the device comes to a rest the lever reassumes its starting position. Therefore no additional energy is given to either the pendulum or lever to achieve this potential to kinetic transfer. I'm sorry for assuming you were nay saying, but many people have come and posted things claiming it proves this system doesn't work, but no one has posted anything substantial thus far. Overunity is a long ways off for this device, I just want to understand the energy transfer that allows the pendulum to collect excess energy from the lever.

~Dingus

p.s. Get a copy WM2D!
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: Charlie_V on February 08, 2007, 04:45:49 AM
Hey guys, I found this form while wasting some time and I like it.  Its fun to imagine ideas and have people to talk to about them without being laughed at. 

I looked at the video and I found it very interesting.  I don't think this device is over-unity, but it appears to be a very clever use of harmonic coupling and leverage (of sorts).  The pendulum is shifting the beam 's center of mass in and out of the central axial.  You'll notice the pendulum traverses a large distance (compared to the beam).  The beam takes that large distance and converts the kinetic energy to force.  You'll notice the beam only moves about an inch or so but has great force behind it.  So the energy is roughly the same (neglecting losses) but in a different form.  The pendulum has a small force, but large distance to travel (comparatively of course), the beam has a small travel distance but large force. 

The harmonic coupling of the two objects is interesting too.  You'll notice in the intro of the video (where the Serbian guy is demonstrating with a toy), that he sets the toy up in his pendulum/beam configuration and says that the load has no effect.  However, you'll also notice he has to re-adjust the configuration because the pendulum was slowing down fast.  This just shows that the pendulum is coupled to the beam.  If you could put a force on the beam at the right time you could cause the pendulum to stop moving.  By re-adjusting where the pendulum sits, you can reduce the coupling (making the vibration of the beam not effect the pendulum as much) but you will restrict the distance the beam can travel.  All in all, this seems to me to be a very efficient way of gearing without the worry of slips or tears! 

Personally, I feel an over-unity device is going to come from something that stores energy yet does not give that energy when used - like a magnet does when you induce a voltage.  The magnet has stored energy yet the field does not decrease when you induce a current in a coil.... I've always found this phenomenon very very interesting. 
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: FreeEnergy on February 08, 2007, 12:10:31 PM
not much of a new approach but the results look good.
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: exnihiloest on February 09, 2007, 11:29:40 AM
Hi All,

I have modeled Milkovic pendulum using WM2D.

All the stuff is here:
- model
http://exvacuo.free.fr/Sciences/Experiences/Pendule/PenduleMilkovic.wm2d
- picture
http://exvacuo.free.fr/Sciences/Experiences/Pendule/PenduleMilkovic.jpg
- low motion video simulation
http://exvacuo.free.fr/Sciences/Experiences/Pendule/PenduleMilkovic.avi

In this model, the pendulum is used to pull up a weight (pay load), attached to the lever with a string. Thus the potential energy of the pay load will give us the energy gain.

Each time the pay load climbs, a platform is positionned upper and upper in order to prevent the load to fall back. The platform is playing no role in the energy balance.

The energy (kinetic+potential) of the pendulum and of the lever is monitored and the potential energy of the pay load is substracted from it to give the total energy gain.

It is fund that the energy gain is null. It is even a bit negative because I neglected the very weak kinetic energy of the pay load.

The weight of the lever can be 0 (actual simulation) or any value, it doesn't change the null result.

As Milkovic doesn't claim new physics to explain its machine and as its machine modeled according the current physics laws doesn't work, we can conclude there is no OU in Milkovic pendulum. It is just a usefull device to transform a form of work into another.

Fran?ois





Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: FreeEnergy on February 09, 2007, 12:20:42 PM
hey guys take a look at the acceleration of rectangle 19.

.sorry if this is of no help.
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: theratboy on February 15, 2007, 09:26:28 AM
this is not overunity,
its a gravity motor...it makes use of earths attract force
this means this particular generator will only work in places where gravity exists,
for space applications a flywheel made of magnets and inductors providing current will do the trick(flywheels dont slow down in space because there isnt any gravity force that slows down)

i cant believe we had this in front of our noses all this time...

btw..its not such a good idea to recolect energy from the moving piston in order to store it and impulse it again w/ a magnet or w/e

its a better idea to keep spinning a flywheel with the up-down movement and moving and pushing the pendulum once every 3-12 cycles, depends of how efficient you build the model

and im not even merging this w/ bendini's (imagine a working concep with a flywheel made of magnets =]

i dont think NASA will certainly pay much attention to this,

i haven't read all these post, if this was already discussed, just ignore me...im just trying to post tips :)

lol had months wanting to post something but was afraid
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: hartiberlin on February 16, 2007, 02:27:15 PM
Has somebody done lately any rebuilding work on this machine ?

I mean real try to replicate it , not just in WM2D software ?

I always see the oscillations slowing down in theWM2D screenshots,
but did not have the time to have a closer look...
SO should theoscillations not rise, if it is an overunity machine ?

Please post real pics of real rebuild machines.
Many thanks in advance.
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: Dingus Mungus on February 17, 2007, 12:43:18 AM
No physical replications so far, but from the collective wm2d sims, I've determined this isn't even close overunity. It does appear to run more efficiently than a standard pendulum, so my theory is its a small 2nd law violation, but thats heavily debated.

There are far too many promising projects to invest anymore time in this.

~Dingus
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: i_ron on February 17, 2007, 05:47:32 AM
Has somebody done lately any rebuilding work on this machine ?

I mean real try to replicate it , not just in WM2D software ?

I always see the oscillations slowing down in theWM2D screenshots,
but did not have the time to have a closer look...
SO should the oscillations not rise, if it is an overunity machine ?

Please post real pics of real rebuild machines.
Many thanks in advance.

I have not previously posted to this forum because of the inane level of the posts.

But here is my effort to date. I have taken a different approach and felt compelled
to power the pendulum as a first step. The picture shows an 18 Kg pendulum being
powered with an 11 watt motor.

Best regards,

Ron

 

Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: i_ron on February 17, 2007, 06:14:26 AM


I have not previously posted to this forum because of the inane level of the posts.

But here is my effort to date. I have taken a different approach and felt compelled
to power the pendulum as a first step. The picture shows an 18 Kg pendulum being
powered with an 11 watt motor.

Best regards,

Ron

 All the simulations to date seem to have missed the point. This is a two stage
mechanical oscillator.

Here is a picture from the back before the weight was doubled and before the
counter weight was installed. It was a motor test and incidentally the 9 Kg weight
was kept in motion (120? plus) with only 5? watts.

R






[/quote]
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: Dingus Mungus on February 17, 2007, 06:22:20 AM
A very nice prototype...

So the motor will only turn untill the pendulum trips the pressure switch, then gravity takes over again. I also like that your counter weight is adjustable, as well as the levers pivet point. So I assume the pannel box is you speed controler. How has your system harmonics hunt going? Congrats again on the really dynamic design job.

Glad to see someone is really putting a propper effort in to exploring this technology.

Best design and prototype I've seen in a while,
~Dingus
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: i_ron on February 17, 2007, 06:41:24 AM
A very nice prototype...

So the motor will only turn untill the pendulum trips the pressure switch, then gravity takes over again. I also like that your counter weight is adjustable, as well as the levers pivet point. So I assume the pannel box is you speed controler. How has your system harmonics hunt going? Congrats again on the really dynamic design job.

Glad to see someone is really putting a propper effort in to exploring this technology.

Best design and prototype I've seen in a while,
~Dingus

Thanks for th kind words, Dingus,

The blue box holds the logic and the Fet to pulse the motor.

The motor has one coil and three magnets on each rotor. To fire the coil only on the down swing I chose to use a quadrature encoder, as seen in this picture on the front.

The opto's for the coil are just ahead of the motor. When the secondary beam is
allowed to oscillate also, it requires more input to the motor, no surprise here.
To accommodate this I added two more windows to the opto's and two more magnets
to the motor from my original four magnet two window 5 watt model... and a doubling of the weight. This is just enough power to allow a limited vertical displacement of the pendulum pivot point. The counter weight is two 25 pound bar bell weights.

At this time I have not attempted to extract power from the secondary arm, rather
I have been side tracked back to a couple of previous generator projects. I will not
post more on this until such time as I have "caught up".

R
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: Dingus Mungus on February 17, 2007, 07:31:18 AM
Well if you ever have a digital video to post please be sure to bring it here. I'm quite curious to see the phases of the pendulum and lever. Good luck on your current experiments.

~Dingus
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: helmut on February 17, 2007, 12:48:03 PM
Hello
I guess.that we search the unknown truth.
The Computer is raltity and the Programs to do the calkulations as well.
But we should remember,that we search for the unknown,which is not Reality (yet)
Not the Computer sets the Level,but our Minds.
So please do not devote the Developers ans Searchers.

Helmut
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: stevensuf on February 17, 2007, 07:42:59 PM
If anyone has a prototype a simple way to test for OU would be to fix the lever, lift the pendulum to a set hieght release it and time how long it swings for, next release the lever lift the pendulum to the same hieght release and time again till it stops, if the duration of both is the same then we have ou, if less then we know some of the pendulums motion has been lost to moving the lever. A simple electromagnet , some iron and a small neo magnet on the pendulum with a hall switch and transistor could easily be used to keep the pendulum going, (much like a pulse motor). Taking power

There is no magical resonance or frequencies here ,just playing with balance.

In my head the logic is simple, the motion of the pendulum makes the lever effectively heavier at one point causing the opposite side to rise then when the pendulum is at full swing its weight is removed from the equation causing the lever to fall.

I would love for a professor to explain to me where gravitational pe is stored ;) I have been formulating an idea in my head for sometime, that there is no such thing as energy only state,  ie hot cant do work without cold, motion cant do work unless other motion. If we imagine heat as electron orbit increase in diameter but slowing down of the electron speed and cold as decrease in electron orbit but increase in elecrton speed (if the orbit did not slow down as the atom heated and orbit hieght increased then any change in heat would create plasma as the attraction of the proton to electon would weaken and the elctron would fly off, simmilary if when the atom cooled and the orbit hieght decreased then the orbit speed would have to increase or the electron would crash into the nucleus as the proton attraction would drag it down) . Imagine motion as electron orbit change from circular to elliptical with the electron speed varying to keep the attraction to the nucleus balanced in both cases the overall momenta of the electron remaining constant.

Imagine i put "pe" into a rock on the moon but let it drop on the earth woohoo free energy, the smart asses will say but the moon has pe already so lets say i give an asteroid in the belt a little shove in earths direction there is no pe=mgh for many millions of miles. You do not put PE into an object by raising it, its overall state remains the same as it was on the ground. Id say there is no such thing as pe it is imaginary you can get work out of gravity you can get work out of heat or motion but no bloody energy, it is all just state and an attempt to persuade matter to change its state by application of force or field.

Just an idea??
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: Dingus Mungus on February 18, 2007, 02:46:27 AM
If anyone has a prototype a simple way to test for OU would be to fix the lever, lift the pendulum to a set hieght release it and time how long it swings for, next release the lever lift the pendulum to the same hieght release and time again till it stops, if the duration of both is the same then we have ou, if less then we know some of the pendulums motion has been lost to moving the lever.

Even with twice the friction this pendulum lever system is capable of storing its kinetic energy longer and swing in phase at a higher velocity. So that is why I claim to have observed 2nd law violations via simulation software. I assume the device to be underunity because even if you were able to extract this excess kinetic energy it wouldn't be enough to reset the pendulum from a stopped point. If a designer developed a way to continously maintain the intensity and phase of the pendulum, perhaps contintuous extraction of this observed excess kinetic energy is possible.

Still worth working on if you're interested in mechanical resonance...
~Dingus
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: artman on February 19, 2007, 04:44:26 PM
Hi all!

At first when I found this topic and Milkovic's device (just 2 weeks ago) I was amazed. The videos looks rather convincing to me, but after some hours spent in WM2D I became a little unsatisfied. I had a hard time even get some result that resembled Milkovic's motions, but after a while I understood that the proportion in mass between the pendulum and lever was wrong ( I had too heavy lever). Anyway I did not find any clear signs of overunity and became somewhat sceptic, something was wrong, either Milkovic or WM2D or both.
The more I think about it, I've come to the conclusion that WM2D is not usable in this case.
Still I'm not totaly convinced that the device is OU, but I could really use some FE, so I'm going in =).
My replica is almost done, and I will post some pictures and results later but first I wanted to shear some thoughts about where the energy might be coming from.
What comes to my mind is a text called "Vimaana" (flying craft in sanskrit) where the auther Lehel Repits (written in swedish, printed in 1971) describes how to build a flying sourcer, both a FE machine and an antigravity device.
He is into some schauberger ideas, however, on page 35 we can read
(http://)
I will translate it for you.
"A german engeneer /Hansen/ living in /Helsingborg/ in sweden was very close to the solution. The experiment was published in a swedish magasine in the begining of year 1969. The experiment was composed of two equal wheights, each tied to a string and put in rotation. At a certain point in time the radius /strings/ where shortend. The speed of the rotation whas doubled. At the same point on the pereferie orbit the wheights are allowed to resume the longer radius rotation. According to all schoolbooks in physics the speed of the rotation would also resume to the former rotational speed. And yet, instead of the rotational speed falling down, as you learn in school, the wheights remaind in the higher rotational speed. At each shortening of the radius, the rotational speed squered to the former. If such accerleration is to be achived at each radius-shortening, its demanded that the radius-shortening happends at the same perefial point every time, and this demand also aplies to the longening of the radius. Hansen called these moments and the whole effect  'mechanical impulse-moments' "
 
To me, this resembles our case with the pendulum, when the lever flips, its like the wheigt gets longer radius at some points and shorter at some. If the timing is perfect this could tap the FE.
This would also explain why WM2D aint helping. . it obeys to the schoolbook laws.


Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: WhiteFalcon on February 19, 2007, 05:17:47 PM
Hi!

First post from me!  I'm not an engineer of any kind, but a chemist interested in "free energies", my academics included math, physics etc... but just enough to grasp a few concepts here and there...!!!

I will give this device a try...

The way I see the whole thing is :

The pendulum is not doing "work" in the whole device : the only work it is doing is "moving the gravity center" of the lever (arm).  The lever's gravity center is a massless component, so moving it doesn't use much "work"...  So the loss of the pendulum should be the same as a normal pendulum (friction)...

Here's how I will build it :

When the lever AND the pendulum are at rest, the "gravity center" of the whole thing should be just over the axis.

The mass of the lever and pendulum are related.  When the pendulum is at its higher swing (from one side or the another), the gravity center of the lever should not be moved too far away from the axis, because the whole device could FALL OVER, or we would have to use "stoppers" (in which we will "lose" work).

The ideal balanced device should be able to operate without the need to add any stoppers, or springs.

This is how I "see" it, I may be totally wrong!!!!

---

If it works, I won't use the lever to operate two bicycle wheels, but two Faraday Discs (using Tesla mods!!), the high currents delivered by the discs will be used to hydrolyse water, with an efficiency of over 100% (plasma hydrolysis), the gases from the hydrolysis could run a Tesla Turbine before they are collected and burnt in a Generator to supply electricity to the motor which will keep the pendulum going!!

--

Could we put two gravity-machines in series?

12:1  times 12:1 = 144:1 COP !!

WF

Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: pg46 on February 19, 2007, 07:15:37 PM
@ i_ron

 Nice work on your test unit. I am hoping it will work out well for you and I look forward to hearing back on your progress. Real nice design!

@ artman

 Intersting concept you brought forward. Sounds like once you get this unit up to speed one could then cut the power and keep it going by adjusting the radius of the strings - does that sound right? and who is going to give this one a try?

Best Regards,
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: Dingus Mungus on February 20, 2007, 03:04:11 AM
The videos looks rather convincing to me, but after some hours spent in WM2D I became a little unsatisfied.

Anyway I did not find any clear signs of overunity and became somewhat sceptic, something was wrong, either Milkovic or WM2D or both.

The more I think about it, I've come to the conclusion that WM2D is not usable in this case.

This would also explain why WM2D aint helping. . it obeys to the schoolbook laws.

Really?

I don't know how you could possibly miss this then:
(http://www.overunity.com/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=1763.0;attach=5874;image)

Look at the graphs... Even with twice the friction on the lever pendulum device it still puts out roughly 5-7 times the kinetic energy, and the pendulum lever swings for 3 additional minutes. If that is not an energy gain... I don't know what is.

~Dingus
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: artman on February 20, 2007, 08:14:33 AM
@dingus
Ok, either WM2D doesnt even obey to the schoolbook laws (makes WM2D even more useless), or you are into some new FE device based on that WM2D scheme.
What is your point ?
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: FreeEnergy on February 20, 2007, 09:16:57 AM
@dingus
Ok, either WM2D doesnt even obey to the schoolbook laws (makes WM2D even more useless), or you are into some new FE device based on that WM2D scheme.
What is your point ?

@dingus if you don't mind me interjecting...

the point is this...we can possibly tap into this excess energy to our benefit ;)

...that is if this wm2d is accurate. we can possibly achieve over unity.   

also we start with the same amount of equal energy, but we end up with very different results, one pendulum outlasts the other....hmmm?

peace
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: artman on February 20, 2007, 02:35:51 PM
Quote
...that is if this wm2d is accurate. we can possibly achieve over unity. 

First of all I think the setups of leversfe-ou2-enhanced.wm2d and leversfe-ou3-enhanced.wm2d are too complex for WM2D to handle them correct.
You have two stable points, and knowing how distrubute the powers of all the 3 moving parts over these two points is a programmers nightmare.
It can be done, but it would require software designed especially for such systems.
I think WM2D is more designed for general purpose.

And second, there is more to the properties of mass than WM2D takes account for like gyroscopic properties and those mechanical impulse-moments for example.
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: nwman on February 20, 2007, 08:16:03 PM
OK, Its been a while since I have posted on here so I thought I would throw my two cents in. I hate to just say this and not do it myself but from the complexity I have seen of some on the devices posted on this thread you could easley "real world" test some of these concepts. On video, test one pendulum on a fixed point of rotation vs. one on the lever setup doing no work just have springs/bungees resistance acting on the lever side. Then see which one stops first just like the WM2D Sim. Test it a million times with switching the pendulum back and forth and the results should be apparent. If the lever pendulum constantly outlasts the fixed pendulum then we may have something. This is the obvious step to take if the WM2D is in question.

I love the simple complexity of this device!

Tim
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: Dingus Mungus on February 20, 2007, 11:41:28 PM
Thanks FE,
You always handle such posts much better than I do...

example:
@Artman
Are you really claiming that 10 components
in one sim is too much for my computer?
Read the graphs... Understand the graphs...
Want more proof? Build a pendulum, its easy.
Just not worth my time and money right now...

You've seen the evidence and it means nothing to you...
If I were you I would just spend my time on something I believed in.
(Linard Griffin H2, Mike motor, SMOT, TPU)

~Dingus
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: hartiberlin on February 21, 2007, 12:43:45 PM
A very nice prototype...

So the motor will only turn untill the pendulum trips the pressure switch, then gravity takes over again. I also like that your counter weight is adjustable, as well as the levers pivet point. So I assume the pannel box is you speed controler. How has your system harmonics hunt going? Congrats again on the really dynamic design job.

Glad to see someone is really putting a propper effort in to exploring this technology.

Best design and prototype I've seen in a while,
~Dingus

Thanks for th kind words, Dingus,

The blue box holds the logic and the Fet to pulse the motor.

The motor has one coil and three magnets on each rotor. To fire the coil only on the down swing I chose to use a quadrature encoder, as seen in this picture on the front.

The opto's for the coil are just ahead of the motor. When the secondary beam is
allowed to oscillate also, it requires more input to the motor, no surprise here.
To accommodate this I added two more windows to the opto's and two more magnets
to the motor from my original four magnet two window 5 watt model... and a doubling of the weight. This is just enough power to allow a limited vertical displacement of the pendulum pivot point. The counter weight is two 25 pound bar bell weights.

At this time I have not attempted to extract power from the secondary arm, rather
I have been side tracked back to a couple of previous generator projects. I will not
post more on this until such time as I have "caught up".

R


Hi Ron,
very nice professional setup.

I hope you will get it running and can post more infos.
Can you do some measurements of the output power already ?

And then compare against your used input power for the
motor driving your pendulum ?

Many thanks.

Regards, Stefan.
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: i_ron on February 22, 2007, 11:19:46 PM


[/quote]

Hi Ron,
very nice professional setup.

I hope you will get it running and can post more infos.
Can you do some measurements of the output power already ?

And then compare against your used input power for the
motor driving your pendulum ?

Many thanks.

Regards, Stefan.
[/quote]


Thanks Stefan,

The output arm needs the restriction of a load in order for the pendulum to work
properly when it's pivot point is allowed to move. I have been investigating various schemes but haven't settled on one yet.

It has been a pleasure to work with Veljko on this. He is genuine, sincere and
offers much support and encouragement.

Regards, Ron

 




Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: FreeEnergy on February 23, 2007, 01:46:16 AM
*edit*
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: i_ron on February 23, 2007, 05:47:31 PM
*edit*

Please explain what you mean?
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: FreeEnergy on February 23, 2007, 10:04:02 PM
*edit*

Please explain what you mean?

sorry but i messed up on my last post. think i had a bit too much to drink. so i came back and erased it.


peace
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: i_ron on February 24, 2007, 12:28:11 AM

[/quote]

peace
[/quote]

Thats allowed,  <grin>
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: njamnjam on March 04, 2007, 09:23:19 PM
http://peswiki.com/index.php/OS:Milkovic-Berrett_Secondary_Oscillator_Generator
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: stevewal2 on March 05, 2007, 06:24:04 PM
Thanks njamnjam,

Well its still looking a pretty rough prototype. The input coil setup could certainly be better arranged. but even so he's still getting overunity:-

Quote
There is only a small electrical advantage with just six induction coils on the secondary oscillator wheel as presently configured. The input coil consumes 1 amp at twelve volts at approximately a 20% duty cycle which comes to around 2.4 Watts. The output is between 200 and 300 mAmps, at between 14 and 15 Volts, which comes to around 3.5 Watts AC (sine wave). These are very rough measurements and don't represent a full curve analysis of the input and output.

So maybe like he says, a more efficient setup really could get some meaningful results.
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: dorro1971 on March 05, 2007, 07:11:27 PM
one could always capture the voltage of field colapse from the main coil...get the input current down abit.

working on low energy input system at the moment

if it works, details will follow
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: Garethfine on March 07, 2007, 03:23:47 PM
Hi all.
Well this has been a very interesting topic up to now, save for the lack of working experiments. I've never posted before but you'll see why i decided to today.

You gotta see what my brother built last night. I went over and made a video of it and took some pictures. Very interesting ideed, but I have to say, we didn't find anything remarkable in the design.

Some notes:
There is a particularly large effort involved to get the pendulum swinging initially (easily forgotten)
Subsequent pushes on the pendulum could be compared to the output on the wheel of the bicycle, except that the lever stops moving when there is a small load on the wheel.

See for yourself and comments will be welcomed.

Will post the video in the next reply because this keeps failing. It 12Mb.
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: barbosi on March 07, 2007, 03:37:55 PM
Hi all.
Well this has been a very interesting topic up to now, save for the lack of working experiments. I've never posted before but you'll see why i decided to today.

You gotta see what my brother built last night. I went over and made a video of it and took some pictures. Very interesting ideed, but I have to say, we didn't find anything remarkable in the design.

Some notes:
There is a particularly large effort involved to get the pendulum swinging initially (easily forgotten)
Subsequent pushes on the pendulum could be compared to the output on the wheel of the bicycle, except that the lever stops moving when there is a small load on the wheel.

See for yourself and comments will be welcomed.

Will post the video in the next reply because this keeps failing. It 12Mb.

There is a little detail stated on: http://www.veljkomilkovic.com/OscilacijeEng.html

QUOTE: "The best results were achieved with the lever axel and pendulum at the same height, and the base of the massive lever above the centre of mass, as shown in Figure 1."

From your picture I don't clearely see how this is achieved (you maybe carefully consider it though). However, I'm waiting for the clip and your comments.
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: Garethfine on March 07, 2007, 04:45:09 PM
OK here's a video
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: barbosi on March 07, 2007, 09:28:51 PM
It's shown the system, and briefely the whole oscilating thing.
It's suppose to be in resonance, and in short periods from clip, to me it looks not "tuned" on the same frequency. It might need you to play with the arm lenght and/or weights.
I'm not to much in mechanic engineering but I think this was to reason to use the simulator in previous posts: to find an optimum.

Secondly, the chain mechanism is not a reductor (like the speed gears)? If so, it's normal to have less power and more speed.

Good luck and don't give up!
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: Hower on March 08, 2007, 11:10:23 PM
Hi all!

PESWiki updated the article about Milkovic's two-stage oscillator and here is what is new:

New video presentation of Veljko Milkovic - Universal Two-Stage Mechanical Oscillator - A Mechanical Amplifier  - Professionally filmed and edited video includes English subtitles (35min)

Google Video
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=6377655322209610872

or

download (38.3 MB, wmv)
http://www.micropixel.biz/veljkomilkovic/videos/Veljko_Milkovic_(video-8)_Universal_two-stage_oscillator_full_presentation.wmv


Also there is a supportive statement by Peter Lindemann, D.Sc. (USA):
Opinion on the Two-Stage Mechanical Oscillator (156 KB PDF)
http://www.veljkomilkovic.com/Images/Opinion_Dr_Peter_Lindemann.PDF


Independent Replications:

Milkovic-Berrett Secondary Oscillator Generator
"The input coil consumes 1 amp at twelve volts at approximately a 20% duty cycle which comes to around 2.4 Watts. The output is between 200 and 300 mAmps, at between 14 and 15 Volts, which comes to around 3.5 Watts AC (sine wave)..."
http://peswiki.com/index.php/OS:Milkovic-Berrett_Secondary_Oscillator_Generator


Discussion group:
Milkovic-Berrett Oscillator Generator
http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/PES_Berrett/
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: bitRAKE on March 09, 2007, 01:47:57 AM
Looking though my scrap bin I noticed there were sufficient parts to build one of these devices without too much expense. Beginning with the pendulum I wanted to reduce the losses due to friction, so I soldered a thin quarter inch steel belt (broken printer) directly to some berrings taking from an old hard drive. This berring is connected to the lever arm attached to a steel tube on a wood plank....

Isn't this setup similar to a double pendulum? Imagine you are sitting on the first ball of a double pendulum (which is our lever). I'm too lazy to bother with the math, but I'm fairly certain the Milkovic device is a constrained double pendulum.

...back to the model.
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: cchance on March 09, 2007, 06:13:59 AM
lol you do realize that the above pendullum is absolutely unbalanced and another thing that initial force isnt exactly a difficult thing to overlook for the sheer fact it only needs to be started once, after that its maintenance that needs to be maintained. which as has been shown by brians reproduction can be done quite easily even in his basic first try design he showed a 1.5x output of power and that was via extremely inefficent design he admits.
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: cchance on March 09, 2007, 06:25:31 AM
whats with people on here always trying to prove a law violation via simulations.... THE SIMULATIONS ARE BASED ON THE LAWS... dear god build the device and try it see if you can get it to work or improve it why the need to be pesimist. I think the best person is brian from the yahoogroup/peswiki atleast he put forth to recreate the device and actually showed it working as well as had stirling meat with him to show the device it works at 2.5w input and 3.5w output

stirling confirmed it only runs for about 15 seconds before he runs into issues each time but says its mostly because of the flimsy design and the many inefficiencys that brian already said he knows how to overcome ... such as a geared ratched  flywheel and the addition of more coils to get the voltage up as well as reducing friction and increasing stability throughout the device.

Want to know what makes this true in the simplest way and i can tell you its true straight from common sense swing the pendullum i can maintain a swinging pendullum with my pinky, however the opposing side of the lever as shown in the milkovic video can operate 10 flash lights at once i dont know about you but my pinky cant force down 10 flashlights atleast not without a hell of alot of effort and probably cracking my knuckle.
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: hartiberlin on March 09, 2007, 07:50:15 AM
Hi all.
Well this has been a very interesting topic up to now, save for the lack of working experiments. I've never posted before but you'll see why i decided to today.

You gotta see what my brother built last night. I went over and made a video of it and took some pictures. Very interesting ideed, but I have to say, we didn't find anything remarkable in the design.

Some notes:
There is a particularly large effort involved to get the pendulum swinging initially (easily forgotten)
Subsequent pushes on the pendulum could be compared to the output on the wheel of the bicycle, except that the lever stops moving when there is a small load on the wheel.

See for yourself and comments will be welcomed.

Will post the video in the next reply because this keeps failing. It 12Mb.

Many thanks for the effort,
but I must say, you did not convert the motion ofthe output very well
to the wheel.
There are many losses within the conversion via the bicycle mechanism, so it is
surely not very efficient...
Maybe you can attach at the up- and downgoing output shaft a few big magnets and
place itinside a coil and have a lamp as the load to the coil, so it is lighting
up via induction.
That would be a much better output test I guess.

Regards, Stefan.
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: FreeEnergy on March 09, 2007, 08:32:04 AM
make sure the lever arm and the pendulum are in balance. in other words when the pendulum is at a dead stop the lever arm stays freely horizontal. must adjust weights accordingly.
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: Matech on March 09, 2007, 03:56:20 PM
Hi.
I'm the one who built the ugly bike contraption, and let me say: the night before I connected the pink bike I really thought it was a free lunch system (hardly slept). Once the pendulum got going it seemed there was no stopping it. Even with varying amounts of wheight on the arm and different spring tensions, you can move the arms' pivot point aswell if you like. I got to thinking how much power would be required to swing a 15kg pendulum and repeatedly pick up and put down an apposing 10kg weight. The fact is they are inter-linked. The 10kg weight on its way down helps the pendulum and the pendulum helps pick the weight up again. Trying to extract work does not work! Bump a 30 pound flywheel twice a second and you'll pump water through a 1/16 inch pipe or light some torch bulbs-I promise. If this is 12X OU why can a man with 50 degrees not make it self run?

M.
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: i_ron on March 10, 2007, 01:25:21 AM
Hi.
I'm the one who built the ugly bike contraption, and let me say: the night before I connected the pink bike I really thought it was a free lunch system (hardly slept). Once the pendulum got going it seemed there was no stopping it. Even with varying amounts of wheight on the arm and different spring tensions, you can move the arms' pivot point aswell if you like. I got to thinking how much power would be required to swing a 15kg pendulum and repeatedly pick up and put down an apposing 10kg weight. The fact is they are inter-linked. The 10kg weight on its way down helps the pendulum and the pendulum helps pick the weight up again. Trying to extract work does not work! Bump a 30 pound flywheel twice a second and you'll pump water through a 1/16 inch pipe or light some torch bulbs-I promise. If this is 12X OU why can a man with 50 degrees not make it self run?

M.

M,

Very good to see you make the effort to prove this out, good work.

However there are several issues with your unit that may have influenced
your conclusions to be negative. Keep in mind that Veljko does say repeatedly
that this is a two stage oscillator.

1) So the counter weight is very important... I had poor results with a spring.

2) In my examination of bicycle freewheels I found that most have a non instant
pickup when changing direction and the kind that go "click click" actually have an
inch or two of pedal travel before engaging. It is hard to see in the vid but there
appears to be some lost motion in yours?

3) you were only collecting one half of the stroke.

I do hope your next one will function better.
An improperly built unit is not proof that Veljko's design does not work

Regards,

Ron



Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: Matech on March 10, 2007, 07:46:55 PM
Hi Ron.

I didn't put the scheme to bed entirely, I built yet another simple contraption out of wood this time (easier to machine and mill etc). The balancing is incredibly simple, by moving the weight further or closer from the pendulum an "ideal" setup can be achieved.
All of the same problems again, the pendulum swings fantastically until the arm is even slightly tampered with. Milcovic implies that the pendulums' movement is not affected by interfering with the arm, this is not true. I rigged up magnets and coils and what not, the arm doesn't like to work at all.
It will be a big day for free energy enthusiasts when gravity can be exploited for uses other than the work it does for us at the moment.
Lifting a dead horse with the same gravity that prevents it from floating away will take some flogging.

M
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: hartiberlin on March 10, 2007, 09:52:57 PM
Hi Matech,
what have been your weights and leverage relations ?
I think the unit would work best, if the pendulum is at least 2times as far away from the pivot point and thus the pendulum weight can be a bit more heavier than half the weight of the output side.
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: i_ron on March 10, 2007, 10:25:49 PM
Hi Ron.

All of the same problems again, the pendulum swings fantastically until the arm is even slightly tampered with. Milcovic implies that the pendulums' movement is not affected by interfering with the arm, this is not true. I rigged up magnets and coils and what not, the arm doesn't like to work at all.


M

M, this is all too true and is just common sense. If you disturb the pendulum by raising
or lowering it it requires more power to maintain the swing.

What I found is with the arm locked it runs on half the power. And this is another one of those things where small doesn't cut it. I am up to 40 pounds (18 Kg) and to me this is the where you can "just start" to get something out, before that it is lost in
the woodwork.

What I discovered in earlier experiments is that with about 120? of swing, practically
the actual weight of the pendulum is apparent at the end of the secondary arm.
With the 40 pound weight I can hold the bathroom scale under the 1:1 arm and
lift up to 30 pounds and the arm is still trying to work! ( it should be +/- 20 pounds
but the scale won't follow the motion) so there is work being done.

Now this is with a very limited amount of travel as can be seen in my second video.

Ron










Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: iacob alex on March 11, 2007, 07:02:59 AM
                              Hi !

A slow motion movie(we live in the youtube times...) of this "inexplicable" double mechanical oscillator in gravity and inertia,can show us,as on a paper,the related display on the time line of the swingings of the pendular mass and beam mass.

It's seems to be an asymmetric type game: a situation in which are implicated two "players" of unequal power:gravity and inertia.

The asymmetric game is advanced by the pendular motion with a balancing fulcrum/pivot.

With a fixed fulcrum,the pendular swinging is simmetrical in gravity and inertia.

The free balancing fulcrum of the pendulum on the balace beam(lever as a weighting machine of the dynamics...) introduces an asymmetric  fall/rise sequence.

The difference of the inertial reaction is transffered to the beam mass:as Milkovic shows,this is an one way power mechanism...or it works as a pendular motion absorber.

The gravity asks for  symmetry:this is the basis of a lever momentum relation.

The asymmetric swinging action asks for an asymmetric inertial reaction.

More(maybe we can see on a slow motion movie),it's possible to have some unequal swingings times(fall vs. rise).

If so,we have an anisochronal pendulum(a motion "prohibited" by inertia!?),so we play time factor in an "unusual" manner?an asymmetric compression technique?

A slow movie can tell us more...

               All the Bests!  /  Alex
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: i_ron on March 11, 2007, 05:58:13 PM
iacob,

You lost me after the "slow video"  lol

What I am coming to think is we should be studying the "balanced beam" or teeter
totter... the pendulum is well written up and easy to understand, but there is no
information on the resonant frequency of the 'beam', no handy dandy tutorials on
"how to maximize your teeter totter output"

Because this is where the action is. I mentioned that I had tried a spring... well the
spring has a tendency to absorb the force and not give it back! So if we look at the pendulum as just an oscillator... that balances and unbalances the beam... for free,
then we would be getting closer to the truth.

We have learned that if you extract work from a pendulum then you pay the price.
Throughout history the pendulum pivot point has been of robust construction to
prevent any vertical motion. But Veljko has shown us that there is a force there
that will allow a certain amount of work to be extracted from the pendulum...with
minimum penalty. As the pendulum swings up towards weightlessness, we allow the
pivot point to rise... as the pendulum swings down, adding the acquired force of
being restrained from its gravity fall, we allow the pivot point to descend.

This perturbation of the pendulum is almost benign, we pay only a minimum penalty.
But the balance/unbalance transfered to the beam is a useful byproduct that can be
utilized.

Hope this helps...

Ron







Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: i_ron on March 11, 2007, 09:44:36 PM
Hi All,

I see a lot of downloads of my video... so perhaps an explanation is in order.

In the beginning I didn't know where to provide the input to the pendulum. I thus
chose the grand father clock model where the input is at the end of the stroke.
This required logic to not pulse as the pendulum swung up through the trigger window
but to only fire on the way down.

This worked well for Mk 1, 2 and 3... but with doubling the weight and allowing the pivot point to rise and fall required more power. I cut another trigger window at BDC so as to have the coil pulse twice per swing and thus doubling my input to 11 watts.

But I since find that perhaps the optimum firing position is at the bottom of the swing, in the words of JDJ...

"I believe that I detect in the writing of both Mr. Pugh and Mr. Berrett a fundamental confusion between the force of the output impulse and the amount of energy it might deliver.  Energy (or work) is the product of force and distance.  In fact Mr. Pugh has demonstrated this relationship by pushing his pendulum at the bottom of its swing.  At the bottom of the swing the pendulum velocity is maximum so that for an applied pulse of fixed duration, the force is applied over a greater distance at the bottom of the swing than at the top.  This couples additional energy into the pendulum from the driving coil resulting in higher swing amplitude."

So what I am saying is please don't copy my earlier work. For in the next model I
wish to do away with the current drive electronics and instead go for the Bedini
trigger. The logic behind this is the JB trigger is directionally sensitive and will only
fire the coil(s) after TDC... regardless of the approach direction. By TDC I mean
full coverage of the magnet by the cored coil. I will use the pulse motor as seen in the
video but wind an addition coil with a trigger winding and move one magnet station
so that the coils and magnets are at 180? and pulsed simultaneously, when the pendulum is at the bottom of its stroke.

Mark three, as posted, is just a report of my progress and can be seen as a
"don't do it this way" type machine.

Ron


Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: stevewal2 on March 12, 2007, 01:15:51 AM
Hi Ron,
I have to say I'm really impressed with your mechines and engineering skills. Great ideas too. Keep up the great work. I replayed your video several times. The bendi trigger definetely sounds the way to go.  :)

Steve.
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: i_ron on March 13, 2007, 01:53:28 AM
Thanks Steve...

you are too kind. It is always nice to see interest in Veljko's ideas.

Ron
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: ChileanOne on March 19, 2007, 02:17:18 PM
Have you seen the latest article on Barrett's replication of Milkovic Ideas!

He has achieved the rotation of a bycicle wheel at around 100 RPMs with a power sustaining impulse (for the pendulum) of 2 watts. As the video shows the wheel with a lot of magnets attached, I bet the next step is puting some coil around and generate power output, let's hope he achieves self sustaining, it looks really promising!!!



< http://pesn.com/2007/03/18/9500462_Berrett_pendulums/ >
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: stevewal2 on March 19, 2007, 02:53:49 PM
Lol, I was just trying to post the same thing. Looks like you beat me to it. Yep it's looking pretty good. I'm not sure what he's using to drive the spinning weel on the last rig, but it looks like he's only transfering power on either the down or up stroke. This progect really needs specifically engineered parts, including a concave and convex rack and pinion to transfer torque to a double ratcheted flywheel on both the up and down strokes. This would help maintain the momentup to extract useful power.

cheers,
Steve.
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: dorro1971 on March 19, 2007, 07:43:13 PM
hi all,

Regarding ratchets and things, i feel it would be most efficient to use industrial one way clutches as these have almost no lost movement, also with two clutches and two gears you could utilze both up and down motion...


have fun

dorro
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: xnonix on March 22, 2007, 10:52:19 AM
Hi all, this is my first post but I'm here long time ago.

I have made a power study and here you are the results. All is done by simulation on wm2d.

I have simulated the hand giving a impulse to the pendulum by a motor and I have reads of power in each impulse.

Because we can have reads of springs power I have used a spring as our generator in the 2nd stage oscillator.

I compared power in and power out.

Test to put air resistance 0.1

Judge by yourselves.
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: xnonix on March 22, 2007, 02:19:40 PM
I made another setup much more intuitive.

Now the hand stroke is simulated in another way.

Have fun!

PS: Sorry for correlative posts.
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: ChileanOne on March 22, 2007, 02:21:12 PM
Can you post a screen capture? I have only a demo of wm2d and I can't open files. With a screen capture I could try to reproduce it. I am really interested on this because I think somehow relates to the way to extract energy form magnetic fields interaction.
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: xnonix on March 22, 2007, 02:36:59 PM
Here you are a screenshot
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: ChileanOne on March 22, 2007, 02:39:12 PM
 :o

Wow, increase of the power. Very Interesting!

I gotta get me a full version of wm2d

Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: pilatte on March 24, 2007, 11:20:58 AM
there is a mechanical way of transfering energy to a pendulum

search the web for "BOTAFUMEIRO" in use in the church "SANTIAGO de COMPOSTELA" in SPAIN
there is good explanation on the web

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Botafumeiro

http://www.sciences.univ-nantes.fr/physique/perso/gtulloue/Meca/Oscillateurs/botafumeiro.html

http://rubens.anu.edu.au/raid1cdroms/spain/santiago_de_compostella/cathedral/interior/botafumeiro/index1.html


Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: FreeEnergy on March 24, 2007, 09:28:40 PM
there is a mechanical way of transfering energy to a pendulum

search the web for "BOTAFUMEIRO" in use in the church "SANTIAGO de COMPOSTELA" in SPAIN
there is good explanation on the web

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Botafumeiro

http://www.sciences.univ-nantes.fr/physique/perso/gtulloue/Meca/Oscillateurs/botafumeiro.html

http://rubens.anu.edu.au/raid1cdroms/spain/santiago_de_compostella/cathedral/interior/botafumeiro/index1.html




very nice first post :)
i will be working on wm2d on this one.
thanks,

peace
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: prajna on March 25, 2007, 04:53:05 AM
Nice thread, people.

I found this device rather interesting too and, having modeled it in wm2d, I found myself in a position that I have been in before when looking at bessler wheels and suchlike: looking at models and thinking "If only there was some way of controlling this part of the cycle we might get energy out". This time I managed to see how that could be possible.

The explaination is at http://DeclarePeace.org.uk/jhula/ (http://DeclarePeace.org.uk/jhula/).  Let me know if it excites you as it excites me.
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: pilatte on March 25, 2007, 11:48:57 AM
hello
if you want to see an application of the JHULA project, go to the web :
http://energie.cnrs.fr/rapport_ACI_2004-2006/ECD032.pdf
photo page 21
text in french (university of NANTES FRANCE)
project SEAREV
mathematical study of a twin oscillator
if you need some translations or informations, just send me a message
you are welcome
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: prajna on March 25, 2007, 02:50:28 PM
Thanks for that link, pilatte.  Very interesting.  They are working on a much more complex problem than the one I am proposing; predicting wave motion in order to optimise a hydraulic pendulum pump.  That paper has a number of very useful references. Jhula is much simpler and, I am sure, is much easier to analyse and predict than what they are trying to achieve.  I am suggesting that there may be no need for all that input energy from waves but that merely using the latch/un-latch mechanism ('optimal control' is the area of wave power research) it may be possible to increase the energy in the system for no (or negligable) additional energy input.  I think they (as I did for ages) haven't seen the wood for the trees.
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: prajna on March 25, 2007, 06:28:08 PM
I've begun a new thread for the Jhula discussion (http://www.overunity.com/index.php/topic,2138.0.html (http://www.overunity.com/index.php/topic,2138.0.html)) so please reply on that thread with regard to Jhula.
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: bitRAKE on March 25, 2007, 06:55:35 PM
I started over with my design (will post pictures soon) - the first try is mostly just to find out how bad my understanding is.  :P Lever turned out well with very little friction or bounce and adjustable. Seems to transfer all the energy from one end to the other.

Currently, I'm tring to build a very good pendulum with the parts I have. My goal is something that is a couple pounds and requires milliamps. Having the motor on the lever seems to the way to go because of the verticle motion. An external push/pull would have to be syncronized in two dimensions or waste power.

Thinking about piezo electric effect because the lever needs to be maintained within a range because the oscillation are not limited by the dampening of the lever. Why waste this force through restraint? Instead the piezo material will be under pressure (weight of lever and pendulum) and generating power even when the lever does not appear to move.

(big THANK YOU to all the posters for sharing ideas and constructions - truely inspiring!)
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: i_ron on March 26, 2007, 07:29:31 PM
there is a mechanical way of transfering energy to a pendulum

search the web for "BOTAFUMEIRO" in use in the church "SANTIAGO de COMPOSTELA" in SPAIN
there is good explanation on the web

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Botafumeiro

http://www.sciences.univ-nantes.fr/physique/perso/gtulloue/Meca/Oscillateurs/botafumeiro.html

http://rubens.anu.edu.au/raid1cdroms/spain/santiago_de_compostella/cathedral/interior/botafumeiro/index1.html




A most interesting post indeed, my thanks also.

Go to that middle link and set up the flash animation as follows...

http://www.sciences.univ-nantes.fr/physique/perso/gtulloue/Meca/Oscillateurs/botafumeiro.html

Sine = on

vitesse angilainee = 1.7 omega 0

C de F = .04 Hz

with it running, grab the incense pot with the mouse and bring it up along side the
wheel... wait for the exact moment when the string to the pendulum is longest,
that is wit he the small circle closest to the pendulum pivot point... and release the
pendulum from the mouse...

It should run at over 90?, note this is from the perpendicular and is a total of 180?

Now we can see what the men pulling on the ropes are doing... they are shortening the rope as the pendulum swings down and releasing it as it flies up and out.

This is a "brute force" method of adding input to the pendulum and is not advantageous to our application. It does illustrate a principle of operation that in
our case the secondary beam is lowering the pendulum and thus lengthening the swing of our pendulum at the wrong time. This is a loss situation for our pendulum.

But it is interesting to speculate, once we have mastered this principle of shortening
the pendulum arm length on the down swing, on the development of the doubly
articulated pendulum, such as the "JHULIA" device. Most interesting....

Ron







 




Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: prajna on March 26, 2007, 07:45:54 PM
Why complicate it, Ron?  The energy is already there in Jhula without messing around with the pendulum arm length.  Simply lock the relationship between the balance arm (counterweight) and the pendulum whenever the centre of mass is in a beneficial location and unlock it when it isn't. Look at Jhula again and tell me if I am wrong.
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: i_ron on March 27, 2007, 06:44:36 AM
Why complicate it, Ron?  The energy is already there in Jhula without messing around with the pendulum arm length.  Simply lock the relationship between the balance arm (counterweight) and the pendulum whenever the centre of mass is in a beneficial location and unlock it when it isn't. Look at Jhula again and tell me if I am wrong.

prajna,

I looked at the link but I did not understand what was on the link... simple as that.

I looked at it again and must confess the concept is still beyond me....

Ron
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: prajna on March 27, 2007, 09:40:16 AM
I must admit, I nearly noticed it many times before with designs for bessler type wheels but it just didn't click.  Then I modeled the Mikovic system and thought "so what happens when you unrestrict the movement of the lever?" Doing so created the kind of chaotic movement that you see in the animation, and I watched it and watched it and I began to notice that there are times when you just want to 'lock' the pendulum to the counterweight because you know that will increase the speed.  Obviously, the pendulum would need to be released to swing again after it had added to the momentum.  It seemed that it would need some complex logic to figure out when to latch and when to unlatch the pendulum but I watched and I watched and I just knew that if I could sit in the pendulum I would know when to latch and unlatch.  And then I noticed that if I wanted the system to rotate clockwise then I would latch the pendulum as it was both a) to the right of the system and b) not moving with respect to the counterweight (if I was riding the swing I would feel weightless).  I would unlatch it when it reached the bottom of the cycle.

I will do some more work on the site so that it gives more opportunity to understand what I'm talking about.  You have to watch the animation (best is to load the wm2d model) untill you have a 'feel' for the relationship between the pendulum and the counterweight and then suddenly it will click; you'll know exactly what I am on about.  Anyway, I'll work on some more drawings that show the difference between a version that is free to rotate (as in the current animation) and that same system where the pendulum is locked with respect to the counterweight.

Once you see how it works it is so obvious that it is difficult to remember how much effort it took to notice it.  Rather like some optical puzzle that takes a while to see but once you have seen it you wonder how you could have failed to see it before.  Thanks for reminding me that it is not easy to recognise.  I'll do what I can on the web page to make it more obvious.
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: FreeEnergy on March 27, 2007, 10:13:44 AM
i think i understand.
the pendulum locks itself after its first swing causing the massive lever to have enough kinetic energy to unlock the pendulum and give it a little kick to its initial position. a little circuit work maybe for timing? just a guess.
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: prajna on March 27, 2007, 10:30:50 AM
Not quite, FE.  Certainly logic will be required (although I am testing a purely mechanical system at the moment that may work).  You see the counterweight spins and the pendulum swings. When the counterweight is spinning clockwise the pendulum will sometimes be assisting that spin and sometimes countering it.  The secret is to lock the pendulum to the counterweight whenever its momentum would assist the counterweight and to let it swing freely whenever its momentum would counter the spin.  I initlially thought that would require quite complex predictive logic that would need to effectively model the physics of the system but it turns out that by not being quite so greedy for getting the maximum out of the system we can simplify the logic to an almost trivial problem: we latch whenever the pendulum is to the right of the main axle and moving at the same speed as the counterweight and we unlatch when the pendulum reaches the bottom of its swing.  Actually, we can use more logic and optimise the energy increase but we should be able to tap enough energy with even this simple logic to get overunity.

By the way, can we continue this discussion in the Jhula thread.  It just saves people from having to wade through all the Mikovic stuff to read about Jhula and likewise it doesn't fill up this thread for those who are more interested in Mikovic.  Thanks.
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: Bruce_TPU on March 29, 2007, 04:11:56 AM
Greetings friends!

I have enjoyed reading your posts for some time, both on this thread and others.  I have been working on HHO production for several months by combining patents.  BUT this lever pendulum idea has intriqued me. 

Here is a drawing of a simple, efficient, mechanical way to close the loop between the lever and pendulum.  If you do not like this idea, I had one more, using the lever to build pressure in a tank via a pump (psi) and then like hydraulics, using that to re swing the pendulum.  I think this drawing is the simplest and can be scaled down to desk size or so.  It need not take up the whole garage..LOL!

Thank all of you for your tenacity, and creativity. 

"With God all things are possible!"
BT
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: magnetman12003 on March 30, 2007, 05:10:30 PM
Hi,
Check this idea out. A lot more is posted in the "Working Smot ramp from Tom Ferko"  in this same overunity group.  Its my last posting with illustration of how two magnetic pendulums might be used to power a self runner device.

I thank "Sam" for pointing me to this group.

A runner ring magnet travels the balance beam between both pendulum mounted ring magnets.  Only repel or bounce mode is used.  The illustrated blocks keep both end ring magnets from possibly slamming the articulating balance beam ??   Might not even need them??

Tom
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: magnetman12003 on March 30, 2007, 05:11:47 PM
Hi All,

Here is an illustration.
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: magnetman12003 on March 30, 2007, 07:25:05 PM
Hi All,

Check this possibility out also. The weight of the ? pendulum would have to be adjusted to have this work.    Both fixed magnets and the balance beam runner magnet all repell each other.

Tom
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: magnetman12003 on March 31, 2007, 04:02:58 AM
Hi All,

Here is my theory of how this might work.


Tom
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: pilatte on March 31, 2007, 07:31:51 PM
Hi all,
may I have your opinion about the five drawing in the file annexed
this device is based on the principe of shortening a pendulum cable like the "botafumeiro" in SPAIN

please, have a look before on the web site : http://www.sciences.univ-nantes.fr/physique/perso/gtulloue/Meca/Oscillateurs/botafumeiro.html

there is a file .DOC attached to this post
the file contains five drawings of the device

please give me your opinion about this project because the test indicate         
NO OVERUNITY EFFECT
Pilatte
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: gaby de wilde on April 02, 2007, 04:53:38 AM
It's starting to look like hamel's stuff.

I was also looking at the shape of the oscillation wave.

here is an idea of mine.

http://gabydewilde.googlepages.com/gravity-engine
gabydewilde - gravity engine

Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: magnetman12003 on April 02, 2007, 02:01:18 PM
Hi,

In any operating device to be most effecient the moving parts must be kept to a minimum.

One knife edge pivot point and one rolling ring magnet are keeping within that idea on my setup.

Tom
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: Vladimir256 on April 03, 2007, 01:32:42 AM
When Milkovic's device is at rest, should the torque on the side of the pivot opposite the pendulum be greater or equal to the torque on the side with the pendulum? In other words when at rest should the device naturally lean towards the side opposite the pendulum or should the lever be balanced.
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: pilatte on April 03, 2007, 10:19:07 AM
When Milkovic's device is at rest, should the torque on the side of the pivot opposite the pendulum be greater or equal to the torque on the side with the pendulum? In other words when at rest should the device naturally lean towards the side opposite the pendulum or should the lever be balanced.
Hi vladimir,
I test several devices similar of milkovic's device.
but when I try to extract mechanical energy from the opposite side of the pendulum : there was a stop of the device (the balancing effect stops).
for more details, see my post "Pilatte reply #378 march 31 with drawings of my last device.
please, give me your opinion on what's wrong with that concept.
thanks
Pilatte
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: i_ron on April 04, 2007, 12:52:54 AM
When Milkovic's device is at rest, should the torque on the side of the pivot opposite the pendulum be greater or equal to the torque on the side with the pendulum? In other words when at rest should the device naturally lean towards the side opposite the pendulum or should the lever be balanced.

Vladimir,

It can be either. If you start with a perfectly balanced secondary beam then the
output strokes will be somewhat equally matched.

If you bias the beam to one side then the torque is not evenly split and one side
of the stroke will be stronger than the other. A good example is the "hammer"
machine where more power is diverted to the hammer stroke.

Ron
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: Vladimir256 on April 04, 2007, 03:46:22 AM
Quote
It can be either. If you start with a perfectly balanced secondary beam then the
output strokes will be somewhat equally matched.

If you bias the beam to one side then the torque is not evenly split and one side
of the stroke will be stronger than the other. A good example is the "hammer"
machine where more power is diverted to the hammer stroke.

Thank you for your response. So you are saying that a better output will be achieved if the torque is greater on the output side of the beam?

Also, one possible way to test this device is to hold the beam stationary, raise the pendulum to a certain height, and measure how long it takes for the pendulum to come to a stop. Then compare that time with the time it takes to stop if the beam is free to move.
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: i_ron on April 05, 2007, 01:02:57 AM
Quote
It can be either. If you start with a perfectly balanced secondary beam then the
output strokes will be somewhat equally matched.

If you bias the beam to one side then the torque is not evenly split and one side
of the stroke will be stronger than the other. A good example is the "hammer"
machine where more power is diverted to the hammer stroke.

Thank you for your response. So you are saying that a better output will be achieved if the torque is greater on the output side of the beam?

Also, one possible way to test this device is to hold the beam stationary, raise the pendulum to a certain height, and measure how long it takes for the pendulum to come to a stop. Then compare that time with the time it takes to stop if the beam is free to move.

Vladimir,

What are you calling the "output side of the beam"? The beam has two strokes,
an up stroke and a down stroke, right? What I was saying was if you bias the
beam to be heavy to one side or the other then you affect the torque output
ratio of these two strokes.

What I found is if you let the beam flop up and down unimpeded it will kill the
pendulum. The beam must be doing work so as to restrict the beams motion.
With no load on the beam it will go into parasitic oscillations and play havoc
with the operation of the pendulum.

This is understandable when we remember le botafumeiro, where a group of men
provide input to the pendulum by raising the pendulum on the down swing!

So if we drop the pendulum on the down swing no good will come of it. But as
well it should be clearly understood that raising the pendulum on the down swing
is horrendously energy intensive. This is the worst case scenario for inputing
maintaining energy to the pendulum ...and this is your answer Pilatte. It will take all
or more of the secondary beam's energy to drive the pendulum from this input point.   

Ron





Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: Vladimir256 on April 05, 2007, 04:37:39 AM
Quote
What are you calling the "output side of the beam"? The beam has two strokes,
an up stroke and a down stroke, right? What I was saying was if you bias the
beam to be heavy to one side or the other then you affect the torque output
ratio of these two strokes.

By the output side I mean the longer side opposite the pendulum. Is the device more efficient if more weight is added to this side, or is that detrimental?

For those who are testing this device, remember: the potential energy input into the pendulum (in joules) is found by the formula mgh m=mass of pendulum (in kg) g=9.8 m/s h=height in meters that the center of mass of the pendulum is raised.

Although Milkovic's flashlight experiment was somewhat helpful, the part where he showed that the flashlight used for the input powered 9 others was unconvincing. He obviously input more energy then required to light the one flashlight on each stroke because his hand+the flashlight had kinetic energy when it struck the pendulum.
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: Mollieman on April 05, 2007, 03:55:28 PM
Hello people, I am new to your site but have being checking out ou devices for some time now.
This one looks promising. Think about this, Use a powerful permant magnet for the pendulium, place an electromagnet at one end of the stroke, pulse the emagnet with a spring switch actuated by pendulium shaft, some adjustment would have to be done to determine the # of strokes the pendulium would freefall before the emagnet assist would be needed, but I think the final device could be used to power a generator.

ANYBODY WHO DOES NOT BELIEVE IN PERPETUAL MOTION HAS NEVER SEEN THE SUN!
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: acp on April 05, 2007, 04:17:27 PM
Hello mollieman, welcome to overunity.com......

Can you draw a diagram to help explain your idea? A thousand pics are worth a single word etc. thousand er whatever it was...... a picture is worth a th...

Quote
ANYBODY WHO DOES NOT BELIEVE IN PERPETUAL MOTION HAS NEVER SEEN THE SUN!

Can you elaborate on this?

Regards

Albert
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: i_ron on April 05, 2007, 05:12:57 PM
Quote

By the output side I mean the longer side opposite the pendulum. Is the device more efficient if more weight is added to this side, or is that detrimental?

For those who are testing this device, remember: the potential energy input into the pendulum (in joules) is found by the formula mgh m=mass of pendulum (in kg) g=9.8 m/s h=height in meters that the center of mass of the pendulum is raised.

Although Milkovic's flashlight experiment was somewhat helpful, the part where he showed that the flashlight used for the input powered 9 others was unconvincing. He obviously input more energy then required to light the one flashlight on each stroke because his hand+the flashlight had kinetic energy when it struck the pendulum.

Not so. His hand + the flashlight was not in contact with the pendulum, only
the sprung lever actually makes contact.

The secondary lever is akin to a teeter totter. two boys of equal weight at an
equal distance make it go with a modest kick off of one pair of legs.

One fat man and one small boy can still teeter totter if you adjust the fulcrum.

If you add too much weight to the output side in a Veljko device the pendulum will
not lift it.

The output side of the secondary arm has two strokes, an up and a down.

Think of it this way if you wish... the pendulum, on it's down stroke, lifts the
counter weight. Gravity lowers the counter weight on the pendulum's up stroke.

You can extract this resulting force equally on both strokes, or bias it to favor one
or the other stroke.

Ron








Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: Vladimir256 on April 06, 2007, 03:58:17 AM
Quote
Not so. His hand + the flashlight was not in contact with the pendulum, only
the sprung lever actually makes contact.

Yes, but that lever is being hit with more force then necessary to light the light.

Quote
Think of it this way if you wish... the pendulum, on it's down stroke, lifts the
counter weight. Gravity lowers the counter weight on the pendulum's up stroke.

You can extract this resulting force equally on both strokes, or bias it to favor one
or the other stroke.

Does putting more torque on the side opposite the pendulum increase the up or sown stroke.

Also, can a pendulum on a string instead of a bar work just as well?
Title: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: brantc on April 07, 2007, 08:11:28 AM
I dont think I have made any posts in this forum, but I have to for this one. I have been studying gravity, a new model based on the aether. The reason why you get more energy out of this device is because it follows the true motion of a gravity impulse as predicted here.
http://ourworld.compuserve.com/homepages/dp5/aethergrav.htm

Specifically this section,
http://ourworld.compuserve.com/homepages/dp5/aethergrav.htm#g4

This graphic describes the trues shape of a gravity impulse.
http://ourworld.compuserve.com/homepages/dp5/cycloid3.jpg

As you can see no other pendulum design follows this shape except this one.
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: Mollieman on April 07, 2007, 04:07:39 PM
Why are we all more concerned about the exact ou # of this machine than about the fact that the machine does what it is clamed to do?
Build the machine using a heaver lever and pendulium, for the pendulium I suggest a permanent magnet with a lift capacity of 200 lbs or more, behind the pendulium place another upright shaft to which is attached an electromagnet, operate the emagnet with a spring switch on a cam attached to the pendulium shaft. As the pendulium swings by the switch it will pulse the emagnet. The combination of the magnetic pendulium and the emagnet should keep the pendulium in motion.
A generator powered by the lever will keep the battery which powers the emagnet charged and produce electrical energy for household use.

REMEMBER THE KISS RULE AND TRY TO THINK OUTSIDE THE BOX!
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: Vladimir256 on April 08, 2007, 06:49:18 PM
For all those who are Milkovic believers:

Above the long arm of the lever place a wheel that will be hit when the lever rises. Attached to the wheel is a weight that rises when the wheel is turned. measure the input energy of the pendulum by PE=mgh (only raise the pendulum once and release it), then see how much energy the lever is able to put in the weight on the wheel by PE=mgh. If it is really overunity the output should exceed the input.
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: magnetman12003 on April 12, 2007, 05:30:58 AM
Hi All,

I need opinions from those familiar with pendulum devices and ask if this device might have merit if the pendulum weight is adjusted properly.

It also depends if the external magnets can slide/glide over the Mu metal at the ends of the Mu metal arc plate. Then we go "mechanically" from an attraction mode to a repel mode in a split second.   That kicks the pendulum at the top of its arc swing. Happens on both sides.

 You will have to read all the literature about Mu Metal if you dont understand what I am talking about. A good search engine will take you there.


Tom
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: d3adp00l on April 12, 2007, 07:33:24 AM
It looks like pretty simple leverage to me. move the pendulum a greater amount than the end of the lever. figure the amount of potential energy stored in the pendulum by moving it transfer that through the ratio of the lever and there in is the amount of energy to do work. I would concede o/u if the end of the pendulum was attached to a perm magnet in a coil to charge another coil with Fe core to pull the pendulum at the right time to keep it all moving forever. A cap might be needed to store the charge with a pressure switch to close the circuit.
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: Kevlar on April 14, 2007, 09:08:39 PM
Magnetman,

A couple things I see as problematic with your design.
Mu metal is really not that good a magnetic shield and the amount of material needed would change the energy in the pendulum since the Mu arc is opposite the pendulum weight.  As you increase the pendulum wieght, you would also need to increase the magnet strength (size) which would require more shielding.  I think from your drawing, if you were to actually build this design you would see no effect on the pendulum as the repel force is equalized on each side, you are taking away energy and replacing it equally without adding anything extra to counter common friction.

Also note that if you interact with the pendulum outside it's pivot you are changing the force on the lever and the position at which the pendulum starts and stops it's swing.
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: jbowe on April 16, 2007, 04:46:23 AM
Very interesting concept.  Been reading thru the 13th but skipped to the last page.  I have a couple of thoughts to offer.  Not sure if they have been mentioned in the pages 14 thru 40.  Anyway,  could the pendulum weight be a magnet?  If so, it seems that an electromagnet could be positioned in a way to provide a timed shot of repelling force upon the pendulum during its descent thus giving it somewhat of a shove on its way down.  I perceive the electromagnetic force could be obtained via solar power via storage batteries eliminating draw from the device's output.

Thanks for listening.

jb
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: magnetman12003 on April 16, 2007, 07:14:13 PM
Hi All,

Thanks for your input on this device idea.  I constructed it and as you foretold- It did not work.  I dont ever give up--

I am currently working on a SMOT idea in the "Working SMOT RAMP from Tom Ferko" section in this same forum.  Uses two magnetic wheels revolving around an axle center pivoting 360 degrees.  If interested check that out on page 32.  Need input.


Tom
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: nwman on April 16, 2007, 08:03:28 PM
Very interesting concept.  Been reading thru the 13th but skipped to the last page.  I have a couple of thoughts to offer.  Not sure if they have been mentioned in the pages 14 thru 40.  Anyway,  could the pendulum weight be a magnet?  If so, it seems that an electromagnet could be positioned in a way to provide a timed shot of repelling force upon the pendulum during its descent thus giving it somewhat of a shove on its way down.  I perceive the electromagnetic force could be obtained via solar power via storage batteries eliminating draw from the device's output.

Thanks for listening.

jb

Just to comment. If you use solar energy to power it then it become a solar generator and wasts some of the electrical energy on the mechanical parts of the setup. It would be more efficient to just pull the power off the solar cell. Keep thinking.

Tim
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: gilligan on April 17, 2007, 02:24:59 AM
heres a pendulum thought to ponder. P.S. I Hosted it on a free place so its spam heaven.
hope it works. :(
sorry I didnt see that you could host it here gonna try that also. :)
well it worked but I had to add the .avi to the end of the name. ???

http://www.vidiLife.com/index.cfm?f=media.play&vchrMediaProgramIDCryp=71B30578-377B-4296-A49A-5
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: supersam on April 17, 2007, 03:12:05 AM
hey gilligan,

looks like a dual osicilator to me.  did you ever buid it?  has anyone ever ran a simulation on something like that.  i wonder where all the power is going to go?

lol
sam
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: d3adp00l on April 17, 2007, 06:45:20 AM
I wish I was as good at animation as most of you guys seem to be. nice avi.
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: gilligan on April 17, 2007, 10:50:52 PM
hey gilligan,

looks like a dual osicilator to me.  did you ever buid it?  has anyone ever ran a simulation on something like that.  i wonder where all the power is going to go?

lol
sam
No sam I have not run a simulation on it.  I wish that guy with the MIT whiteboard would scribble it up and give it a simulation run though I'd be interested to see how it fares.
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: wizkycho on April 18, 2007, 12:36:13 AM
Hi all !

When I first saw this pendulum oscilator system ... I was astonished that something so simple
has not allready been built and powering our houses from middle age to this day. This Veljkos oscilator system had one small flaw so it can be built every time and work every time predictibly.
 This resolution of mine is small contribution to great Veljkos work and toughts and now
we have complete easy to build solution to our energy crisis...till we think of electronic analogy
of this tremendous mechanicall system. Every house, even every flat can have it's own
self sustaining generator, that is why we came here. Many Thanks to Harty who invested so much energy, will, knowledge ...
 We can say that finaly we have a device that can make us independent from everydays non
productive jobs that not only wastes our time, energy ... these jobs we DO are actually helping
destroing all thats worth...even the planet we live on...we cannot even quit... This paradox must STOP, sooner the better.

greetings !

benzzzzzzzzziiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiinnnnnnnnnnnnnnnn

Igor
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: wizkycho on April 18, 2007, 01:45:12 AM
hi again !

well maybe I didn't tought it through enough... seems like i have only shortened one side
(input arm) and if so the mass of input weight must increasse proportionaly to be able to lift output arm weight...
something else should be done to lower input altitude change in case when output allowed to
lift mass higher.
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: Vladimir256 on April 19, 2007, 03:48:42 PM
Wizkycho,

Why does your design have a second pendulum near the fulcrum?
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: gtarrant on April 19, 2007, 07:46:26 PM
A pendulum driven hammer..  8)
My first thought was slap a piezo crystal in there where that hammer strikes.
 ::)

 ;) Post results please :P

Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: gyulasun on May 02, 2007, 01:38:48 PM
Hi All,

I found this interesting link referenced in Naudin's yahoo list.  It deals with harnessing secondary oscillations in connection with Milkovic dual mechanical oscillating setup.

http://www.keelytech.com/news.html

Gyula
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: ChileanOne on May 02, 2007, 04:16:40 PM
Hello Gyulasun!

Thanks for this link! I found it really interesting. I liked it specially because the author makes a point that even if Milkovic is partly wrong in his theoretical approach, that's not to stop to research experimentally.

I know that one rather well known scientist performed a full lagrangean analysis of Milkovic ideas, and found nothing OU on it. But, the scientist did not discourage Milkovic and told him that experimentation was the only way to try new ideas, and encourgaed him to follow that path. The experimental approach is what can save the day, as theories are not cast in stone and can always change.

Regards.
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: gaby de wilde on May 03, 2007, 01:50:03 PM
I know that one rather well known scientist performed a full lagrangean analysis of Milkovic ideas, and found nothing OU on it.

You have a link for us chilean?

thanks.  :)
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: ChileanOne on May 04, 2007, 01:36:00 AM
No link, sorry Gaby, I acquired the information in a discussion with this scientist in a closed forum.
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: gaby de wilde on May 05, 2007, 12:06:01 PM
PFFFFFFF !!!!

And you believe such nonsense?
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: FreeEnergy on May 05, 2007, 12:39:21 PM
lol
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: gaby de wilde on May 05, 2007, 04:27:25 PM
I know that one rather well known scientist performed a full lagrangean analysis of Milkovic ideas, and found nothing OU on it.

but... but... there is nothing "full analysis" about Lagrange.

and... and... there is nothing "well known" about the scientist either?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lagrangian_mechanics
Quote
This considerably simplifies many physical problems. For example, consider a bead on a hoop. If one were to calculate the motion of the bead using Newtonian mechanics, one would have a complicated set of equations which would take into account the forces that the hoop exerts on the bead at each moment.

The same problem using Lagrangian mechanics is much simpler. One looks at all the possible motions that the bead could take on the hoop and mathematically finds the one which minimizes the action. There are fewer equations since one is not directly calculating the influence of the hoop on the bead at a given moment. One of the key advantages of Lagrangian mechanics is that no vector quantities are involved in the calculations, which simplifies problems a great deal.

ROFL !
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: i_ron on May 05, 2007, 11:07:27 PM
Hi All,

I found this interesting link referenced in Naudin's yahoo list.  It deals with harnessing secondary oscillations in connection with Milkovic dual mechanical oscillating setup.

Gyula

Hi Gyula,

Hans is correct in saying that the beam placed in resonant motion will start a
stationary pendulum in motion. This is because of the radius change of the
pendulum suspension. But this is the "only" case where the non feedback to the
pendulum can be dis-proven.

All that is required is a link from the beam to a vertical linear slide and no motion
of the secondary beam will induce the pendulum to swing.

In other words a very long secondary beam with short vertical travel will minimize
the radius change, thus reduce to zero any feedback from the secondary beam.

Take Care, 
Ron





Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: JohninCR on May 06, 2007, 10:12:29 PM
While I believe the rig is nothing more than a lever, why not use simple voice coil motors to both extract the output and provide kicks to the pendulum?
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: tinu on May 07, 2007, 08:42:41 AM
Hi all,

1. Just to let you know, ChileanOne and gaby de wilde, that I would be interested in the above mentioned Lagrangean analysis, if available in the near future. It is very hard for me to believe that energy can be taken out of a gravitational field using a ?Milkovic device? because I can not see from where this energy can be taken. But let?s say for now that the device is promising and, of course, I?m just a reluctant person. Am I?  ???

2. Gyula, the reference you gave (http://www.keelytech.com/news.html) is very interesting, especially in the first part but then it contains at least two major flaws: first ? ?There is no way any radio receiver can put a load onto a radio transmitter? YES, THERE IS. In fact, a radio receiver (or simply an antenna) IS drawing more power from the emitter. Of course, the coupling quickly fades out with the distance but the effect is still there. Second (I can not cite because it extends over several paragraphs) ?human ear is very sensitive; it takes a pressure of only 10E-5 N/m2 to hear a sound, so that?s why hearing a radio broadcast with a passive receiver is possible; it requires tiny amounts of energy. That?s being said, I would be circumspect in taking the article as reference?

3. The whole problem of Milkovic is reducible imho to a basic question. It is known (from experience as well as from Newtonian physics) that a pendulum is in principle weightless at its upper point and it weights more that its own rest mass when crossing the vertical, due to centrifugal force. This is just basics, don?t shot yet. Now, if you give me a truly variable mass, I can easily build an OU machine, by simply lifting the said mass (and thus investing energy) when it is easy and then by letting it going down and perform work (and recovering energy) when it is heavier! If the mass would follow a variation like m=m0*sin(2*pi*f*t), like in a stationary pendulum, the OU device would work. But?

4. If you followed the above, Milkovic is about a device that has a ?variable mass? on one side (on left side, in all of his practical devices but water pump). The problem with that variable mass is that it is no longer zero once you try to lift it. That?s due to inertia, of course. Then, the second problem is that it will no longer weight more than its rest mass once you let it drop free. I don?t know if most can follow me but to be short, the mass is not truly variable and in any case it does not follow a sinusoidal function. So, the analysis may be relevant in makings things clear for us? And that?s why I started with 1 above.  ;)

Yours truly,
Tinu
?In the absence of light, dark prevails?
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: gyulasun on May 08, 2007, 01:02:02 AM

2. Gyula, the reference you gave (http://www.keelytech.com/news.html) is very interesting, especially in the first part but then it contains at least two major flaws: first ? ?There is no way any radio receiver can put a load onto a radio transmitter? YES, THERE IS. In fact, a radio receiver (or simply an antenna) IS drawing more power from the emitter. Of course, the coupling quickly fades out with the distance but the effect is still there. Second (I can not cite because it extends over several paragraphs) ?human ear is very sensitive; it takes a pressure of only 10E-5 N/m2 to hear a sound, so that?s why hearing a radio broadcast with a passive receiver is possible; it requires tiny amounts of energy. That?s being said, I would be circumspect in taking the article as reference?

Hi Tinu,

Thanks for your comments.  I mentioned the link because its owner seems to deal with Milkovic's device in a more scientific approach than most of other members here or elsewhere. I mean he tries to give reasons why he thinks the explanations / video demos from even Milkovic or from others are mainly based on show-like ones and I look forward to his approach with having two counter-rotating weights around a common axis. He may also fail to come out with proving the setup as overunity though, I do not say it is a 100% solution, only experiments can give answers. 

I think Ron's explanation/suggestion is ok to circumvent Hans objection but there is more to it.

I respectfully disagree with your mentioning the two 'flaws', I do not think they are flaws.  Why?  Because I think a transmitting antenna radiates its input power into the space it is placed in, it dissipates almost all of its input energy into the space wave impedance (around 377 Ohms) and regardless of the number of receiving (resonant or non-resonant) antennas placed in the same space / room around it, it radiates the power fed to it non-reciprocally: I do not think you could measure any loading effect on the transmitter by increasing the number of receiving antennas up to practical limits.  Of course when placing the rec antennas I assume considering NO nearfield but far field propagation of the waves so that unwanted coupling due to physical closeness of tr/rec antennas is not an issue.

I imagine all this as a current source works: whatever load you place on it the current does not change...  well, in practice this is within component limits of course.

On your second issue with the tiny amount of needed energy: it is true but above I meant on practical limits of the number of antennas can go up to thousands or millions, depending on the wavelength and still you will hear info with the same strength... there will be no load on the transmitter...   

I do not state that you can surely achieve overunity with using a great number of antennas for collecting more received power from a given transmitted power, because I do not know it for sure yet,  I say only that there is no loading effect on the transmitter when doing so.  A good (but rare) example on the lack of feedback between action-reaction.

Regards
Gyula
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: tinu on May 08, 2007, 09:20:39 AM
Gyula,

Please do not take it personally but I really don?t get it. The strength of the receiving radio signal is in any case not the same whether a single or one million antennas. That?s why radio signals can be shielded by a metallic/conductive net for instance, which is the exact equivalent of ?billion of antennas?. Behind the shielding you will not hear a thing or in the best case ? if you want me to be very rigorous- if you hear something it will be crystal clear that any signal you may detect there is severely attenuated. Why? ?

Ok, now you will probably tell that we are taking about antennas placed on the surface of the same sphere and not about antennas placed one behind the other. Ok but it is even simpler then. Surface of the sphere is known, energy flux is known and power is thereby also limited and equal to the product of first two.

Even more important, by placing a shielding net in the proximity of a radio transmitter, the power demand of the transmitter will increase, if allowed by its own electronics and by the power source. That?s plain experiments I?ve conducted. Almost anyone can reproduce them with basic equipments. And I?ve seen no limits by increasing the distance but strictly due to the detection sensitivity of the power taken by the transmitter. If one can lower this detection sensitivity at extremely low (practically impossible) levels, it will detect that you tune your radio receiver no matter what the distance is.  It is nothing more than resonance between the transmitter and receiver(s), I agree, but for me in order to digest something that I am presented on public domain, I have to see that the author is at least familiar with the field in discussion and that he/she does not make claims that are beyond what are real and already known facts. Otherwise, white and black will quickly become gray and not everyone is able to make the difference?

As about the impedance of free space, it is constant (according to existing and accepted theories), it is variable even in vacuum according to some new ideas (i.e. www.blazelabs.com ? one of the best page I?ve seen around; I?m not affiliated to it in any way but I highly recommend everyone to have at least a quick lecture), but it is clearly variable and just in approximation taken to be constant for others media than pure vacuum, that approximation being made strictly to make our life easier. The approximation works well for air but it doesn?t work that well (actually is far from that, failing to work at all) for water ? just to mention one other media.

Point 2 of my previous message was the least important. Sorry to digress on it.
What about 3 a 4? At least they are on topic, and I was hoping that it will shed some light on Milkovich device for those less familiar with mechanics and gravitation?

Respectfully,
Tinu
?In the absence of light, dark prevails?
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: Dact on May 22, 2007, 05:36:45 AM
 :-[

I'm a newcomer here, and only watched the video once, but was not impressed. I assume the lever arm was balanced with the pendulum in place. Ok, so there is equal weight on both sides of the fulcrum. When the pendulum swings and reaches it's farthest advance, it weighs NOTHING, so the other end of the bar FALLS. Nothing but gravity here!
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: cyberdust on May 23, 2007, 02:17:12 PM
Hello? It does not only look fake, but it is a joke. What does it mean power (symboled with F in the original diagram) becomes zero, and so it weights less than the other side and the other side gets havier and you have power out put, soory but that's physics that even kids in kindergarten know better. A pendulum gains and loses energy, not F (gravity). It sould be marked with P in all the pictures. And zero energy does not mean zero gravity. It is only exchanging potential energy with kinetic energy. ?No hammer will ever jump up and down. The right side has the equal weight as the left side. No energy gain at all. I hate to repeat myself, bbut all the video is a joke aimed to simpletons. Now that typed, I demand my 2 cents be given back to me for the honour I granted you to enlighten from all your delusions.
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: tinu on May 23, 2007, 05:15:07 PM

Yes, I?m a bit skeptic too. After many years of device testing, it is not normal, no matter how limited funds are, for Milkovic not being able to conduct better measurements and, even worst, to mix forces, power and energy.

But as skeptic as I am, I still believe that there is something worth to be investigated there. After all, there are at least two experiments partially documented, besides the dynamo-lights: one is that in comparison with other oscillators and the other one ? even more relevant from energetic point of view ? is with pistons. Look again please at http://www.veljkomilkovic.com/Images/Measurement1.JPG
and table given in http://www.veljkomilkovic.com/Images/Measurement3.jpg
Now, for the first one, it is not clear that the initial potential energy was taken into account neither the fact that drag effects on pistons are more significant at low forces. But for the second one, why is it oscillating the system for 78 cycles as compared with 37 and 21?!!!
Of course, it is still possible that some other hidden factors are behind the above values, but still the ratio is more than two!
What about these two experiments? Can you dismiss them too at ease?

So, Dact and Cyberdust, let me say these as a physicist, hopefully an open-minded one: According to the existing laws, our understanding of universe is very limited. The understanding based on average formal education is even more limited. For instance, most of us were told that since the gravitational field is conservative, no energy can be extracted out of it using a closed mechanical setup. This is not always correct. At a deeper analysis, even classical mechanics predicts that a gyroscope is able to extract energy from the rotational movement of Earth. (Don?t get too excited ? the device is very impractical, almost impossible to be built). But the functional equivalent of this ?free gravitational generator? is a toy you can have and play with ? Power Ball. (Sorry ? I have no intention to advertise).
My 2 cents in return: It would be so easy to say that nothing can be done but if we consider that no one is able to define the mechanism of gravity as of today, would it be really wise?

No offense intended, just thoughts for hungry minds.
And welcome aboard!

Tinu
?In the absence of light, dark prevails?
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: Dact on May 23, 2007, 08:34:53 PM
To both Cyberdust and Tinu:

Thank you both for your replies. My short post was aimed at reinvigorating this debate, and was based only on initial observation and an instant analysis and theory, without any benefit of formal training in any persuasion other than classical electrical theory. That is why I enjoy this site, and others like it, so much, as it makes me feel like Isaac Newton, living in a world of the unknown, with apples falling all around. Unlike Newton, however, I have the benefit of knowledge and answers from individuals such as you, learned thinkers who are willing to share their knowledge and ideas through forums like these, which I am sure will quickly lead to the answer we are all looking for. My job is only to ask questions, of which I have many.

Here's one:

What IS the weight of the mass at the end of the pendulum at the end of it's swing?

Dact
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: cyberdust on May 23, 2007, 09:34:07 PM
The weights are always the same, and that?s the clue to the mystery. If one looks carefully, the right side is shifted when the left side with the pendulum weight is in its highest position. That means, if the pendulum is stretched, the left side times distance is ?heavier? than the right one, and so it is shifting the right side, whereas when the pendulum is moved to its right highest position, the right side wins the game with the rods. You have always to apply exactly the force needed to shift the pendulum to its highest position. That is exactly the amount of energy needed to shift the right side. It would be quite easier if professor Linkovic used some banal instruments like scales to write down all the forces that are applied to the rods, if he measured distances etc and gives us full details of his calculations and his results, instead of claiming such nonsense. Playing with flashlights do not satisfy our curiosity.


Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: i_ron on May 24, 2007, 01:50:29 AM
The weights are always the same, and that?s the clue to the mystery. 


Let me help you with your understanding.

Hold a 10 Kg pendulum by its pivot point (axle)
Have your assistant lift the pendulum to the three or nine o'clock position.

Your are right, the pendulum will still weigh 10 Kg's... but how much weight will you
feel?  next to NONE, right.

Have your assistant drop the pendulum... when it reaches the bottom how much will
it weigh? still 10 Kg's?  What I am saying is, you might not even be able to stop it
because it could easily double it's stationary weight.

But to be practical a 180? swing requires a lot of energy. 120? is reasonable and
the weight change at the pendulum pivot point approximates the "standing" weight
of the pendulum, ie: 10 Kg's in our example.

So on each upward swing, left and right, of the pendulum, the pivot point on the secondary arm experiences a minus 5 Kg's of force...and on the bottom of the swing, plus 5Kg's of force, in our example. The force needed to maintain the pendulum's swing is relatively the same in any case. But it is the weight change on the pivot
point, that is mounted on the secondary arm, that allows the secondary arm to do work.

Ron




Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: Dact on May 24, 2007, 06:22:14 AM
 :) Thanks for the explanations! My initial, brief observation of the video only focused on the pivot point, and my conclusion that there was no "apparent" downward force on that spot at the end of either swing, which I admit, I visualized at the horizontal.

One more question. Does the initial energy input derive from the potential energy in the ball before dropping it, the kinetic energy exerted to lift it, or a combination?

Dact
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: tinu on May 24, 2007, 08:58:27 AM
If one looks carefully, the right side is shifted when the left side with the pendulum weight is in its highest position. That means, if the pendulum is stretched, the left side times distance is “heavier” than the right one, and so it is shifting the right side, whereas when the pendulum is moved to its right highest position, the right side wins the game with the rods. 


Cyberdust,

This is not correct. It?s precisely opposite: the right side is shifted when the left side with the pendulum weight is in its LOWER position. This happens due to the centrifugal force acting on the swinging pendulum. When the pendulum weight is in its highest position, the right side (the hammer) simply begins to fall under the gravity due to its own weight.

Static analysis of forces involved and their associated angular momentum is not enough to explain the device. Then analysis became soon very complex because the pendulum oscillates in a variable-accelerated reference system. One component of the acceleration is given by gravity (g) and it is well known but then there is the other one, adding to or subtracting from g, given by the lever movement. And the movement of that lever is not easily analyzable because the lever is stopped suddenly when the hammer reach its lower point. This involves a sudden change in acceleration which is felt by (is transmitted to) the pendulum; in theory this is a kind of discontinuity (infinite acceleration) but in practice the acceleration must have a finite value. Nonetheless, it may be muuuch larger than g, thus substantially affecting the pendulum.

Up to my understanding to this day, a significant part of the ?mystery? may be hidden in this very short collision between the hammer and its anvil. Otherwise, all we have there is a system composed of two classic oscillators.

For other questions, please have a look on my former post on the previous page. Here is an excerpt of it:
3. The whole problem of Milkovic is reducible imho to a basic question. It is known (from experience as well as from Newtonian physics) that a pendulum is in principle weightless at its upper point and it weights more that its own rest mass when crossing the vertical, due to centrifugal force. This is just basics, donÂ’t shot yet. Now, if you give me a truly variable mass, I can easily build an OU machine, by simply lifting the said mass (and thus investing energy) when it is easy and then by letting it going down and perform work (and recovering energy) when it is heavier! If the mass would follow a variation like m=m0*sin(2*pi*f*t), like in a stationary pendulum, the OU device would work. ButÂ…

4. If you followed the above, Milkovic is about a device that has a ‘variable massÂ’ on one side (on left side, in all of his practical devices but water pump). The problem with that variable mass is that it is no longer zero once you try to lift it. ThatÂ’s due to inertia, of course. Then, the second problem is that it will no longer weight more than its rest mass once you let it drop free. I donÂ’t know if most can follow me but to be short, the mass is not truly variable and in any case it does not follow a sinusoidal function. So, the analysis may be relevant in makings things clear for usÂ… And thatÂ’s why I started with 1 above.  ;)

Restpectfully,
Tinu
"In the absence of light, dark prevails"
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: i_ron on May 25, 2007, 02:59:27 AM
:) Thanks for the explanations! My initial, brief observation of the video only focused on the pivot point, and my conclusion that there was no "apparent" downward force on that spot at the end of either swing, which I admit, I visualized at the horizontal.

One more question. Does the initial energy input derive from the potential energy in the ball before dropping it, the kinetic energy exerted to lift it, or a combination?

Dact

Hi Dact,

I am not sure as I follow your question. Treat the pendulum as the motor that drives the secondary arm. As the pendulum cycles it imparts a plus minus force on the secondary arm.This causes the secondary arm to oscillate... within the confines of it's stops. The secondary arm is just a teeter totter. The springs (or the striking of the hammer) return some energy to reverse the motion... the little feet that push off, if you wish.

The pendulum requires a source of input, the one flashlight for example, but the
input is least when the secondary arm is stationary. Increasing the arm travel
requires increasing the input to the pendulum.

http://www.sciences.univ-nantes.fr/physique/perso/gtulloue/Meca/Oscillateurs/botafumeiro.html
 
This is a fun site to play with and shows that the monks were actually raising the
pendulum at the bottom of the stroke. This will put the pendulum over the top!
Unfortunately we are allowing the pendulum to drop at the wrong time... thus we
should not over do the arm movement.... or we pay a penalty.

Ron


 




Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: Dingus Mungus on May 26, 2007, 02:49:56 AM
I just want to add something to this discussion, but I've moved on from researching this device. During my months of virtual replication and emulation of the device I discovered several examples where a pendulum attached to this secondary oscillating arm would swing for longer and with greater kinetic energy then a duplicate pendulum. That is a rather interesting observation since the pendulum with more parts/friction/resistance was supplied the same starting kintic energy.

I theorized that the reason for this excess energy was improbability...

Let me explain:
The probability of the horizontal arm being at 0d with 0ke and the vertical pendulum arm being at 0d with 0ke is far less than a single vertical arm reaching 0d with 0ke. Small ammounts of gravitaional potential enery were taken from the horizontal arm when its <> 0d and the vertical arm == 0d, and visa versa.

I know thats a rather sloppy explanation, but one day I'll draw out some diagrams to further explain it. More importantly though... I was not able to find an example that provided anything close to 100% of efficiency, but I did find drastic efficiency improvements when using a duped pendulum to compare run times/input energy.

Remember though... This device is in no way even 100% efficient! If it was even 100% efficient the pendulum would never slow, and if it was 1200% efficient the pendulum would swing faster and higher the longer it ran. So clearly... The title of the thread is wrong. Altho it can make a pendulum 2x-3x More efficient. AKA runs 2x-3x longer...
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: i_ron on May 26, 2007, 05:06:41 AM
I was not able to find an example that provided anything close to 100% of efficiency[/b],

Dingus

There is no simulation program that models Veljko's pendulum.
Therefore your results are inconclusive... garbage in equals garbage out.


"*"This device is in no way even 100% efficient! If it was even 100% efficient the pendulum would never slow, and if it was 1200% efficient the pendulum would swing faster and higher the longer it ran."*"

But what is your method of extracting energy from the secondary beam and how are
you reapplying it to the pendulum? I posted pictures and video of my on going
experiment.... where are yours? How can you post conclusions when you have no
valid data?

What you are saying with that statement is you haven't a clue as to how this works. 

Ron
Title: Transmitter / Receiver arguement
Post by: Earl on May 26, 2007, 06:55:26 PM
I believe this arguement does not apply to loadless mechanical feedback.

One can always insert between transmitter and antenna a magneto-ferrite electrical device called an isolator or circulator.  These are widely used for UHF, microwave and optical transmitters.

It should be obvious that an infrared transmitting diode is not affected by any infrared receiving diode.

Regards, Earl
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: Monk on May 29, 2007, 07:51:39 AM
I joined this forum with the entire intent of discussing this thread.

I've looked into cold fusion (too much power needed to make deutirium), Nuke power (currently a second year nuke student, too many licenses needed for that), HHO gas (just a fossil fuel knockoff really).

But this one gravity machine (to me) seems to have alot of promise.

I dont think the issue is whether or not the pendulum keeps going, but the energy needed to move the pendulum versus the energy gained on the other side.

The pendulum will stop, thats a given. But is the energy output enough to keep the pendulum running.

I plan to build one, and hook the thing up to a generator, and have a solenoid kick the pendulum at every return (maybe, depending on the voltage output I can get from the generator.)

Am I positive this will work... Nope, but I have high hopes, and thats what everyone in this forum has, is high hopes for unity/overunity. I am hoping that I could get overunity so I can put a pump on the end of this bad boy and run a moped on compressed gas. How awesome would that be?
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: sevich on May 29, 2007, 01:12:28 PM
I agree with i_ron

In my opinion this, "Milkovic" thread is GROSSLY OVERRATED!! .......we need more proven substence.......SOMEBODY, PLEASE!!! ....   :D


No offence Mr Milkovic
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: sevich on May 29, 2007, 01:22:19 PM
..
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: mrgalleria on May 30, 2007, 01:45:39 AM
Aloha All, first post.
I think Milkovic gave all of you a good spanking. You missed the point entirely! If you watch the entire video carefully, you should note several things.
1. The video is not for scientists. The reasons should be self apparent from the beginning and I am not going to bother to explain it if you don't already understand.
2. Everybody is talking about the pendulum, with scientific confusion and contradiction. Did anyone notice near the end what the real truth of the device was or was it only me? It was the most elegant and simple example of alternating current. This primitive device is just a window to the truth about energy and gravity. Maybe some of you just think you know so much that you cannot understand that.
3. Look at the patents and drawings at the end, this man is way past the simple device he presented.
4. Look at his solution for unemployment. This fellow is so crafty that he showed this solution to distract governments, and big business from considering his work a threat.
If any of you are so darn smart as you would leave us to believe, then take this primitive device to the next level. Learn what it is telling you about how nature uses the limitless energy of gravity.
Sorry to be so harsh, just cut it out will you.
Bill
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: aleks on May 30, 2007, 08:11:36 AM
I guess it has been proven scientifically this oscillator works:
http://www.overunity.com/index.php?topic=1763.350 (below you can see power output graph which is 10 times higher than the input graph)

Or does somebody think Working Model 2D is not a scientific application based on newtonian laws?

So, I guess the question is closed. Mega-Corporations now have to 'invent' new laws that do not allow such use of gravity, in order to continue world-wide slavery.
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: mrgalleria on May 30, 2007, 11:17:27 PM
Aloha,
Good point. But Nature uses gravity so well. Rivers offer a good example of energy transmission. Moving huge amounts of water requires huge amounts of energy, yet we make the mistake of taking that for granted as we watch a river flowing. Instead think about how much real energy it takes to move that water, and then ask yourselve "where does that real energy come from?" Milkovic has shown us what gravity energy is, and how it is transmitted. Gravity should now be renamed electro-gravity as gravity is electricity.
The water in the river has taken the electro-gravity that is moving vertically and transmitted it into energy working horizontally. Yet there is so much excess available energy, that if you stand on a boat in the river your body weight does not change. It seems that you should be lighter, as some of the energy (electro-gravity) is being used by the water.
With this knowledge, we can move forward developing devices that capitalize on electro-gravity. Since gravity is electric, then anti-gravity is electric. Many things in Nature exhibit anti-gravity effects- notibly gases. When we understand the electrical differences between the gravity and anti-gravity elements, we can achieve anti-gravity, or better- controlled gravity (electro-gravity).
Bill
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: aleks on May 31, 2007, 06:22:31 AM
Gravity as electro-magnetic force is an old idea it seems, but mainstream physics does not think so. As far as I know, general relativity postulates gravity to be an effect of mass, and it does not relate to electricity in any direct way. (it is that bad)

Of course, I think otherwise. I perceive our earthly gravity as an everlasting electricity flow of ultra low (or zero-constant) frequency, and of considerable power (we people and various physical objects are particles like electrons which "flow" in the earthly gravity field). The only problem is to create a resonator that "connects" to that flow, and which oscillates with it. Of course, you can't do that with antenna or a cable, as you have to have a difference in potential while there is no considerable difference in electrical potential of gravity-electricity in a given small area of space. So, the only way to extract work out of gravity-electricity is to create a mechanical resonator that converts its motion into electricity, which converts energy of a vastly larger system (earthly gravity) into a small closed electrical system composed of generator, battery and various load.

"That's wishful thinking" one would like to say? But one have to prove the model posted by xnonix is wrong, and that Working Model 2D is wrong as well in that respect.

Beside that wind generators are an example of devices that convert energy of a larger system into energy of a closed system.
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: aparodox2003 on May 31, 2007, 07:42:01 AM
cevich is right, this looks like it runs off the same idea as a teader-todder--where the fat guy sits 10 feet away from the pivot point and the child sits 5 feet.  If this is OU then so is the pry-bar i use to loosen nuts on my engine, If i tried to use my fingers it would never let loose but with a pry-bar i can break it in 2
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: aleks on May 31, 2007, 08:20:59 AM
cevich is right, this looks like it runs off the same idea as a teader-todder--where the fat guy sits 10 feet away from the pivot point and the child sits 5 feet.  If this is OU then so is the pry-bar i use to loosen nuts on my engine, If i tried to use my fingers it would never let loose but with a pry-bar i can break it in 2

No, it is not similar. The fat guy does not rise as high as the light guy falls... While in this oscillator you can rise 25 kg like you are rising 2.5 kg to the same height. Of course, as xnonix model suggests, you first have to put the system into a surplus resonance (it takes about 10 seconds for his model - note that this does not necessarily increase the amplitude of the beam (spring limits it), but it does increase traction power of the beam, and it can't be limited without stopping the pendulum).

So, the power comes from 'out there'.. The good analogy would be an object made of a non-conductive material which nevertheless may carry an electrical charge. So, the system gains charge seemingly out of nowhere.
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: mrgalleria on May 31, 2007, 09:37:58 AM
Aloha,
aparadox- your pry bar is a more effiecient way to do work with your arm vs your fingers, of course no one will argue with that.
You seem to need some help understanding what Milkovic is teaching. Maybe this will help.
I am going to assume that as a child you did swing on a home swing set. Do you remember the effect that occurs that makes swinging so facinating? It's that weightless sensation you get at that point where the swing reaches the end of travel- sometimes you float off the seat. Well, at that moment you are not weightless, it's just that the energy that was pulling you downwards has been transfered up the chain, across and down the pipes which form the structure of the device, and that energy can be so great that it will lift one or more pipes off the ground momentarily, at the precise moment you feel weightless. It cannot be a mechanical effect (as with the pry bar). It is instantanious, quick like electricity.
Hydro-electric plants draw fractions of energy from movingwater via mechanical means. That proves that electricity is in moving water, and I previously explained how it got there. It is that simple, as it should be, as we knew it would be.
Now that we have a very basic understanding of energy transfer. We have to force ourselves to mentally abandon all of the current and past thinking (last 100+ years) of how we are using mechanical means of accomplishing work. Then we will have access to energy that is clean, harmless, and unlimited
Bill
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: mrgalleria on May 31, 2007, 09:59:06 AM
Aloha,
Pardon me. I wrote "of how we are using mechanical means of accomplishing work" when I should have written " of how we are using mechanical means of producing energy."
Aleks- you said "the power comes from 'out there'". Please, it's no great mystery. In fact, it's way to simple. It's just electro-gravity. You have been living in it all your life. Like wind, you cannot see it, but you see it's effect. A wire can have 200 volts in it, can you see the electricity? The electricity does not harm the wire, and it is not visable. Like gravity, electro-gravity.
Bill
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: aleks on May 31, 2007, 10:11:58 AM
Aleks- you said "the power comes from 'out there'". Please, it's no great mystery. In fact, it's way to simple. It's just electro-gravity. You have been living in it all your life. Like wind, you cannot see it, but you see it's effect. A wire can have 200 volts in it, can you see the electricity? The electricity does not harm the wire, and it is not visable. Like gravity, electro-gravity.
Bill
Surely I understand the situation. Electro-magnetic field is a given thing: we live in it, we are particles compared to it - this is a given. We are subject to gravity due to EM field that builds in and around our bodies, and because our bodies stop the natural earthly field from flowing - thus we have a differing potential than the field itself - and that's why we are attracted (field tries to move us out of its way).

But I'm trying to reason how the charge (energy) accumulates in this oscillatory system. Newtonian physical model proposed by xnonix shows it does accumulate in at least 10x amount compared to the input.

(sorry to be a bit off-topic, but such view on things may describe a recently increasing frequency of people spontaneous combustion evidences - it is scary since it is an uncontrollable thing, but nevertheless such event is possible given energy from the earthly gravity can be accumulated - it is just possible that some unfortunate earthlings open a door for such accumulation within their bodies - hypothesis of static electricity accumulation being a reason of combustion supports this view).
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: aleks on May 31, 2007, 06:45:42 PM
What also puzzles me in the xnonix model is that power on the spring end grows even after the "hand"'s impulse - by about 10% before the next impulse arrives (power on the beam should dampen with time - not increase even if for a short duration)... Exactly this fact looks anomalous - everything builds around it I think.

Also, as far as I understand, the spring in the model presents the active load (it is the same as creating torque in a motor generator out of a linear movement of the beam), and still it does not stop the power from increasing. While nay sayers here insist that the system will stop as soon as you will start drawing the power.

Maybe I'm missing something?

Maybe it is better to create xnonix model - not exactly 'wheel' or 'ball' mass model? xnonix model consists of straight poles of given weights. Also the point of application of impulse to the pendulum may be important. Motor driving pendulum and sharing base with the beam may not be the best approach. An alternative would be a motor mounted on the ground that pulls pendulum via stiff rope by winding it on a pole a bit and then releasing the force, or also unwinding the rope back while the pendulum travels down. The rope being light should not be a limiting factor to the pendulum.
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: aparodox2003 on May 31, 2007, 08:54:38 PM
Ok, what i was trying to say is (imagin the device as a teeder todder-the fat guy on one end about 5 ft from the pivot point the light guy to componsate for the big guy now has to sit 10 ft from the pivot point so they can play the game)  Now if the light guy dosn't want to use his feet to go up and down, he can just move back and forth from his position.  That concludes the teeder todder part...........If he wanted to exert less 'work' to create the teeder todder effect he would us a secondary pivot point in this case he takes advantage of gravity by hanging from a rope and swinging on it (just like when we were kids-I went to the park ;D), and just like this machine my dad only had to give me one underdog and i could go for a few minutes.
The fat guy does not rise as far a the small guy falls because he is closer to the pivot point.


cevich is right, this looks like it runs off the same idea as a teader-todder--where the fat guy sits 10 feet away from the pivot point and the child sits 5 feet.  If this is OU then so is the pry-bar i use to loosen nuts on my engine, If i tried to use my fingers it would never let loose but with a pry-bar i can break it in 2

No, it is not similar. The fat guy does not rise as high as the light guy falls... While in this oscillator you can rise 25 kg like you are rising 2.5 kg to the same height. Of course, as xnonix model suggests, you first have to put the system into a surplus resonance (it takes about 10 seconds for his model - note that this does not necessarily increase the amplitude of the beam (spring limits it), but it does increase traction power of the beam, and it can't be limited without stopping the pendulum).

So, the power comes from 'out there'.. The good analogy would be an object made of a non-conductive material which nevertheless may carry an electrical charge. So, the system gains charge seemingly out of nowhere.
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: aleks on May 31, 2007, 09:28:15 PM
That concludes the teeder todder part...........
Well, but how you'll describe surplus output from xnonix model? :)

On the other hand, I agree with some nay sayers that Milkovic did a bit 'bad' job when he used flashlight. He could use a rope with a simple force meter and show the reading (I guess a spring balance should be enough), and then use the same meter to measure force it takes to light a single flashlight (with flashlight being mounted on a stable stand). We could then see the effect better. If we light 9 flashlights with the same force as it takes to light a single flashlight then it's working (of course, after a first couple of pulls that put this system into resonance). Otherwise it's not.

But anyway xnonix model drives me nuts. I can't understand how it works and why it shows surplus energy... of course given, those are not free oscillations, but oscillations under load that transfer shown output energy to the spring (and to the anchored base which probably resembles energy sink point).
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: nandoanalog on May 31, 2007, 11:25:31 PM
 Hi. I know nothing about what you guys are talking about. I barely went to school...

 Today, about 5 hours ago, I came to this site, and it said that this device can put out more energy than you need to put in. So, I grabed some tools and build one of those devices.

 Well... It sure doesn`t put out more energy than I need to put in.

 So, can anyone give me some exact plans of how I should build it?
 
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: nandoanalog on June 01, 2007, 12:58:03 AM

 I just realized that this device just cant work. It`s not even 99% efficient.
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: Dingus Mungus on June 01, 2007, 01:59:38 AM
I made another setup much more intuitive.

Now the hand stroke is simulated in another way.

Have fun!

PS: Sorry for correlative posts.
(http://www.overunity.com/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=1763.0;attach=7483;image)

After analyzing this sim for hours last night:
First thing is "P output" is not actually output in any sense of the word.
The spring is acting like a flywheel, which is why output rises above input.
As soon as you apply any load at all, the excess energy is converted,
and the secondary arm begins runs at less than half the input wattage.
(50N spring VRS. 0.1N damper)

So this sim still proves my initial point...
Untill you start removing energy, putting it in is missleading.
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: Dingus Mungus on June 01, 2007, 02:07:39 AM
Aloha,
Pardon me. I wrote "of how we are using mechanical means of accomplishing work" when I should have written " of how we are using mechanical means of producing energy."
Aleks- you said "the power comes from 'out there'". Please, it's no great mystery. In fact, it's way to simple. It's just electro-gravity. You have been living in it all your life. Like wind, you cannot see it, but you see it's effect. A wire can have 200 volts in it, can you see the electricity? The electricity does not harm the wire, and it is not visable. Like gravity, electro-gravity.
Bill

Bill,

I couldn't help but notice you used the term "electro-gravity"...
How exactly did you unite "Electro-magnetism" and "gravity"?
The world of physics has been hunting for that equation for 50 years!
Please post it! BTW have you also united "strong/color force" and "gravity"?
Then you would have the "holy grail" of physics!

Looking forward to hearing more.
~Dingus
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: mrgalleria on June 01, 2007, 02:41:37 AM
Aloha,
Dingus Mungas- Regarding the term "electro-gravity". I just coined this term in this forum. I believe it should be used because I believe it more accurately describes what gravity is. Much thanks to Milkovik!
I cannot confuse others nor myself by arbitrarily introducing magnetism into the discussion, though it is true that magnetism can be implied to be at work here too.
To me, though, it's just not as apparent. Sorry, it is true that I am a very simple person, more of a realist than a physicist.
Bill
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: Dingus Mungus on June 01, 2007, 03:08:30 AM
Ahhh my bad, I was confused...

I had assumed you had united the theories of gravity and electromagnetism!
You see physicists have united electricity and magnetism by proving they were
the same force and phenomenom just observed differently. Then they ran in to
a snag... No one yet has been able to unite electromagnetism and gravity with
a single equation yet. So they are still considered two different kinds of force.
So unfortunately "electro-gravity" is probably a bad term to use until someone
finally figures out the whole unified theory thing first...

~Dingus
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: aleks on June 01, 2007, 07:01:25 AM
As soon as you apply any load at all, the excess energy is converted,
and the secondary arm begins runs at less than half the input wattage.
(50N spring VRS. 0.1N damper)

So this sim still proves my initial point...
Untill you start removing energy, putting it in is missleading.

But how can you be sure it is exactly a damper spring? It could be a stiff attraction spring that does not oscillate. Hence my question about free oscillations. If these are free oscillations then it is nothing special, at all, and the output graph can't be called 'power out'.

Beside that there is NO indication of pendulum's swing - while it should also 'oscillate' like the output graph. So, output graph may not be tied to swing, at all - it may be exactly the consumed power.

Comment from xnonix could be useful.
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: aleks on June 01, 2007, 09:00:50 AM
I had assumed you had united the theories of gravity and electromagnetism!
I wonder - if dielectric body carrying surface charge does start to move and accelerate in electromagnetic field, can this be construed to be equal to gravity? Can it be true that physicists are unable to equate electromagnetism to gravity just because they were unable to create electromagnetic system as powerful as the Earth core itself: i.e. because it is non-reproducible, and not because it is nonsense?
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: xnonix on June 01, 2007, 10:06:33 AM
Hi all,
after many studies in wm2d my conclusions are in this thread.

http://www.overunity.com/index.php/topic,2138.40.html

This thread is based on this device optimized for a circular movement.
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: aleks on June 01, 2007, 11:39:35 AM
Hi all,
after many studies in wm2d my conclusions are in this thread.

http://www.overunity.com/index.php/topic,2138.40.html

This thread is based on this device optimized for a circular movement.

I'm unable to follow your conclusions. Could you say your conclusions on the model you have posted on this Milkovic thread?

But what is more important - what kind of spring have you used? (wm2d is a bit expensive for me to try it myself)
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: Paul-R on June 01, 2007, 03:42:54 PM
Aloha,
Dingus Mungas- Regarding the term "electro-gravity". I just coined this term in this forum.
Oh, no you didn't !!!
Here is a google search using electrogravitics:
http://www.google.co.uk/search?hl=en&q=electrogravitics+boeing+b2&btnG=Search&meta=
Paul.
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: Dingus Mungus on June 02, 2007, 12:17:28 AM
http://www.overunity.com/index.php/topic,2138.40.html
Everyone in this thread should be in that thread about now...
I found something pretty neat at 6am this morn!
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: ChileanOne on June 02, 2007, 07:00:15 AM
I totally agree with Dingus Mungus!!!!

Everyone should be checking that Juhla thread! Dingus has managed to get a Perpetual motion model Working on WM2D based solely on pendulums and gravity.

Worthy of some serious replication.

Regards.
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: mrgalleria on June 02, 2007, 10:12:51 AM
Aloha All,
Paul-R- so, your calling me a liar? You can do better than that.
(just did google- electro-gravity)
I really like this forum, there are a lot of optimists here.
Aleks- I enjoy following your line of reasoning, very similar to mine.
But aside from that, sorry I don't know anything about simulation programs. I intend to learn though. Thanks for the introduction to this media.
Bill
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: eisenficker2000 on June 03, 2007, 07:50:31 PM
Hi anybody ever looked at the "Electric Pulse Pendulum Power Generator" ?

http://www.wipo.int/pctdb/en/wo.jsp?IA=WO2005100787&DISPLAY=DOCS
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: aleks on June 03, 2007, 08:43:37 PM
Hi anybody ever looked at the "Electric Pulse Pendulum Power Generator" ?

http://www.wipo.int/pctdb/en/wo.jsp?IA=WO2005100787&DISPLAY=DOCS

So, we are late with this discussion.. while we are arguing about 'possibility' others already take patents. :) And it is 1.5 years old already... However, its drawing is different from Milkovic device.
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: tinu on June 04, 2007, 08:59:53 AM
Well I don?t know much about patents but this one surely looks bs to me. Starting with the bottom of page 7, where it says that E=m*9.82*9.82*0.60=57.624 Nm, everything bellow goes erroneous. That?s because, if I?m not too old, E=m*g*h and NOT m*g*g*h. You figure the rest?

So, I come back with my kind request above, although off-topic: is this a mere patent application and is to be rejected (I suppose) or is this a valid patent? (I really hope it is not!!! Otherwise, it would very badly shake any faith I have in patents.)

Respectfully,

Tinu
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: aleks on June 04, 2007, 03:39:51 PM
Well I don?t know much about patents but this one surely looks bs to me. Starting with the bottom of page 7, where it says that E=m*9.82*9.82*0.60=57.624 Nm, everything bellow goes erroneous. That?s because, if I?m not too old, E=m*g*h and NOT m*g*g*h. You figure the rest?

Sorry, I may be totally wrong, but they are talking about pendulum - not about a single piece of weight (that potentially falls down)

From some textbook:
Pendulum, after falling to the point where height=0 instead of E=mgh acquires velocity V=2gh, and so it acquires kinetic energy that is equal to E=mV^2/2.

Beside that the unit was tested and results were confirmed. They are receiving continuous 60 W while invesing 16.8 W two-second pulses, at intervals of 4 seconds. So, 2/6*16.8=5.6 W/h results in 60 W/h output. Pretty huge, very close to performance of Milkovic device.
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: hartiberlin on June 04, 2007, 05:51:24 PM
The Milkovic principle seems to work as can be seen here in this simulation:

http://www.overunity.com/index.php/topic,2138.msg33596.html#msg33596
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: hartiberlin on June 04, 2007, 06:25:05 PM
Here is also a newer video from Mr. Milkovic.
Many thanks for mentioning my website in it !

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=6377655322209610872


Best regards, Stefan.
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: nightguy2 on June 23, 2007, 04:13:57 AM
Hello, I have posted a video to google of my replication of Veljko Milkovic's machine. Hope you find it interesting. The file name is veljkomilkovic01.
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: dailytool on June 23, 2007, 09:34:34 AM
Brilliant simple design! Now you just need a little generator to run off the wheel and some device to electrically swing the pendulum (to be run by the generator). I wonder how much the spring on the chain takes away from the overall performance. Is it a very light weight spring?

Here is the direct Google download link:

http://video.google.com/videogvp/veljkomilkovic01.gvp?docid=3218487552793730311
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: helmut on June 23, 2007, 12:30:08 PM
Hello Nightguy2
Well done.I also guess,that some of the Power is konsumed by the Spring.
Perhaps you can fix the chain on the oter position quite near to the point.where the
Pendulum is fixed on.

helmut
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: hartiberlin on June 23, 2007, 03:35:22 PM
Great video, well done,
here is the direct link to stream it in the browser:

http://video.google.de/videoplay?docid=3218487552793730311

Please keep us updated about any new progress.
Many thanks.

Regards, Stefan.
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: hartiberlin on June 23, 2007, 03:46:58 PM
Please try to couple a generator to the wheel and try to power the pendulum from this generator output via pulses to an electromagnet to kick the pendulum weight.
Many thanks.
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: magnusx on June 24, 2007, 07:44:21 AM
Hi all, great work going on here!
I'm new here but I've been interested in this stuff for ages.

 I thought of making a model of this device in Meccano but I'm a bit short of parts at the moment (I'll be working on it) - seems to me that you could check out the power of a real one by powering the swinging weight with a solenoid and gradually increasing the weight on the other end of the arm until it didn't rise . .
then you use that as a guide when you harness the output since it is short but strong oscillations, a little tricky to convert efficiently into rotary motion . . . .
Twelve times the input does seem pretty amazing though . . . ..
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: dailytool on June 24, 2007, 06:46:18 PM
Please try to couple a generator to the wheel and try to power the pendulum from this generator output via pulses to an electromagnet to kick the pendulum weight.
Many thanks.

Maybe someone has an old battery powered baby swing that they could convert:

http://www.amazon.com/Fisher-Price-Smart-Stages-Rocker-Swing/dp/B000NK5GJW
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: srgrimm on June 25, 2007, 06:03:42 AM
I must be missing something....the concepts he's decribing are things I figured out when I was about 10 I think. It's nothing more than transfer of energy via fulcrums and pendulums...and I might add this is what I would call a far-from-unity machine. As demonstrated with his flashlights, he was continuously pushing the pendulum with the other flashlight thus keeping enough energy into the system to cause enough force to bang the lever on the "test" flashlight. Given enough of a lever and a properly placed fulcrum and one could move the world...is that how it goes.
I'm sorry,afer about five minutes of watching this I thought it was a gag video....something to tease everyone with. This guy acts like he just discoved gravity or something....hey, but what do I know.
 ;)
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: VOR on July 02, 2007, 10:34:20 AM
Yeah,
And look at his oscillator pdf's...we're comparing voltage to power... Voltage = Current * Resistance... Power = Voltage*Current = Current^2*Resistance...Apples to oranges. All this mans done is show that yes conservation of momentum is still true...Mass*Velocity at time1 = Mass*Velocity at time2...lower mass, higher velocity, higher unloaded voltage...brb, i'm gonna get him a gold star...and you all get one too.
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: Dingus Mungus on July 10, 2007, 09:59:39 AM
Untill you've built it and tested it yourself you'll probably never believe it. Thank god there are researchers here willing to do the job since you would never bother. So please try not to belittle others hard work. Real losers don't even attempt.

I too am a skeptic but even in simulations I've seen some merit in this device.

~Dingus Mungus
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: shruggedatlas on July 11, 2007, 02:13:51 AM
Untill you've built it and tested it yourself you'll probably never believe it. Thank god there are researchers here willing to do the job since you would never bother. So please try not to belittle others hard work. Real losers don't even attempt.

I too am a skeptic but even in simulations I've seen some merit in this device.

~Dingus Mungus

I agree that it is noble to dedicate your time to something worthwhile, and what could be more worthwhile than a discovery leading to free energy for the entire world to use?  Such a discovery would probably end poverty and generally improve the lives of everyone.

However, I do believe that this noble task must be tempered by some common sense.  The device we have here simply demonstrates mechanical advantage.  I have no idea why this thread was started under the topic of "12 times more output than input."  Surely the OP is intelligent enough to know the difference between force and energy.  Without that distinction, we must include every lever, screw, pulley, inclined plane as an OU device!

Maybe an OU device is possible, maybe it is not.  What is clear is that pendulums and levers are not the answer, so maybe we should stop beating our heads against that particular wall.  This is stuff we learn in middle school science class.
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: hartiberlin on July 11, 2007, 04:55:08 AM
http://www.rexresearch.com/milkovic/milkovic.htm

Why don?t the skeptics read the papers from the professors doing the calculations ??
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: hartiberlin on July 11, 2007, 05:09:58 AM
http://www.veljkomilkovic.com/Images/Misljenje%204%20-%20Matematicka%20analiza%20-%20Tosic.pdf (http://www.veljkomilkovic.com/Images/Misljenje%204%20-%20Matematicka%20analiza%20-%20Tosic.pdf)
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: shruggedatlas on July 11, 2007, 05:46:18 AM
http://www.rexresearch.com/milkovic/milkovic.htm

Why don?t the skeptics read the papers from the professors doing the calculations ??

Why do you call this a paper from a professor?  The page clearly states that it was adopted from Milkovic's own website.  The inventors own claims cannot be used to validate the invention.

The second link you provide, the pdf document, is directly from Milkovic's website.

Looking at the water pump example, I do not see anything out of the ordinary.  Instead of pumping, the operator needs to keep pushing the pendulum (much like Milkovic, in his own video, needs to keep pushing the pendulum while his device is lighting the flashlight).  It is easier to push the pendulum, due to the mechanical advantage involved, but there is no energy gain here.
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: shruggedatlas on July 11, 2007, 05:51:00 AM
Additionally, a couple people have posted in this thread that they have built this device themselves.  (It is a fairly simple contraption, after all.)  Neither noticed any energy gain.  Why are you convinced that there is any gain at all, much less 9 to 1 or 12 to 1 or whatever is claimed.  With a 12 to 1 gain, the pendulum should never stop!  12 to 1 is huge.  Why isn't this thing powering Europe yet?
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: snowblind on July 11, 2007, 08:23:18 AM
Hi

first post.

This is the way I see the pendulum machine works:

-----Why we need input energy:

Imagine you have a "perfect" pendulum swinging in a vacum with no friction, on perfect bearings etc..  (impossible but just for this example). It would swing forever without ever losing its speed/slowing down/stopping, Thus requiring no input energy to keep going.

Because we dont have a perfect pendulum, we have to input energy to make up for friction, bearing resistance etc.. that the pendilum encounters while swinging. Note that this energy is not to swing the pendulum, but to keep it swinging because of the resistance it encounters. The pendulum keeps swinging via the force of gravity.

While swinging, the mechanical part of this machine (other end) taps up and down, with a force equal to the weight of the pendilum (say 100kg). this weight can be used to create whatever (power a generator etc..).

---Why the other end lifts up:

When the pendulum is on the outside/top of a swing, it has lost all its energy, and gravity starts to pull it down. At this point it is weightlessto the other end (which taps up and down),  and the other end is in the down state.

Gravity works on the pendulum and pulls it down, gaining momentum/force whatever.

When it is at the center/bottom of its swing it has a downwards force equal to, or more than, its own weight, and the other end of the machine is now lighter and lifts up.

The pendulum then swings up and ends up at the start again.

---The other bit:

The next thing we have to ask is: does the up down motion added to the pendulum take/use some of the swing force acting on the pendulum? If it does, then the system is not over unity, as we have to put this energy back in with the input energy (i.e. input energy is not just factoring friction, but also the up down motion).

If it doesnt, then the system is overunity. Note that while the pendulum has the most force and pulls the other end up, as it swings along, the other end is pulled down by gravity and 'gives' energy back to the pendulum. So we could just have to add some more input energy for the resistance of friction/bearings etc..

---

Thats just my theory after a few hours on the peswiki and then finding this thread (e.g. reading things like the machie is most efficient when both ends are the same weight. I only flicked through 15 or so pages of this thread. Im going to build a small model with some chopsticks, paperclips, tape and rocks and see what happens.

Greeting from Japan
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: hartiberlin on July 11, 2007, 08:35:36 AM
@shruggedatlas:


http://www.veljkomilkovic.com/Images/Misljenje%204%20-%20Matematicka%20analiza%20-%20Tosic.pdf (http://www.veljkomilkovic.com/Images/Misljenje%204%20-%20Matematicka%20analiza%20-%20Tosic.pdf)

To all the skeptics,
this PDF file was written by:
Akademik Professor  Dr. Bratislav To?ic

Please point out here if you find some mathematical errors in it.
Otherwise don?t come here and always give us the same lame skeptical views...PLEASSSSEEEE !


There are replications under way right now that try to close the loop.
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: WhiteFalcon on July 11, 2007, 02:54:22 PM
I'm currently gathering parts to replicate this machine, I bought an old bike for $5...

I have two ideas to improve the machine...

1) Make the pendulum to swing perpendicular to the lever, so the same force would be applied to the lever when the pendulum swing from right to left than from left to right.  If you look carefully at Milkovic's machines, you may notice that the force is different when the pendulum swing from front to back than from back to front...

2) What if I make both end of the lever to be a hammer AND carrying a pendulum.  When pendulum A is a Bottom Dead Center, pendulum B would be at Top Dead Swing.  Will I gain more amplitude on the lever?  Since both ends of the lever now have a variable mass...  This I don't know... I'll try to see...

WF
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: shruggedatlas on July 11, 2007, 03:31:52 PM
@shruggedatlas:


http://www.veljkomilkovic.com/Images/Misljenje%204%20-%20Matematicka%20analiza%20-%20Tosic.pdf (http://www.veljkomilkovic.com/Images/Misljenje%204%20-%20Matematicka%20analiza%20-%20Tosic.pdf)

To all the skeptics,
this PDF file was written by:
Akademik Professor  Dr. Bratislav To?ic

Please point out here if you find some mathematical errors in it.
Otherwise don?t come here and always give us the same lame skeptical views...PLEASSSSEEEE !


There are replications under way right now that try to close the loop.

I will admit that I have no idea what that paper says, but I sincerely doubt it says there is a 12 to 1 energy gain.  I believe a 12 to 1 mechanical advantage, perhaps with the combination of the lever and the pendulum, but not a 12 to 1 energy gain.

As far as closing the loop - there is no way to make a pendulum create energy, and there is no way to make a lever create energy.  They both only give out what energy was put into them.  The lever allows a small force to lift a relatively heavy object, but at the cost of having to exert the small force over a longer distance than the heavy object actually lifts.  A pendulum doles out its energy slowly (via friction and air resistance) over the duration of its swing, but it cannot give out any more energy than what was originally exerted into lifting the pendulum in the first place.  There is nothing new here.  If someone was to close the loop on this, then it would mean that see-saws and pendulums never stop, but accelerate on their own (at a 12 to 1 energy gain).  But this is now how things work in this universe.

Am I missing something?  Is there really any more to this machine than a lever and a pendulum?
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: shruggedatlas on July 11, 2007, 03:52:50 PM


The next thing we have to ask is: does the up down motion added to the pendulum take/use some of the swing force acting on the pendulum? If it does, then the system is not over unity, as we have to put this energy back in with the input energy (i.e. input energy is not just factoring friction, but also the up down motion).

If it doesnt, then the system is overunity. Note that while the pendulum has the most force and pulls the other end up, as it swings along, the other end is pulled down by gravity and 'gives' energy back to the pendulum. So we could just have to add some more input energy for the resistance of friction/bearings etc..


You have thought about this and your analysis shows this!  It is easy to get confused discussing this device, because the lever affects the pendulum and vice versa.  But in the end, it is just a pendulum attached to one end of a see-saw.  Neither a pendulum nor a see-saw naturally accelerates, so there is not way to magically combine the two together and get an over-unity device.  In fact, any combination of the two can only decrease efficiency, because there are more parts in contact and therefore more friction.
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: bigface on July 12, 2007, 04:11:28 AM
I still doubt that this machine is overunity.  If this machine is overunity then it would most likely be due to the swinging of the pendulum.  I don't see why the lever is necessary at all, it only makes it lose energy due to friction.  The lever does not contribute any more energy it just transfers it from one end to the other.  why not just have a pendulum on a string pulling on a load? that would make the system more efficient because it doesn't lose energy to friction from the lever. 
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: hartiberlin on July 12, 2007, 04:47:49 AM
@bigface,
you did not understand the principle:

As the pendulum is at its highest point the force onto the leverarm is zero
and thus the other end of the leverarm behind the pivot point  gets more heavy.

When the pendulum is at its lowest point in its swing, it gets much more heavy,
also through its centrifugal force and this will make this leverarm
much more heavy now and it can lift up the other leverarm with much more force.

So you see, the pendulum is modulating the gravity which is working onto the
whole leverarm and thus can convert gravity field energy to mechanical output energy.

As the input power via pushing the pendulum is almost at 90 degrees to the gravity field,
so this does not interact with the gravity and thus it needs only low input power.

The more centrifugal force we have, which is a virtual force,
the higher will be the COP over one..


So it is basically a gravity modulation device with low input power and higher
output power, converting unbalanced gravity forces into real mechanical
output power.
Regards, Stefan.
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: ravengo2005 on July 12, 2007, 01:52:39 PM
If you need translation for any of this texts, I can help. I know serbian language.  :)
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: bigface on July 12, 2007, 03:36:39 PM
hartiberlin, thanks for replying.  I do understand the principle behind this device.  My point was that the lever is pointless.  The driving force behind this device is the pendulum, if this device really did create energy it would be due to the swinging of the pendulum and not the movement of the lever.  The lever merely transfers downward force created by the pendulum into upward force of the other side.  This principle would be just as valid if you used a pulley system instead of a lever. 
              The lever contributes nothing in terms of energy.To suggest that this device is over unity is suggesting a pendulum is overunity.  i do not know whether a pendulum is or isn't but either way the lever does nothing of use in the system.  i think that the easiest way to verify this system is simply attach a pendulum to a spring scale. 
               it would still work the on the exact same principle as the lever/pendulum combo but it would be easier to measure.  The the lowest point of the swing it would have gravitational and centrifugal force pulling down on the spring.  At the highest point you would have essentially no force acting on the spring so it would go back up. So gravity would still be modulated as you say, just using a spring instead of a lever.  This would make it a lot easier to measure then adding an extra piece (lever) into the equation.  instead of having lever+pendulum+scale(to measure output) you can simply have scale+pendulum.
              i hope i made myself clear and i look forward to your response. 
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: helmut on July 12, 2007, 04:12:18 PM
Hi Bigface

Please have a look to the first Movie from the Inventor.
He explains,what happens to the Oscilation and what happend on the other Side of the Lever.
You can not just ignore the part of the Resonanz.

helmut
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: WhiteFalcon on July 12, 2007, 06:19:21 PM
I'm not sure if this device is or is not OU, but I'm impressed to the point that I want to try to build a replica!!

I'll put down to example of why I think it is OU.

1) Let's talk about a gas engine and an alternator.  The engine is connected FIRMLY to the alternator pulley, to the point that when you turn the alternator by hand, the force will make the engine turn...  The engine doesn't need to give a lot of energy to make the alternator to turn when there is no load on it.  But if you put a load on the alternator (retrieving energy from it), a COUNTERFORCE will slow down the engine, since they are firmly connected.  Extracting too much energy of the alternator may even lead to engine stalling...

2) The pendulum is not OU.  Nor the lever is!   We ALL know that.  The interesting thing in the Milkovic device is that energy is easily transferred to the lever, but the lever cannot swing back the same COUNTERFORCE to the pendulum, since the connection between the two of them is "quite interesting" !!!  In the end, ALL of the energy that the pendulum GIVES (on the way down) is used to make the other end of the lever to go up (less friction, for sure!!).  Then, the lever can extract work from gravity, and is going down.  The energy extracted from gravity SHOULD be the energy returned as a counterforce to the pendulum, but can't, because of the "interesting connection"... so this energy is extractable from the device for us, without affecting the input side.  And what did the pendulum used to give energy to the lever : it's own mass!  Did he lost it? No!!


Another example that made me thinking, to show that a normal "lever" is different from this device.  Let's say I set up a lever with a 10:1 ratio.  I can lift a 200 lbs rock!!  If I say "Put your finger under the lever" you know I can crush it if I push the lever with both of my arms and legs!!  But you have nothing to fear if I only tap the lever with my little finger!!!!

But if I tap the pendulum just ONCE with my finger on Milkovic's device, your finger will be crushed by the 25 kg of mass of the lever on its way down!!  I can even say : "I can crush a new finger with each little tap of my little finger on the pendulum!!"

WF
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: shruggedatlas on July 13, 2007, 03:52:00 AM

Another example that made me thinking, to show that a normal "lever" is different from this device.  Let's say I set up a lever with a 10:1 ratio.  I can lift a 200 lbs rock!!  If I say "Put your finger under the lever" you know I can crush it if I push the lever with both of my arms and legs!!  But you have nothing to fear if I only tap the lever with my little finger!!!!

But if I tap the pendulum just ONCE with my finger on Milkovic's device, your finger will be crushed by the 25 kg of mass of the lever on its way down!!  I can even say : "I can crush a new finger with each little tap of my little finger on the pendulum!!"

WF

I think you are giving both too much and too little credit to the "tap".  How strong is a tap?  If you mean a moderate tap, maybe enough to move 500g, then it is enough to injure or at least seriously discomfort my finger!  With a 10 to 1 advantage, this translates to 5kg, and I would not want a 5kg weight to be pressing on any of my fingers!

On the other hand, to threaten me with Milkovic's device, you would need to tap a 25kg weight.  I do not know how far you have to tap it, but to get it up any amount would certainly require a force equal to having to lift 2 or 3 kg, and this is stretching the definition of a tap.
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: Dingus Mungus on July 16, 2007, 05:05:06 AM
You won't know what you're taking about untill you build a model.
It doesn't have to be perfect! Just do the wind resistance demo.
Its amazing to see how much work the lever does vrs pendulum.
Linear equations can not help you understand this device.

I'm so tired of fighting the nay sayers,
~Dingus Mungus

Its not OU yet, but with proper developement I think it's CoP>1.
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: AlanR on July 16, 2007, 02:45:59 PM
Hi all, first post....

hate to start off like this, but this exact thing has been beaten to death at the besslerwheel.com forums over and over again.

All manner of pendulum and many other purely mechanical solutions (as Besslers wheel was, take a look!) are investigated.

To date nothing has shown OU   :-[ but that hasn't stopped us (or you guys  :) )

Keep trying, but you are wasting your time chasing this particular one.

Hope to make a more positive comment next time, best of luck chaps.

Alan.
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: d3adp00l on July 17, 2007, 05:15:54 AM
If it was (which it is not) 12 time more out then heres the simple test, use the level to produce power to manipulate the pendulum, if it can keep going then it is o/u because it is beating friction, if it can't then its not. This device is the swinging equal to the worm and spur gear thats all.
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: Dingus Mungus on July 18, 2007, 03:12:09 AM
If it was (which it is not) 12 time more out then heres the simple test, use the level to produce power to manipulate the pendulum, if it can keep going then it is o/u because it is beating friction, if it can't then its not. This device is the swinging equal to the worm and spur gear thats all.

This is what I'm trying to say... You don't yet understand the prinicples. The lever can only effect the pendulum when its roughly 180 degrees out of phase and its a negitive interaction, but the pendulum always effects the lever positively. I have half a dozen examples of a 2x pendulums swinging longer and harder than a stationary duped pendulum, but it's never going to introduce enough energy to the free wheeling pendulum to close the loop with no additional components. You would be right in saying thats impossible, but based on what I've seen in my experiments there is definitely more going on in this device than people are willing to see. We just need a precision way to tap the pendulum why extracting the output.

Like I said if you're a "nay sayer" get out some wood, pen springs, steel hangers, some paper, and some plyers and test against wind resistance. You'll notice a pendulum with the broad side of a piece of paper on its vertical axis will quickly slow and stop from the air resistance, but when you place the paper on the horizonal lever it has nearly ZERO influence on the pendulums speed or phase. Thats not what physics would refer to as a normal trasfer of potential energy. You're just not looking at the important factors of its operation. Its in no way a ready to develope concept yet, but it absolutely does show its validity IMHO. Please test for yourself and report back if you still don't see it. I'm still trying to think of a better way to harness this gravitional potential feedback in the mean time. If this device was a lot more complicated I think people would give it more benifit of the doubt, but due to its simplistic structure people assume to understand it far too quickly.

~Dingus Mungus
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: snowblind on July 20, 2007, 05:42:30 AM
Hi

So all the believers out there: this would theoretically work. I just drew this up quickly at work.

Pretty much when the lever pulls up, it pulls a string which pulls back a small hammer, which is pushing against a spring. It passes over a one way clip, which stops it from releasing and is held there. When the pendulum reaches the top and is near the hammer, the lever goes down and it pulls the other string, which pulls the clip and releases the hammer, which pushes the pendulum forward.

Note this is a pretty simple drawing, and would require a lot of tweaking, and pully ratios etc.. but you get the basic idea.

It would need to be atleast 200% efficiant to work like this, as the hammer will get pulled and released when the pendulum is at the other end of its swing aswell, meaning no benifit to the system. if you had a 2 independent pendilum/leaver systems hooked up to the same hammer, but the hammer had a fork shape, and swung the pendulums at opposite ends, it would only need to be 100% efficiant, as it would push each pendulum with each swing.

I hope you can understand this  :-X

Greets from Japan
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: ltseung888 on July 20, 2007, 11:30:49 AM
Explaining the Milkovic Pendulum and Lever system using the Lee-Tseung Lead Out  theory.

Many of you are already expecting this.  The Published Lee-Tseung PCT patent information (PCT/IB2005/000138) describes how a Pulse Force on a Pendulum can Lead Out  gravitational energy.

Explaining the detailed working of the Milkovic system is now in
http://www.overunity.com/index.php/topic,2794.msg40855.html#msg40855.

There is no magic.  There is indeed Gravitational Energy Lead Out from two complementing systems.  Please comment via the above thread.

@snowblind from Japan,
Good thinking.  Work on it more.  I am confident that you are moving in the right direction.  Energy has been Lead Out.  It is a matter of using it!

Lawrence Tseung
Lee-Tseung Theory Leads Out the secret of the Milkovic system
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: ltseung888 on July 21, 2007, 12:37:21 PM
Improving the Milkovic system.

Please read:

http://www.overunity.com/index.php/topic,2794.msg41011.html#msg41011

Who can help to pass this message to Milkovic?

Regards,

Lawrence Tseung
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: gyulasun on July 21, 2007, 04:58:02 PM
Improving the Milkovic system.

Please read:

http://www.overunity.com/index.php/topic,2794.msg41011.html#msg41011

Who can help to pass this message to Milkovic?

Regards,

Lawrence Tseung

Hello Lawrence,

See Milkovic's contact page info:  http://www.veljkomilkovic.com/KontaktEng.html

Regards
Gyula
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: Senator on July 24, 2007, 05:53:40 AM
Ok.

Question.

Why is the flashlight thing touted as an amazing proof for the machine?

You/He appears to interpret as energy, only the period a flashlight is on or in fact the light from the flashlight itself, with no regards to the speed he brings (his) flashlight in. I think that he vastly underestimates the energy he is inputing, which is far greater than just pressing the dynamo button on the other flashlight.

That energy, does not come from closing the contact, (that would require just to press it with your finger, then put it near the pendulum, and release it allowing the button to hit the pendulum. Then you could claim that you have inputed into the system energy equal with the one needed to make one flashlight turn on) it comes from his arm, which in turn comes from bio/chemical reactions releasing enough energy to accelerate the mass of said arm, and ultimately the mass of the flashlight, which collides with the hanging pendulum, which then gets transfered (that biochemical energy) to the entire mass of the pendulum. Energy, far, far greater than the pressing of the dynamo button.
In fact, with the flashlights are on or off is quite irrelevant, a much better measurement to take would be heat. The heat produced by the collision of his flashlight to the hanging pendulum, and the heat produces by the collisions of the hammer to the other flashlight.

You see, he appears to be thinking over this, as the energy that takes to pressing the dynamo button, when in reality, you have there one flashlight getting its dynamo button pressed, and another flashlight getting its button pressed, moving at a speed. Their energy is not equal.
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: Dingus Mungus on July 24, 2007, 08:33:38 AM
The point of the flashlight was that when your pushing on a moving object, its hard to deposit extra energy without moving faster than the object in its away swing. This coupled to the fact that his single flashlight could barely be fully lit with the impact was use to illistrate an overall understanding of the concept, not an accurate CoP.

Build the wind resistance demo with junk from around your house and you'll be a believer. Also check out American replications on youtube.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OLRTW7Kdje4
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E_XVuMdSro4
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f3GQnhpkMBc

I just hung a pendulum from a rod made from a metal clothes hanger. Mounted it so its level under the weight of the pendulum, and taped a sheet of paper to the pendulum. I pulled it back and released it. It twisted arround and quickly came to a stop. I expected as much. Then I moved the same piece of paper to the spot on the lever furthest from the fulcrum where the movement and resistance would be greatest. Same test but a lot more work was extracted... Dare I say more than 12 times what the pendulum itself was able to do on its own. This means I introduced the same amount of potential energy in to a pendulum and got back more expendable kinetic energy on the lever than I could extract from the pendulum. Do you see what I mean? I then did the same experiment with no paper and found the runtime of a unloaded lever and a loaded lever were roughly the same as no extra strain was placed on the pendulum in either example.

Please experiment and then draw an opinion.
This is a super simple device, but its complicated to fully understand.

~Dingus Mungus
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: Senator on July 24, 2007, 09:55:42 AM
Barely lit, is not how I would describe the shoving shown here: http://www.veljkomilkovic.com/Video/Veljko_Milkovic_(video-7)_Universal_oscillator-generator.wmv

Once again, the light is irrelevant, it does not represent the energy provided by the act of the mass of the flashlight (AND arm) colliding at a speed with the pendulum. How long it stays on, doesn't provide any information on how "hard" it was pushed. Also, don't forget that those lights, light up at the act of being pushed, not on them button remaining pushed. As a result, any light colliding with the pendulum, would only light up only during the initial collision and then would turn off while you could still provide for the rest of a second as acceleration.

If anything, pushing away while the object is in it's away swing, is the best, this way you can provide a very gentle acceleration for a significant amount of time that will add to the objects energy (as opposed to a collision with the object coming at you which would also risk canceling some of it's kinetic energy) while maintaining the illusion that is insignificant. You collide, flash light turns on-off and then you continue the movement with your arm, but this time your arm charging with energy the entire mass of the pendulum. The energy seems insignificant to us, because arm muscles are strong and so we concider the act of shoving such big a mass as an army and letting it "rest" (from our perception) on a pendulum insignificant.

As I said, just, truly using only the energy of the dynamo light's button decompressing (eg, by pressing it with a finger from the side, or a string, bringing it near a still pendulum, and releasing it) and managing with that, to press 2 flashlights, or 12, would be impressive.

Concerning coathungers, I couldn't understand very well your device but I assume you mean the same "toy" in the first video in the http://www.veljkomilkovic.com/OscilacijeEng.html site specifically around 7:30-8:30

My problem with that is that you/he has no way of accurately measuring the energy he provides with the starting "tap". Presumably he provides just enough, for the vibrations to be start looking "similar" as when unloaded. A more dramatic way of doing it in fact would be to lift the horizontal end exactly the same amount off center in  both cases.

But

It is not the same system any more. Because the small pendulum, acts as an energy storage. Basically, what he did, was increase the mass of the long element. By providing enough energy to make it "start" with the exact same vibration, you have actually provided much more energy. His "tap" might seem the same to him, but it now sets in motion a system with much more mass.

So.

Although the horizontal pendulum alone doesn't fair well alone with a paper.
And the small pendulum alone doesn't fair well with a paper.
When you attach the paper to the horizontal one, with the small pendulum attached to it, what the paper faces now, is a horizontal pendulum with the mass of the horizontal element AND the small pendulum together. And since the small pendulum is also swinging, also it, being an energy storing device (almost like a winding spring) for the horizontal element.




 
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: Dingus Mungus on July 25, 2007, 07:14:19 AM
Barely lit, is not how I would describe the shoving shown here: http://www.veljkomilkovic.com/Video/Veljko_Milkovic_(video-7)_Universal_oscillator-generator.wmv
Again my point is still: the required input pressure of the pendulum (while in swing) is a LOT less than that required to power 12 flashlights at once... Would you agree?

Once again, the light is irrelevant, it does not represent the energy provided by the act of the mass of the flashlight (AND arm) colliding at a speed with the pendulum. How long it stays on, doesn't provide any information on how "hard" it was pushed. Also, don't forget that those lights, light up at the act of being pushed, not on them button remaining pushed. As a result, any light colliding with the pendulum, would only light up only during the initial collision and then would turn off while you could still provide for the rest of a second as acceleration.
This is because the energy given to the pendulum is lower than the energy required to compress the spring. Would you agree? If not why doesn't the handle fully compress?

If anything, pushing away while the object is in it's away swing, is the best, this way you can provide a very gentle acceleration for a significant amount of time that will add to the objects energy (as opposed to a collision with the object coming at you which would also risk canceling some of it's kinetic energy) while maintaining the illusion that is insignificant. You collide, flash light turns on-off and then you continue the movement with your arm, but this time your arm charging with energy the entire mass of the pendulum. The energy seems insignificant to us, because arm muscles are strong and so we concider the act of shoving such big a mass as an army and letting it "rest" (from our perception) on a pendulum insignificant.
Firstly, Thats how they were swinging it. Second, it would be hard to "trick my eyes" considering I did my own experiments before developing an opinion on this topic.

As I said, just, truly using only the energy of the dynamo light's button decompressing (eg, by pressing it with a finger from the side, or a string, bringing it near a still pendulum, and releasing it) and managing with that, to press 2 flashlights, or 12, would be impressive.
Yeah that would be a really easy demo to perform by hand...
Plus no one would come in claiming it didn't work then! ::)

Concerning coathungers, I couldn't understand very well your device but I assume you mean the same "toy" in the first video in the http://www.veljkomilkovic.com/OscilacijeEng.html site specifically around 7:30-8:30

My problem with that is that you/he has no way of accurately measuring the energy he provides with the starting "tap". Presumably he provides just enough, for the vibrations to be start looking "similar" as when unloaded. A more dramatic way of doing it in fact would be to lift the horizontal end exactly the same amount off center in  both cases.

I have no idea what you are saying there... Did you mean load the pendulum to the same hieght in both experiments? If so the goal is to swing it in resonance and phase so the optimal swing distance is always roughly the same.

But It is not the same system any more.

It's just another form of the concept, all you need is two mechanical oscillators and gravity. The fulrum and counter weight are for power only. In fact that design is really squirrly to control, which is why most replications have gone to the wheel form.

Because the small pendulum, acts as an energy storage. Basically, what he did, was increase the mass of the long element. By providing enough energy to make it "start" with the exact same vibration, you have actually provided much more energy. His "tap" might seem the same to him, but it now sets in motion a system with much more mass.
Build one and judge for yourself. I can't stress this enough.

So.

Although the horizontal pendulum alone doesn't fair well alone with a paper.
And the small pendulum alone doesn't fair well with a paper.
When you attach the paper to the horizontal one, with the small pendulum attached to it, what the paper faces now, is a horizontal pendulum with the mass of the horizontal element AND the small pendulum together. And since the small pendulum is also swinging, also it, being an energy storing device (almost like a winding spring) for the horizontal element.
Congrats thats nearly the whole point of this device!!! You almost fully "get it". You can't load either when seperate, but magicly when combined you can load the lever without extracting any noticable force from the pendulum. The pendulums downward inertial causes its "weight" to tripple twice a cycle. And extracting power from the lever doesn't effect your "wound up spring" at all! Now you just need to input the energy yourself and extract the energy yourself and you'll understand it. Our video evidence will not suffice so you'll need to do your own experiment.

OK so forget the flashlights and how its an inaccurate test (never intended to be accurate) and go to small scale testing. If spending an hour building something is "not for you". Start reading from page one or just assume your right and never bother looking at this concept again. Point is no one is going to be able to help you understand this uber simple device. You need to help yourself by doing a simple proof of concept, but we both know thats not going to happen, as its easier to just hit reply and jabber on about the same points again. Do you honnestly believe you're the first person to come in and say those things?

Forgive me for being short, but I have this conversation once a week. Seriously... Take an hour and look back through the thread... People show up, read nothing, watch one video, and challenge months of work based on an uninformed opinion. It's an irritating case of big hat no cattle, considering anyone can build this proof of concept, out of anything.

Welcome to the forums,
~Dingus Mungus
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: Senator on July 29, 2007, 08:13:28 PM
Quote
Again my point is still: the required input pressure of the pendulum (while in swing) is a LOT less than that required to power 12 flashlights at once... Would you agree?
Not really. Levers can be impressive like that. Let me give you my favorite example. The door.

A well oiled door, needs only a "slight" touch to move, something someone would call "insignificant" energy. You could set it in motion by just unfolding your finger.

But, put your finger in the other end near the hidge after someone set it in motion, and you would find it "very difficult" to stop it. Put it in the wrong place and a "slight" shove (which if someone applied directly on your finger with his hand wouldn't hurt at all) might even crush it.

Slight shove from the one side, crashing power on the other, is that an overunity machine? Sounds like it, but it isn't. And if you understand that mechanism you can understand what is going with that device over here as well.

The door example gives me an idea for an experiment. Take something soft, like blue tack, and make a ball. Then put many balls of similar size in the hidge area, and hit the door with a ball you hold in your hand with enough force, to flatten it and watch how many you can flatten on the other side. The energy to flatten, or even slighty deform one blue tack ball on your hand, flatten many on the other side? What is going on there?
Quote
This is because the energy given to the pendulum is lower than the energy required to compress the spring. Would you agree? If not why doesn't the handle fully compress?
It does light up, so it does compress. The difference is that his, compresses once, and stays there for the remaining of the acceleration while because in the other side because compressions decompressions happen continously the energy output seems more dramatic.

But wait, there is in fact and a second problem. You appear to think that the energy it takes to compress the flashlight button in his hand, is the same with compressing the flashlights on the other hand.

Well, first off I want to call your attention to another phenomenon. Have you noticed that if you put a scale on a hard surface like marble, and if you put a scale on a soft surface, like a carpet, or over a pillow, they show different weights? What is going there? The carpet stops gravity? Initial intuition would assume that since the energy provided in both is same, they would both show the same amount, regardless if one have to dive inside the carpet enough until it becomes "solid".

But, this is not the case what it actually happens, is that the carpet, acts like a spring, and takes some of the load of the spring of the scale, with the two springs, based on their "hardness", finding a balance somewhere in the middle. Two scales one on top of the other would in fact show half your weight despite, you, providing the same force on them! (plus a scale). And you would need double the force to make it seem the same!

In other words. When you compress a spring against an object that gives way, it's not the same as when you compress a spring against an immovable surface. Your pendulum, is going to act as an opposite spring, as "hard" as the friction in it's pivot point (towards which is also a lever so it gives even easier way), which you hit during its away phase as well, I would say that the fact that it lights up at all, can already represent significant energy.
Quote
Yeah that would be a really easy demo to perform by hand...
Plus no one would come in claiming it didn't work then! Roll Eyes
Not that difficult actually. Let me describe it in more detail.

You take a piece of string. You tie it around the dynamo flashlight's button in a way so that it is compressed, you put the flashlight button next to the pendulum, and then you release the spring and/or if you have tied it and for neatness, burn it. That way, the pendulum is going to get one flashlight's button decompression worth of energy, if it manages to compresses even two on the other side, THAT would be significant.

That is all.

I guess I will have to build one myself, just to get the "no mock up model, no talk" comments off my back but I am also prepared to wait the very very very very long time it will take you to ever close the device and make it self-running.

I an overunity lurker, who could trust an electromagnetical device's claims, because they involve quantum effects likes fields and leave space for some invisible "mystery" you cannot debunk, unless you test it. Mechanical devices however will never work, no matter how many levers, how many flywheels and wheels someone hides behind, it always comes down to a geometrical riddle that results in what we know. Objects fall down, once.
Quote
Do you honnestly believe you're the first person to come in and say those things?
Those specific points, phrased like this? Yes.




Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: PulseFuelNerd on July 29, 2007, 10:25:35 PM
Hmmm. 52 pages of postings so far on this subject! wow
I skipped to the most recent to find out- "what could they still be discussing?"

Figures....
Peace to all. (concerning the last two posts.)

Hey folks, Viewing the video clip with the little pink bicycle confirmed my thought that this in not OU.
I would think that the 1:12 ratio claims would be put to rest (and this thread for that matter) when one sees three fingers stopping the tire on the little pink bike.  It is 'WORKING' at full output for it's design.

Pendulums and levers are great and very useful and all.... But this forum is about OU. 
Are not our efforts better spent elsewhere?

Cheers to all who try and keep trying.
Russell

Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: Dingus Mungus on July 30, 2007, 01:26:06 AM
Your first 3 posts here are all saying the exact same thing and further confirming your whole point for being here is to discredit this device. You're not here to experiment or replicate or contribute... You're here to tell us what we're doing wrong right? Oh thank you for pointing this out for us. Thank god we have randoms coming in to tell us "whats what" months after the fact.

Point is when you load the lever the pendulum is not effected. Any and all energy transfered to the lever is free. All other points are moot by now. Build it and see for yourself, or continue to ASSUME you're right and move on. I will never be able to convince you, and because I've actually built a demo and experimented with the concept you'll never convince me. So we are litterally talking to walls here. I am NOT here to say its 1200% efficient or that its a CoP>12, but I will say this mechanic system is not a simple as it first appears. It's all about phase and mechanical resonance, and when you get those things worked out you do can extract energy from a pendulum with out any additional slowing to the pendulum!!! I can't say it any clearer. The pendulum once in full swing goes from weightlessness to 3x its stationary weight.

Have you ever pushed a kid on a swing?
Is it the ammount of work for each push, equal to LIFTING the kid to that height?

I REPEAT: go build it, or simply assume you're right and move on. Debating a guy whos describing door hinges is really getting old, and so help me god if you even mention a flashlight I will be ignoring your posts from here on out.

~Dingus Mungus
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: Senator on July 31, 2007, 04:09:00 PM
Fine. When you close the device and it is self-running, even after years, don't forget to send me an e-mail. kupeplex@hotmail.com

Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: Dingus Mungus on July 31, 2007, 07:18:17 PM
Will do... In the mean time you are right. It will probably will be years. If you want to see a better proof of concept involving OU, then check out the Linnard Griffin HHO thread. There is some great prototype discriptions and experiment data in there. Once again a simple system, galvanic chemistry, but its not a simple as it appears once you built it and run it for a week or two.

~Dingus Mungus
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: binarycortex on August 02, 2007, 01:23:32 AM
I have several ideas relating to this as far as extracting work and turning that into electricity. Granted these may seem Rube Goldberg-ish but what the heck, who knows it may even inspire someone with the resources to try it or something like it.

1. Since we know this device is very good at operating mechanical hand pumps (water) why not use that to run a water wheel or two water wheels if you hook up one to run on the opposite stroke. On that note since we are already pumping the water up might as well have each water wheel empty into a bucket with a hole in it and have that pour on to another water wheel. We just doubled our output, yaay gravity.

2. Attach a steam engine type wheel to the end of the lever (the lever would be the piston), attach that via chain or a similar method to a smaller wheel and put a generator on that. See attached crappy drawing.

I'll let you guys figure out how to close it, or don't, it doesn't matter.
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: Dingus Mungus on August 02, 2007, 11:31:59 AM
Some one is working on replication now.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E_XVuMdSro4
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OLRTW7Kdje4
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wgnxMqVAFKM

~Dingus Mungus
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: binarycortex on August 02, 2007, 06:33:22 PM
I have seen his work but sadly he has stopped working on it. I did notice there was a new video posted on milkovic's site, which includes images and drawings posted in this thread.

http://www.micropixel.biz/veljkomilkovic/videos/Veljko_Milkovic_(video-8)_Universal_two-stage_oscillator_full_presentation.wmv (http://www.micropixel.biz/veljkomilkovic/videos/Veljko_Milkovic_(video-8)_Universal_two-stage_oscillator_full_presentation.wmv)

Ian
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: buz.drahu on August 02, 2007, 10:10:04 PM
Hello guys
I'm a newbie on this site
Thanks Hartiberlin for this work
I'm french, sorry for my bad english
How clever and generous comunity
In OU, people who share their work is rare
Thanks everybody :)

Sorry, i have not read all messages in this subject, perhaps my interpretation has already figure, but...

For me, this device is not OU.
don't waste your time without study a bit.
OU is fantastic, and it's easy to lose the reason and fall in madness.
No OU device is so simplest, gavitational device too.

Why it's not:
-Ok, the torque can be multiplied, even more than twelve, i think.
-But, what about the angle of the torque?
if you multiply torque by angle, you will get, the same (quite less)

It's only a mecanical level, like a gearing, a jack or a control lever.
But this device is great, for its application, like pumps in africa because of the oscillation.

In the movie, we see one lamp supplying others, ok, it's not a fake.
But what thinking about the lenght of the movement of his hand to do that?
For keeping the movement, if we suppose to push the pendulum in the same distance of the lever of the lamp (about 30-50mm), we'll need the same power than output.
If we push it twelve time the distance (like video), we'll use (twelve time less) it's simplest.

Sorry, but this device is so simple replicate, why nobody has already success to loop ?


Cordially
BH
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: Unicron on August 03, 2007, 10:43:01 AM
Or like this?
only need the timing of the wheel to push and pull. or won't this work?
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: buz.drahu on August 03, 2007, 11:29:14 AM
Hi Unicron

Many times, i saw the same mistake,
if you try, or see the video, we observe that the second level as a double freq
your shem won't work.

i think all movement are Sin, so mine also is not the best setup.
Because of the lenght of the rod
my second permit a non-linear force, it can be use for tunning

Cordialy
BH
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: supersam on August 04, 2007, 03:35:30 AM
to all,

while i see alot of people trying to use bicycle's to close the loop of this device, i don't see anyone thinking about where the tourqe is located in this device!  everyone seems to be trying to take maximum torque from the end of the lever, even after it has loaded a spring. 

if you look at the point where, maximum power or, (crush force), is , you will see that it is at the fulcrum of the lever!  not at the end of the lever.  (where would you rather have your finger?)  if you don't want your finger at the end of the lever( under the hammer), you damn sure don't want it any closer to the fulcrum. 

the thing is, that none of the replications, that i have seen, have taken this into cosideration.  please, someone take this into consideration and see what kind of power you can develop from the axel of the fulcrum on the lever.  not to be mistaken for the end of the lever. 

no wonder you can't get any power!

lol
ss
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: FreeEnergy on August 04, 2007, 03:38:46 AM
to all,

while i see alot of people trying to use bicycle's to close the loop of this device, i don't see anyone thinking about where the tourqe is located in this device!  everyone seems to be trying to take maximum torque from the end of the lever, even after it has loaded a spring. 

if you look at the point where, maximum power or, (crush force), is , you will see that it is at the fulcrum of the lever!  not at the end of the lever.  (where would you rather have your finger?)  if you don't want your finger at the end of the lever( under the hammer), you damn sure don't want it any closer to the fulcrum. 

the thing is, that none of the replications, that i have seen, have taken this into cosideration.  please, someone take this into consideration and see what kind of power you can develop from the axel of the fulcrum on the lever.  not to be mistaken for the end of the lever. 

no wonder you can't get any power!

lol
ss

Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: DarkLight on August 04, 2007, 11:19:14 AM
Hi all

I have made some calculations that are valide for all unbalanced wheels and similar devices

When we move center of mass of the device, we move it only horisontally. We did not do any work against gravity, only against friction (in this concrete case we do work against gravity. It is the difference in potential energy between highest and lowest position of the pendulum.)

Let we move center of mass of the device horizontally at distance L
let we have friction coefficient

k=0.05    <- rolling

the friction force will be

M*g*k=0.05*M*g

work that we do to move the center of mass at distance L

A_friction = 0.05*M*g*L



When the center of mass is moved, there will be uncompensated torque

torque = M*g*L

work that we gain from rotating of the device due to this torque is

A_torque = Fi*M*g*L

Fi   is the angle of rotation in radians

Now we can calculate what angle of rotation Fi we need to gain at least the energy that we put in

A_result = A_torque - A_friction = FI*M*g*L - 0.05*M*g*L

we need 

M*g*L*(Fi - 0.05) > 0   =>  Fi -0.05 > 0  =>  Fi > 0.05  radians

or FI > 2.865 degrees


That is the principal I think.



Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: Omnibus on August 04, 2007, 12:44:25 PM
@DarkLight,

This is very interesting. I think you should develop this idea further as soon as possible.
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: Omnibus on August 04, 2007, 12:57:20 PM
@DarkLight,

Have you seen this: http://www.veljkomilkovic.com/Images/Mathematical_analisys_Tosic_english.pdf. Would like to hear your opinion on that.

The problem is solved in the ?forward? direction (that is, the swaying of the pendulum causing the oscillations of the lever) and it seems to be the trivial part, aside from the fact that probably some of the approximations are unjustified.

 What would the solution be in the ?reverse? direction (that is, when the oscillations of the lever on the opposite side of the pendulum are forced)? Would there be analytical conditions whereby these forced oscillation would cause the pendulum to swing? If not then the asymmetry Mr. Milkovic is talking about is inherent in the very essence of the mechanism.

Also, would there be an analytical solution which would undoubtedly prove the production of excess energy the way it has been proven analytically in the case of SMOT?
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: FreeEnergy on August 04, 2007, 10:54:27 PM
to all,

while i see alot of people trying to use bicycle's to close the loop of this device, i don't see anyone thinking about where the tourqe is located in this device!  everyone seems to be trying to take maximum torque from the end of the lever, even after it has loaded a spring. 

if you look at the point where, maximum power or, (crush force), is , you will see that it is at the fulcrum of the lever!  not at the end of the lever.  (where would you rather have your finger?)  if you don't want your finger at the end of the lever( under the hammer), you damn sure don't want it any closer to the fulcrum. 

the thing is, that none of the replications, that i have seen, have taken this into cosideration.  please, someone take this into consideration and see what kind of power you can develop from the axel of the fulcrum on the lever.  not to be mistaken for the end of the lever. 

no wonder you can't get any power!

lol
ss


anyone going to try this? any news?
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: DarkLight on August 04, 2007, 11:16:54 PM
The work we gain is   

torque*angle

it dose not matter where do you take out the force

torque and angle are the same

more force but less distance
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: supersam on August 05, 2007, 01:20:49 AM
darklight,

you are correct, as were the experimentalist, that showed that power could be generated at the end of the lever!

the question remains, what is the power generated at the center of the fulcrum?

until this question is answered, i don't see how you can write this off!!!!!

lol
sam


ps:  think of gears!!!
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: Omnibus on August 05, 2007, 09:56:37 AM
@DarkLight,

All is good an well in your idea as far as obtaining more energy out than in. However, this a one time deal. How do you restore the initial state of the machine so that you can get another portion of excess energy?
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: DarkLight on August 05, 2007, 10:13:17 AM
@DarkLight,

All is good an well in your idea as far as obtaining more energy out than in. However, this a one time deal. How do you restore the initial state of the machine so that you can get another portion of excess energy?


Unbalancing the system in the other direction will give us another portion of excess energy.
That makes the pendulum here.
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: Omnibus on August 05, 2007, 10:28:15 AM
There must be some time lag to break the symmetry. Can you show a mechanism doing this?
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: Omnibus on August 05, 2007, 10:35:45 AM
Can you show analytically how in this device the portion of energy imparted to the pendulum to make one full swing produces more energy than the input on the other side of the lever?
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: FreeEnergy on August 06, 2007, 10:22:20 PM
to all,

while i see alot of people trying to use bicycle's to close the loop of this device, i don't see anyone thinking about where the tourqe is located in this device!  everyone seems to be trying to take maximum torque from the end of the lever, even after it has loaded a spring. 

if you look at the point where, maximum power or, (crush force), is , you will see that it is at the fulcrum of the lever!  not at the end of the lever.  (where would you rather have your finger?)  if you don't want your finger at the end of the lever( under the hammer), you damn sure don't want it any closer to the fulcrum. 

the thing is, that none of the replications, that i have seen, have taken this into cosideration.  please, someone take this into consideration and see what kind of power you can develop from the axel of the fulcrum on the lever.  not to be mistaken for the end of the lever. 

no wonder you can't get any power!

lol
ss


it is funny cause my grandmother has an old manual sewing machine that uses this method!  :o
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: supersam on August 10, 2007, 11:58:21 PM
fe:

that isn't applicable, imho, i have one too.  the real point of my question is, where are alll the experimenters taking there  energy from?  i think that everything i have seen on an experimental basis, has confirmed that that you can't get more, work, out of the end of the lever, than you put in.  DUH! 

the question i have is, is there a possibility, in a dual oscillating system to extract more energy out of the lever's fulcrum?  if the facts as purported are true, then there should be more than enough power to sustain, and accelerate a gravity device.

it is still my opinion that the best place to do this would be at the fulcrum of the lever, even if it required gears, such as on a bicycle, in a simple arrangement.  i have seen numerous attempts to extract this energy from the end of the lever, however, none to try and take this energy from the center of the torque circle.

lol
sam
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: supersam on August 11, 2007, 12:05:56 AM
 ;)
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: supersam on August 11, 2007, 02:29:09 AM
at all:

i just do not get it!  you go from zero gravitational force to three times the force,  ( in a matter of seconds), and you can't understand that this could be used for mechanical leverage, and harvested at the fulcrum of the lever, and still bounce back to, at the least reset the pendulum!

take for instance if you set the lever up at a four to one ratio, will you not have twelve to one output at that point? can you reset the pendulum with that power output and still produce excess energy?  it, just seems possible to me.  even knowing that it can't be done.

lol

sam
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: supersam on August 11, 2007, 02:47:38 AM
hi all:

i guess what i am trying to say is that since my windmill doesn't have to pump water from two hundred feet anymore, by it's self, my cows now have alot more water available.

just think of the wind power alone!  trust me it doesn't take near the power for my windmilll to slap a pendulum, as it does for it to pump water four feet, let alone two hundred.  i think this should speak for it's self.  once you move one gallon of water up one foot then with the same force you can move it however far you need it.

the thing i am thinking about now is how to make this overunity.  the rest has already been shown.  but how do we close the loop?

lol
sam
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: FreeEnergy on August 11, 2007, 02:56:51 AM
hi all:

i guess what i am trying to say is that since my windmill doesn't have to pump water from two hundred feet anymore, by it's self, my cows now have alot more water available.

just think of the wind power alone!  trust me it doesn't take near the power for my windmilll to slap a pendulum, as does for it to pump water four feet, let alone two hundred.  i think this should speak for it's self. 

the thing i am thinking about now is how to make this overunity.  the rest has already been shown.  but how do we close the loop?

lol
sam

i can't wait! sooner or later we will crack the code for self powered machines based on gravity.
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: supersam on August 11, 2007, 03:33:00 AM
FE:

have you been hiding under a rock? i just said if you can slap a pendulum with a windmill every few seconds you can pump a one inch column of water over two hundred feet. yes it takes a few more foot valves, but so what in the long run.

no i don't have an eternal supply of wind either. however, most of the time i have enough to slap the pendulum!

lol
sam

ps: maybe i should consider batteries!  hummm!

;
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: FreeEnergy on August 11, 2007, 03:38:32 AM
FE:

have you been hiding under a rock? i just said if you can slap a pendulum with a windmill every few seconds you can pump a one inch column of water over two hundred feet. yes it takes a few more foot valves, but so what in the long run.

no i don't have an eternal supply of wind either. however, most of the time i have enough to slap the pendulum!

lol
sam

ps: maybe i should consider batteries!  hummm!

;

how are you "slapping" a pendulum with a windmill. got a picture?

p.s. ever though of using the drinking bird? http://www.overunity.com/index.php/topic,2421.0.html
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: supersam on August 11, 2007, 03:45:23 AM
fe:

a simple piece of leather on the downstroke!

lol
sam
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: FreeEnergy on August 11, 2007, 03:46:29 AM
like to see a picture just to confirm :)


thanks :)
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: supersam on August 11, 2007, 03:53:53 AM
fe:

right!

lol
sam













Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: FreeEnergy on August 22, 2007, 11:58:55 AM
to all,

while i see alot of people trying to use bicycle's to close the loop of this device, i don't see anyone thinking about where the tourqe is located in this device!  everyone seems to be trying to take maximum torque from the end of the lever, even after it has loaded a spring. 

if you look at the point where, maximum power or, (crush force), is , you will see that it is at the fulcrum of the lever!  not at the end of the lever.  (where would you rather have your finger?)  if you don't want your finger at the end of the lever( under the hammer), you damn sure don't want it any closer to the fulcrum. 

the thing is, that none of the replications, that i have seen, have taken this into cosideration.  please, someone take this into consideration and see what kind of power you can develop from the axel of the fulcrum on the lever.  not to be mistaken for the end of the lever. 

no wonder you can't get any power!

lol
ss


hi all, me again.

just a suggestion. what if you hang the whole device like a pendulum from the lever's fulcrum? i think you will have more torque in the other end of the pendulum.
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: hansvonlieven on August 29, 2007, 01:36:37 AM
G'day all,

The trouble with taking the power off the balance beam's fulcrum is that you don't get enough movement to do anything with, granted there is more torque, but without gearing or levering it, it is quite useless for any practical application.

If on the other hand you take the power off the pendulum's fulcrum the whole idea of secondary oscillations goes out of the window. You will just bring the thing to a standstill so much quicker.

Hans von Lieven
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: rozzaa72 on August 30, 2007, 02:32:51 PM
Perhaps mr milkovic's design would become perpetual motion, if a balloon type water pump, like what the doctor uses to check your blood pressure, was put under the hammer and compressed, with each swing. The hose could be used to squirt water on the pendulum.
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: oouthere on September 01, 2007, 04:09:05 AM
I have not read all of this post but hopefully enough to not be totally ignorant.

Just looking at the short usefull movement, I believe this could be coupled with a wankle magnet motor for regauging and then using the stored kinetic energy of the wankel (since no regauging power is used from the wankel) to oscillate the pendulium.

The wankle motor can be built using an iron spiraled rail instead of magnets and only an attractive force will be used on the rotor (neo magnet).  The last portion of the rail is severed and connected to the second portion of the oscillator.  When the magnet of the rotor is on the last (severed portion) of the rail the dual oscillator moves the rail to regauge the rotor.  The severed portion would need to be calibrated as to allow mometum to carry (energy stored in a flywheel) past the permanent part of the rail.

It looks like I've found my next project after the final tests of the RV.  :D

Rich
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: supersam on October 25, 2007, 08:11:35 AM
@hans,

do you really believe that gearing at the fulcrum is the right way to go?  i  have to agree with you if this device will ever be looped!  if there is twelve times more power out than in then it is only a mattter of, where do you extract the power from to keep the device running and how much power do you have left to generate energy?

lool
sam
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: hansvonlieven on October 25, 2007, 11:45:46 PM
G'day Supersam and all,

When I first came across the Milkovic device I created this animation just for fun. The trouble though with the Milkovic idea is that you do indeed have an increase in power, but no increase in available energy. The power developed is only of a very short duration, so when you multiply each side power times time you will find that the total ENERGY is in equilibrium minus friction losses as one would expect. That is why no-one, including Milkovic has been able to achieve a self runner. But for the hell of it look at this and PLEASE don't take it too seriously.

If you want some further information on the device go to my website and have a look, there are two papers there on the device that I wrote some time ago.  http://www.keelytech.com/news.html and follow the links.

In the meantime here is the "Beast" :-)

Hans von Lieven

(http://www.keelytech.com/news/perpetualmotion.gif)
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: Eddy Currentz on November 06, 2007, 01:20:29 AM
G'day Supersam and all,

When I first came across the Milkovic device I created this animation just for fun. The trouble though with the Milkovic idea is that you do indeed have an increase in power, but no increase in available energy. The power developed is only of a very short duration, so when you multiply each side power times time you will find that the total ENERGY is in equilibrium minus friction losses as one would expect. That is why no-one, including Milkovic has been able to achieve a self runner. But for the hell of it look at this and PLEASE don't take it too seriously.

If you want some further information on the device go to my website and have a look, there are two papers there on the device that I wrote some time ago.  http://www.keelytech.com/news.html and follow the links.

In the meantime here is the "Beast" :-)

Hans von Lieven


Hi Hans,
As a builder of a few Milkovic oscillators I have to take issue with your contention of equilibrium. While it appears that what you put in is what you get back, this has not been my experience.
If you have a 10 lb pendulum on one side, and a 10 lb weight on the secondary for balance, without any input energy you have a system in equilibrium. If you pick the pendulum up to a point of about 45 degrees and let it go, what happens? It swings down to the bottom of it's arc and applies force, through the arm, to the 10 lb weight. Say the 10 lb weight travels 1 inch vertically. The pendulum continues in it's arc and reaches the peak of it's swing on the other side. The 10 lb weight has no force on it so it drops down to rest. On the return swing the same thing happens with the 10 lb weight.
The energy put into the system is what it took to lift the pendulum in the first place. This energy was used to raise a 10 lb weight 1 inch, twice.
Now we need to put more energy into the system to raise the weight 2 more times. This is the amount of energy required to return the pendulum to it's starting height. A gentle push is usually sufficient to accomplish this, and another gentle push to do it again and on and on.
Now, take the pendulum off it's arm and let the 10 lb weight rest on the other end. By pushing down on the lever where the pendulum was attached, raise up the 10 lb weight, 1 inch, two times.
You will immediately realize how much work that pendulum is doing every time you give it a gentle push. Even better, do it with a 500 lb weight. You will not be able to budge that weight without the pendulum attached. Swinging the pendulum once will pick up that 500 lb weight twice. If you had a scale under the weight, it would go from 0 to 500 lbs two times. That's real work.
Where does this work come from? It's not gravity. It's centrifugal force. The force that "doesn't really exist", only it does.
A mass in circular motion doesn't always listen to Mr. Newton.
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: hansvonlieven on November 06, 2007, 11:49:31 PM
Hi Hans,
As a builder of a few Milkovic oscillators I have to take issue with your contention of equilibrium. While it appears that what you put in is what you get back, this has not been my experience.
If you have a 10 lb pendulum on one side, and a 10 lb weight on the secondary for balance, without any input energy you have a system in equilibrium. If you pick the pendulum up to a point of about 45 degrees and let it go, what happens? It swings down to the bottom of it's arc and applies force, through the arm, to the 10 lb weight. Say the 10 lb weight travels 1 inch vertically. The pendulum continues in it's arc and reaches the peak of it's swing on the other side. The 10 lb weight has no force on it so it drops down to rest. On the return swing the same thing happens with the 10 lb weight.
The energy put into the system is what it took to lift the pendulum in the first place. This energy was used to raise a 10 lb weight 1 inch, twice.
Now we need to put more energy into the system to raise the weight 2 more times. This is the amount of energy required to return the pendulum to it's starting height. A gentle push is usually sufficient to accomplish this, and another gentle push to do it again and on and on.
Now, take the pendulum off it's arm and let the 10 lb weight rest on the other end. By pushing down on the lever where the pendulum was attached, raise up the 10 lb weight, 1 inch, two times.
You will immediately realize how much work that pendulum is doing every time you give it a gentle push. Even better, do it with a 500 lb weight. You will not be able to budge that weight without the pendulum attached. Swinging the pendulum once will pick up that 500 lb weight twice. If you had a scale under the weight, it would go from 0 to 500 lbs two times. That's real work.
Where does this work come from? It's not gravity. It's centrifugal force. The force that "doesn't really exist", only it does.
A mass in circular motion doesn't always listen to Mr. Newton.

G'day Eddy Currentz and all,

If what you are saying is right, why then has no-one managed to build a self sustaining engine in what is now 10 years or so since the idea has been around. With THAT kind of surplus energy it should be a walk in the park. Many have tried, no-one has succeeded. After all, this is a very simple device which can be built by almost anyone who has some experience with tools. The materials required can be got for free if you are strapped for cash, so this is no barrier either. Everyone that was seriously experimenting with the device has walked away from it, even Milkovic has been remarkably quiet since the first of March this year.

The first one to demonstrate perpetual motion with this device will go down in history, The physics books will have to be re-written. You would think there is enough incentive there. And yet is doesn't happen. Food for thought maybe?

Hans von Lieven
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: Eddy Currentz on November 07, 2007, 03:24:32 AM


G'day Eddy Currentz and all,

If what you are saying is right, why then has no-one managed to build a self sustaining engine in what is now 10 years or so since the idea has been around. With THAT kind of surplus energy it should be a walk in the park. Many have tried, no-one has succeeded. After all, this is a very simple device which can be built by almost anyone who has some experience with tools. The materials required can be got for free if you are strapped for cash, so this is no barrier either. Everyone that was seriously experimenting with the device has walked away from it, even Milkovic has been remarkably quiet since the first of March this year.

The first one to demonstrate perpetual motion with this device will go down in history, The physics books will have to be re-written. You would think there is enough incentive there. And yet is doesn't happen. Food for thought maybe?

Hans von Lieven
Hi Hans,
How do you know it hasn't been done? Veljko has a tendency to hold some cards close to his chest.  ;)
I like your animated drawings, you have some very clever ideas. Nevertheless, without hands on experience it's very difficult to understand this mechanism.
To me, building a self runner is secondary to really understanding the physics involved. This looks like a simple machine, and physically it is. The difficult part is determining how the power is developed and how to efficiently use it.
I'm still learning a lot of new things with different configurations of this mechanism. I'm also experimenting with full rotation of unbalanced wheels. There is resonance, feedback, geometry and many other parameters that all work together in creating a desirable or undesirable output. Parasitic oscillations alone are a big problem. It's not quite as straight forward as it seems. A lot of time is spent in design and construction.
In other words, these machines are great fun.  :)
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: hansvonlieven on November 07, 2007, 04:12:10 AM
G'day Eddy,


Quote
In other words, these machines are great fun.

You are right they are. You are also right in your reasoning that there are many things yet to be discovered as far as resonance is concerned. And again you are right in saying that when it comes to resonant circuits our friend Newton is not always doing as well as expected.

Having said that it is not easy to create a self runner this way. I am not certain, as a result of considerable experimentation, that there is enough energy in the system to do so.

The energy developed on the "working side of the beam", if I may call it that, comes in 4 distinct pulses. The two upswings and the two downswings have each different characteristics. They are not identical in stroke-length and force. This makes a feedback system difficult to design. For that reason I have employed in the above animation a two way ratchet system (borrowed from George Constantinesco). This will impart the maximum available motion on the transfer gear regardless of individual stroke-lengths.

The rest is a matter of timing and weight of the hammer that energises the pendulum. I know I have been criticised for using a purely mechanical approach. To my critics I say this, any conversion of mechanical energy to electrical energy by say a generator of some sort and the reconversion of this electrical energy into mechanical energy by say an electromagnet in order to push the pendulum costs a lot of energy. You will be lucky to be able to apply 35% of the available energy to the pendulum.

The mechanical system envisaged in the animation is far more reliable and efficient, in spite of its clumsiness.

I have not built it like this, purely because my initial experiments indicated there was not enough energy in the system to guarantee its functioning.

Hans von Lieven

 
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: Eddy Currentz on November 07, 2007, 05:53:25 AM
Hey Hans,
One of the reasons that I switched to full rotation was the problem of stability with the pendulum. It's difficult to produce even and regular pushes in order to keep the pendulum in the sweet spot.
I agree with your assessment of turning the mechanical force into electrical energy. Its a very lossy process. On a larger scale with some serious engineering it might be more feasible.
Here is a machine I built that combines a Bedini wheel with a Milkovic oscillator. I called it the Milkodini. I stuck about 10 lbs of weight on the wheel to unbalance it.
The coil gets the wheel moving fairly well, enough to go through a few oscillating points during spool up.
The secondary will start to bounce wildly at certain RPMs, even with heavy springs to dampen it, unless I hold on to it. Even grabbing on to the arm and really leaning on it doesn?t completely stop it from oscillating. There is a lot of leverage when the stroke is shortened.
It only takes about 600 ma @ 12 volts to put out a considerable amount of force in the lever. And, of course, the current stays the same regardless of the loading.
After all the gearing I was only able to light a few led's with a stepper motor I stuck in there. It was quite a sight when it all got going. The problem was having way to much mechanical loss in the gearing, and I should have stuck the flywheel on the final shaft. The gearing should have been done in one step too.
It was a fun motor though. Here's a few pics.

Here is a side view.

(http://img136.imageshack.us/img136/1200/widefnl5.jpg)

Here is the gearing mechanism I used. I took apart an old bicycle and used the sprockets. It creates a 1-5 increase in speed (and a 5-1 reduction in torque). The flywheel weighs 20 lbs.

(http://img113.imageshack.us/img113/8334/milko6qz5.jpg)

I used a stepper motor as a small generator to light a few led?s. There wasn?t much left by the time the generator received some rotation.

(http://img113.imageshack.us/img113/7840/gearstd2.jpg)

I also borrowed heavily from Mr. Constantinesco and fashioned a mechanical valve from a couple of gear wrenches. It worked well, but had more slop than I could have hoped for. A clutch bearing would work much better, but you would have to machine an arm to fit on it.

(http://img514.imageshack.us/img514/1874/mechvalveeg0.jpg)
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: hansvonlieven on November 07, 2007, 10:01:58 AM
G'day Eddy,

There are a number of ways to keep the pendulum in the "sweet spot". The old time honoured method is of course the pendulum clock escapement. The other way is to use a 555 timer and an electromagnet. Since the resonant frequency is a result of the length of the pendulum alone, and since this frequency is incredibly stable, the timer can be set to deliver a push at the optimum time. You can also set the duty cycle of the timer and therewith set the amount of force you add into the system.

If you need more information on this please ask.

Btw. Good job and a lot of imagination on your prototype. Keep it up, you have talent.

Hans von Lieven
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: FreeEnergy on November 07, 2007, 11:01:10 PM
G'day Eddy,

There are a number of ways to keep the pendulum in the "sweet spot". The old time honoured method is of course the pendulum clock escapement. The other way is to use a 555 timer and an electromagnet. Since the resonant frequency is a result of the length of the pendulum alone, and since this frequency is incredibly stable, the timer can be set to deliver a push at the optimum time. You can also set the duty cycle of the timer and therewith set the amount of force you add into the system.

If you need more information on this please ask.

Btw. Good job and a lot of imagination on your prototype. Keep it up, you have talent.

Hans von Lieven

so what are you saying? over unity is possible with this system?
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: Eddy Currentz on November 07, 2007, 11:21:00 PM
G'day Eddy,

There are a number of ways to keep the pendulum in the "sweet spot". The old time honoured method is of course the pendulum clock escapement. The other way is to use a 555 timer and an electromagnet. Since the resonant frequency is a result of the length of the pendulum alone, and since this frequency is incredibly stable, the timer can be set to deliver a push at the optimum time. You can also set the duty cycle of the timer and therewith set the amount of force you add into the system.

If you need more information on this please ask.

Btw. Good job and a lot of imagination on your prototype. Keep it up, you have talent.

Hans von Lieven
Thanks for the encouragement Hans, I appreciate it. :)
I thought of also using a solenoid with a microswitch for the pendulum, but I'm sort of committed to full rotation at this point.
The mechanical pulses are much smoother and easier to handle. The key is to not take too much energy out of the system, or it becomes very inefficient. It's a trade off where the more travel you have, the easier the energy is retrieved. However, the more travel you have, the more energy gets bled off your angular momentum. The shorter the stroke, the more energy that is retained as rotational inertia. It seems to me to be an exponential relationship.
This presents difficulties in converting these short, powerful strokes into useful energy, especially electrical energy. Without well engineered and precision parts, a lot of energy is lost. This is nothing that can't be solved, it just adds to the puzzle.
I bought a little hand operated bilge pump that I'll rig up to see how much water I can lift. I can at least get a rough idea of how much work can be done on the output compared to the input.
Rotational physics are very interesting. What Chas Campbell has done with his flywheels, and what ltseung has talked about, lead me to believe there is energy available for the taking. There is a mysterious part (to me anyway) about the distribution of power in offset axis. It has to do with the effect a rotating mass has on the aether, with respect to it's axis. I've heard it mentioned a few times, but never explained well. It's just one of many foggy areas spread throughout my understanding of energy.
An excellent video to watch, which briefly mentions this concept, is by Jim Murray called the Gravity Tap Project. I wish I could grill Murray for a couple of hours about this stuff. That guy knows a lot.

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=6761827664845630969&hl=en (http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=6761827664845630969&hl=en)
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: hansvonlieven on November 07, 2007, 11:45:19 PM
@ Free Energy,

No, at this stage I would not go as far as this. By the same token I have not completely discarded the idea either.

The main problem with the device is its erratic behaviour. If the energy that causes this can be channelled in the desired direction perhaps it is possible to extract more energy from the system than we put in.

What we are dealing with is essentially a double pendulum. They behave in a strange way and become more and more chaotic as time goes by or as energy input increases. It is impossible to mathematically predict the behaviour of such an arrangement over any length of time.

The only way to control it at the moment is to severely dampen the reaction with counterweights, springs and so forth, which eat up energy at a furious pace. If that energy can be channelled it might become a different story.

Below is a simulation of a double pendulum. This animated GIF was taken from a physics site and is authoritative. It is easy to rig this up and observe the phenomenon yourself. Just add a balance arm beyond the fulcrum and add a dampening weight and you have the Milkovic device.

Hans von Lieven
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: CHANGE Australia on November 08, 2007, 08:28:45 AM
Why hasnt the loop been closed?  ???

If the basic premise is correct, and if, say, input is 1 stroke, output is 10 strokes, how come 1 of the extra 10 strokes hasnt been utilised to close the loop?

If I had built one of these, and it truly gave the first step to 'overunity', I'd immediately move to close the loop with the many relatively simple methods available. Why this isnt being done is anyones guess.

God help us.

Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: hansvonlieven on November 08, 2007, 09:09:38 AM
G'day change,

I think you are misunderstanding the system. If you have a close look at my animation on the previous page you will see there are two complete strokes (up and down) for every complete cycle of the pendulum (forward and return).

Where the alleged overunity comes in is in the power exerted on those up and down strokes compared with the power required to keep the pendulum moving.

I have not found usable overunity that could be harnessed to perpetuate the motion not to mention being able to extract work.

In spite of its simplicity of construction we are dealing here with quite a complex system as far as the different forces generated and their interactions are concerned.

The jury is still out on this one but even if someone manages to build a self runner using this system, don't expect it to revolutionise power generation.

Hans von Lieven
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: FreeEnergy on November 08, 2007, 09:18:51 AM
@ Free Energy,

No, at this stage I would not go as far as this. By the same token I have not completely discarded the idea either.

The main problem with the device is its erratic behaviour. If the energy that causes this can be channelled in the desired direction perhaps it is possible to extract more energy from the system than we put in.

What we are dealing with is essentially a double pendulum. They behave in a strange way and become more and more chaotic as time goes by or as energy input increases. It is impossible to mathematically predict the behaviour of such an arrangement over any length of time.

The only way to control it at the moment is to severely dampen the reaction with counterweights, springs and so forth, which eat up energy at a furious pace. If that energy can be channelled it might become a different story.

Below is a simulation of a double pendulum. This animated GIF was taken from a physics site and is authoritative. It is easy to rig this up and observe the phenomenon yourself. Just add a balance arm beyond the fulcrum and add a dampening weight and you have the Milkovic device.

Hans von Lieven

very very nice thanks for sharing. this gives me a whole new perspective on this Mikovic device. the animation is great!

peace
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: FreeEnergy on November 08, 2007, 09:23:50 AM
even if someone manages to build a self runner using this system, don't expect it to revolutionise power generation.

why not? i would put into use for myself and share it with friends, etc.
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: Eddy Currentz on November 08, 2007, 04:27:05 PM
Why hasnt the loop been closed?  ???

If the basic premise is correct, and if, say, input is 1 stroke, output is 10 strokes, how come 1 of the extra 10 strokes hasnt been utilised to close the loop?

If I had built one of these, and it truly gave the first step to 'overunity', I'd immediately move to close the loop with the many relatively simple methods available. Why this isnt being done is anyones guess.

God help us.


Hans has been gracious enough to design it, all we need is someone to build it (hint, hint).   :)
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: hansvonlieven on November 08, 2007, 11:24:52 PM
G'day all,

I wouldn't put too much stock in my "design". There are a number of things wrong with it that are not easy to overcome. It was never meant as a design to which a machine should be built, it was more an illustration of a possible approach. Sort of like a workout at the mental gym :-)

The system to function at all relies on resonance. Key to it is keeping the pendulum moving at its resonant frequency. Now normally, like in a pendulum clock, that would not be much of a problem, this has been solved centuries ago with the escapement mechanism. So why don't we use that?

Well, for one, the pendulum's fulcrum in a clock is in a fixed position. In the Milkovic device it is not. Here it moves in an arc relative to the fixed fulcrum of the balance beam. This in effect makes the balance arm a pendulum in its own right, with its own resonant frequency. The balance arm is moved solely by the centripetal forces that develop in the pendulum. It is important to understand this. As the pendulum reverses swing the centripetal forces are temporarily suspended and the balance beam because of its counterweight moves upwards. Since for every complete cycle of the pendulum there are two such points, the balance beam moves at TWICE the frequency of the pendulum.

We no longer have a clean relationship between resonant frequencies because now we have a natural frequency (the pendulum) and a forced frequency (the balance arm)

These two are antagonistic to each other resulting in erratic behaviour. Milkovic compensates for this by pushing the pendulum with his finger at what he judges to be an opportune moment. A mechanical device is not that flexible.

There are a number of other antagonistic frequencies that develop in the device, to go into this here would exceed the scope of this post. Perhaps I should write a paper on this when I have the chance.

The trick with this device would be to design it in such a way where all emerging vibrations are in a harmonic relationship to each other thus creating what Keely called a "Neutral Centre".

This is easier said than done. Perhaps you will understand now why I am putting so much work and research into this device and how it interfaces with my attempt to replicate Keely. Here we have a mechanical analogy to Keely's acoustic system. Interesting stuff indeed.

Hans von Lieven
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: fletcher on November 09, 2007, 01:09:41 AM
Thanks Hans .. that's about the most lucid & succinct account I've heard yet  :)
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: Eddy Currentz on November 09, 2007, 01:44:11 AM
It would be easy to drive a pendulum with a Bedini coil. They are bidirectional and you can control the amount of drive to the pendulum.
If you built the pendulum, like I did the Milkodini, on a wheel with only 4 or 5 magnets, you could swing the pendulum as high as you want at it's natural frequency.
This coil is very efficient and would provide all the drive you need for a 10 to 15 lb pendulum.
Dealing with the secondary is a whole different can of worms.
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: hansvonlieven on November 09, 2007, 05:21:23 AM
G'day all,

Attached is the avi capture of a computer simulation of a Milkovic device. I have only programmed gravity into this, no allowance for friction or air resistance. The pendulum length is twice the distance between the balance beam's fulcrum and the pendulum's fulcrum.

The weights are such that when the beam is horizontal in a quiescent state there is perfect equilibrium.

Note the erratic movement. It gets much worse when you allow it to run further but the entire file is over 26 MB, too big for posting here. Nevertheless this is an example of what happens when using these parameters.

The programme used is WorkingModel 2005.

This is just a short illustration of what I have been talking about.

Hans von Lieven
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: DarkLight on November 09, 2007, 07:37:49 AM
The period must be the same.
Pendulum and lever must move in synchrony
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: Eddy Currentz on November 09, 2007, 03:38:59 PM
That's an interesting simulation, but I'm afraid it bares little resemblance to reality. In my experience, when the pendulum swings down the lever swings up. There is some irregularity in the motion, but it is confined to small erratic excursions. They more resemble harmonic or parasitic oscillations. I have never had a machine even come close to behaving like that simulation.
The position of the pendulum and the load with respect to the fulcrum changes the dynamics of the machine. The length of the pendulum is also a critical parameter.
To achieve optimal performance, a fair amount of testing and adjustment is required. These things can act like real slugs when they aren't happy. But once you get the load impedance matched to the pendulum, the machine comes alive.
Milkovic claims that there is no connection between the load and the pendulum, and this is correct in a narrow sense. You can extract energy from the secondary, or hold the lever still, and it makes little difference to the pendulum (within certain parameters). However, there is a point of resonance where the secondary is reflecting energy back to the pendulum in an additive way. This is the tuning we're after.
A short, heavy pendulum works well. Look at Milkovic's machines and see how an optimal setup is constructed. Why reinvent the wheel when someone else has already done most of the work?
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: hansvonlieven on November 09, 2007, 08:02:35 PM
G'day Eddy,

I will post simulations soon of different layouts. This particular arrangement shows very graphically what you are up against.

Believe it or not, this is actually the optimum harmonic combination. It generates the most energy with the least losses. The natural frequency of the balance beam is one octave above the natural frequency of the pendulum. Any attempt to bring these erratic movements under control like shorter pendulum, springs, discord between balance beam and so forth will get the vibrations under some control but will also cost you much of the available energy.

I have a few ideas of how maximum energy can be obtained without creating rogue frequencies but the system is still incomplete, though promising.

You are correct when you say that a very short pendulum length diminishes the problem albeit it does not cure it altogether.

Hans von Lieven
Title: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: Earl on November 09, 2007, 09:08:13 PM
For the builders and simulators:

I would like you to try "Earl's Idea".

This idea comes from analogical comparison to electrical circuits.
The traditional double axis oscillator is what an EE would call "single-ended".  It needs an electrical point as reference, usually ground.  The mechanical circuit is the same; it needs a point of reference, for example a metal frame or the ground.

My idea is to turn this "single-ended" mechanical mechanism into what an EE would call "differential or push-pull".  For the same output impedance, a differential circuit has twice the amplitude and 4 times the output power as a single-ended.

This means no mechanical reference more. You need two arms oscillating 180 degrees out of phase, and of course the same phase offset for the two pendulums or unbalanced discs.  My EE bones say that two continually rotating discs, each with a weight on the circumference, would be better than pendulums.  Pendulums need gravity, rotating unbalanced discs should not need gravity.

The two discs/pendulums are on the same end; when one is going up, the other is going down.  The power output is taken only between the two moving arms at some point along their length.

The two arms are only connected at their common pivot point, each on its own ball bearing.  This would be a convenient point to fix the two bearings together and to attach the whole machine to a suspension frame which rests on the ground.

The input power would be to 2 electromagnets, each fixed on one arm pulsing each disc / pendulum.  Output power would be for example a water compressor connected by very flexible tubing.

Instead of one arm being referenced to a fixed environment, the two arms are now only referenced to each other.  This is the reason for the term differential.  Who knows, this machine might be able to function (with rotating unbalanced discs) just as well laying on its side or in outer space?  It seems to me that such a machine might be independent of gravity.

What do you think?
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: hansvonlieven on November 09, 2007, 09:21:06 PM
G'day Earl,

You mean something like this perhaps?

(http://www.keelytech.com/news/oscillations/harness.gif)

Hans von Lieven

For more information on this device http://www.keelytech.com/news.html and follow the link.

Hans von Lieven
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: Eddy Currentz on November 10, 2007, 01:21:03 AM
For the builders and simulators:

I would like you to try "Earl's Idea".

This idea comes from analogical comparison to electrical circuits.
The traditional double axis oscillator is what an EE would call "single-ended".  It needs an electrical point as reference, usually ground.  The mechanical circuit is the same; it needs a point of reference, for example a metal frame or the ground.

My idea is to turn this "single-ended" mechanical mechanism into what an EE would call "differential or push-pull".  For the same output impedance, a differential circuit has twice the amplitude and 4 times the output power as a single-ended.

This means no mechanical reference more. You need two arms oscillating 180 degrees out of phase, and of course the same phase offset for the two pendulums or unbalanced discs.  My EE bones say that two continually rotating discs, each with a weight on the circumference, would be better than pendulums.  Pendulums need gravity, rotating unbalanced discs should not need gravity.

The two discs/pendulums are on the same end; when one is going up, the other is going down.  The power output is taken only between the two moving arms at some point along their length.

The two arms are only connected at their common pivot point, each on its own ball bearing.  This would be a convenient point to fix the two bearings together and to attach the whole machine to a suspension frame which rests on the ground.

The input power would be to 2 electromagnets, each fixed on one arm pulsing each disc / pendulum.  Output power would be for example a water compressor connected by very flexible tubing.

Instead of one arm being referenced to a fixed environment, the two arms are now only referenced to each other.  This is the reason for the term differential.  Who knows, this machine might be able to function (with rotating unbalanced discs) just as well laying on its side or in outer space?  It seems to me that such a machine might be independent of gravity.

What do you think?
I think it would work great.   :)
In fact, I'm almost finished building a rig very similar to what you described. This one is going to be powered manually, through a chain connected to both weights. The weights will be 180 degrees out of phase, on a balanced bar, and I'm taking the output off a third lever that extends down from the fulcrum (the center). I have it set up to swing a third weight in this arm too, but that's later.
I'll start off with just the two weights (10 lbs each) and see what happens. I'm thinking I may need a damping weight on the third leg. I'm hoping that the two weights can get into a resonance and provide some energy back to each other to help keep them rotating. This is where the energy gain should be.
There are a lot of variations that can be tried here. Eventually I want to add a fourth weight and see what happens when I spin the whole thing.
It'll be endless fun.  I'll post some pics if I get my #%$@&*# chain this weekend (been waiting 2 weeks).

Ted

PS, I'll let you know if it takes off.  ;)
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: hansvonlieven on November 11, 2007, 09:45:45 AM
G'day all,

Still along the same track but no longer a Milkovic device. In this design advantage is taken of centripetal forces only.

The use of counter-rotating weights generates a sinusoidal reciprocating force along the axis of the convergences.

The reciprocal movement thus caused moves a magnet inside a coil back and forth generating electricity.

Have fun with this one. And yes, this will work in space since it does not rely on gravity.

Hans von Lieven
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: CHANGE Australia on November 12, 2007, 12:09:41 PM
Hans,

you should do a podcast or something. you'd have at least one listener (me)

i esteem you highly for pursuing energy liberty.

take care and God bless.
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: Talmin on January 03, 2008, 01:15:13 AM
Abstract of scientific paper by Nebojsa Simin 

FREE ENERGY OF THE OSCILLATING PENDULUM-LEVER SYSTEM
http://www.veljkomilkovic.com/Images/Nebojsa_Simin_-_scientific_paper_-_abstract.pdf
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: hansvonlieven on January 03, 2008, 08:49:12 AM
Abstract of scientific paper by Nebojsa Simin 

FREE ENERGY OF THE OSCILLATING PENDULUM-LEVER SYSTEM
http://www.veljkomilkovic.com/Images/Nebojsa_Simin_-_scientific_paper_-_abstract.pdf

What scientific paper, one page of utter rubbish and he calls that a study?

Have I missed something here?

Hans von Lieven
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: Talmin on January 04, 2008, 12:09:10 AM
It is clearly stated it is an ABSTRACT.
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: hansvonlieven on January 04, 2008, 04:16:33 AM
Sorry Tamin.

It is utter crap.

It purports to be a scientific paper. This it clearly is not.

An abstract in a scientific paper are the conclusions drawn and statements made as a result of an underlying study. They are aways published together, first the abstract, then the paper proper.

Even though the writer talks about a study supporting his findings he does not furnish it.

This puts the entire effort into the realm of toilet paper, if printed.

These are just a few statements by some idiot who does not know what he is talking about.

Hans von Lieven
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: Omnibus on January 04, 2008, 09:37:30 PM
This is what I got from this fellow in response to my asking for a reprint:

"The manuscript will be installed on the same link later. I am waiting for the response from one scientific magazine.
Sincerely
Nebojsa Simin"
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: hansvonlieven on January 04, 2008, 10:45:59 PM
Thanks Omnibus,

Let us wait then.

Hans von Lieven
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: hartiberlin on January 14, 2008, 04:17:06 PM
Got a new message from
Veljko Milkovic about another invention of him:


Dear friends,
 
we are glad to present you our new video on Self-heating eco-house concept with 85% energy savings.
 
There is an excerpt from the TV show ?Ugao?, FOX TV (Belgrade, Serbia, 2007) where it is shown Self-heating eco-house with the reflecting surfaces located in Novi Sad (Serbia) owned by Mr. Aleksandar Nikolic who lives in that house with his family more than 12 years and who speaks, in this video, about his positive experience of living in such house stating the advantages of building that eco-house with the reflecting surfaces...
 
Veljko Milkovic (www.veljkomilkovic.com) is the ideological creator (author) of this self-heating eco-house concept with the reflecting surfaces and the owner of this eco-house in Novi Sad (Serbia), Aleksandar Nikolic did a construction project for presented eco-house.
Veljko Milkovic still develops and improves this principle of building the self-heating eco-houses.
 
More info: http://www.veljkomilkovic.com/EkoKuca2Eng.html
 
Video on Google Video link:
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-341523606597835915
 
Best regards.
 
Veljko Milkovic
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: Talmin on February 10, 2008, 03:57:53 AM
I found this update related to this subject.

Model Builder’s Guide To Understanding Veljko Milkovic’s “Two-stage Mechanical Oscillator”
by Dr Peter Lindemann:
http://www.veljkomilkovic.com/Images/Model_Building_Guidelines_by_Dr_Peter_Lindemann.pdf
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: hartiberlin on February 15, 2008, 05:37:58 AM
Here is a new great video of a new pump.
If you have played as a kid with an old  street pump,you would
know how hard it is normally to pump so much water with all
of your weight..

Dear friends,
 
there is a new (old) video of the hand water pump with a pendulum - it is a replication done by Miroslav Zupkov -
the capacity of the pump is 1200 litres per hour.
 
The video is recorded in August 2004 in Novi Sad (Serbia).
 
Video link:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hNpgl7o_1QI
 
More info on the subject:
http://www.veljkomilkovic.com/rucnaPumpaEng.html
 
Best regards.
 
Veljko Milkovic
 
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: hansvonlieven on February 15, 2008, 10:03:37 AM
This all sounds very good until you look at the figures.

1200 liters is very little. And look at the cumbersome and expensive contraption that delivers it. By comparison a $12.00 bilge pump delivers 1800 liters per hour and runs of a 12 V car battery. A small solar panel can keep the battery charged. The whole set up would be a fraction of the price ofr Milkovic's contraption and you don't have to work it by hand. These kind of pumps are about the size of a man's fist.

No wonder Milkovic is going nowhere.

In case you think I am making this up I am enclosing the pump and price from a current boating supply house in Australia.

Hans von Lieven

Incidentally, this is the Milkovic pump (http://www.veljkomilkovic.com/Images/rucnaPumpa_clip_image002.jpg)
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: hartiberlin on February 15, 2008, 10:37:14 AM
Hi Hans,
do you know, if this pump can draw up the water from 12 Meters deep?

Also 36 Watts still needs a pretty big and expensive solar panel in clouds sky to really get 36 Watts
out constantly, especially in cloudy wintertime over here.

I just compared it, how much water I could draw from a street pump when I was a kid in the 1960s
how much physical body power I needed to draw this much water from the street pump.
You had to apply much more force than shown in this video by just giving it a little swing...
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: tinu on February 15, 2008, 01:49:13 PM
Hi Hans,
do you know, if this pump can draw up the water from 12 Meters deep?
...

That?s interesting!
Assuming water density at 1000kg/m3 and g rounded at 10m/s2, it would take exactly 40W to pump 1200l/hr from 12m deep. That?s for an ideal pump, of course.

Several questions arise:
1. Is a normal adult person able to deliver 40-50W? I?d say it is, even with one finger in a clever setup, but not for prolonged times. 50W is, in common terms, lifting 5kg to 1m in every second. For how long one can keep up with this effort rate? It depends on physical constitution but this is actually testable and some figures might, in principle, be brought into discussion. On the other hand, classical pumps require a great deal of force (because of small displacement) to achieve the same power. Not everyone is able to apply force over a threshold (especially a child) but nonetheless maybe some are able to expend great amounts of energy (i.e. children running, playing etc. all day long) thus achieving a reasonable mean power over the considered time interval.

2. Before water starts to pour out, the pendulum has to be swing for some time until reaching the designed working amplitude. Consequently, when Milkovic stops pumping, a lot of energy which already exists in the moving pendulum will be lost. It is unfortunate that neither one of these stages is shown in the videos, although they are part of the process and the energy loss may be quite significant if one only needs a small amount of water (i.e. a bucket of 10-12l).

3. By taking two pumps, one of which being classical and one of Milkovic type, it would take maybe just a ?barbecue contest? to have a fair resolution on which is better. Not to mention that both pumps may be electrically driven and scientifically compared.  Lack of such simple tests raises question about OU aspect. Nonetheless, the Milkovic device may be useful in the view of 1 above.

Cheers,
Tinu
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: tinu on February 15, 2008, 01:50:12 PM
deleted. double post.
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: Talmin on February 15, 2008, 04:11:24 PM
It is good comparation with the classic water pump.
I remember those pumps in my town too, it would be very hard to pump that after 2-3 minutes.

When we are talking about this, here are some videos showing how people pumping water in Africa even today:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GWFjKq8NVQY

http://www.fotosearch.com/DVA007/052-0353/
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: abassign on February 15, 2008, 06:55:07 PM
Confirm that the power is 40W/s, but the the efficiency of a piston pomp should not overcome 50%. Moreover seem me strange 12 mt, a pomp as that in the film, it should not overcome the 7-8 meters of deep. There am hand pomps that can pump up to 10 mt, but they use other technologies.

Then it is probable that the deep meters are always 6-7 and the liters 1200/h. However the power should be of 40W (50% eff.). However the power should be of 40W (6 mt.) but non more 80W (12 mt.).

The power of 40-80W, developed with an only arm, for a man of average build is not small. Even if the hourly calories are bearable (600 -1200 kcal/h)

I am a lot of curiosity from this tape, more than from that of the light bulbs. It seems really an interesting device to be experimented.
However I don't understand because nobody has built an electric model to testing, in serious way, the characteristics of the device.

Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: hansvonlieven on February 15, 2008, 07:24:05 PM
Hi Hans,
do you know, if this pump can draw up the water from 12 Meters deep?
...

No pump can. The theoretical maximum to which a pump can "draw" water is a little over 10 m assuming a perfect vacuum. Because water pumps generally can only create a partial vacuum and because of friction losses the practical maximum height is around 8 meters, even at that height pumps are not very efficient. These figures are for sea level. In elevated areas the figures are correspondingly less.

I will explain the physics if anyone is interested.

Hans von Lieven


Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: hartiberlin on February 15, 2008, 07:35:52 PM


That?s interesting!
Assuming water density at 1000kg/m3 and g rounded at 10m/s2, it would take exactly 40W to pump 1200l/hr from 12m deep. That?s for an ideal pump, of course.

Several questions arise:
1. Is a normal adult person able to deliver 40-50W? I?d say it is, even with one finger in a clever setup, but not for prolonged times. 50W is, in common terms, lifting 5kg to 1m in every second. For how long one can keep up with this effort rate? It depends on physical constitution but this is actually testable and some figures might, in principle, be brought into discussion. On the other hand, classical pumps require a great deal of force (because of small displacement) to achieve the same power. Not everyone is able to apply force over a threshold (especially a child) but nonetheless maybe some are able to expend great amounts of energy (i.e. children running, playing etc. all day long) thus achieving a reasonable mean power over the considered time interval.



Hi Tini,
many thanks for your calculation.

You can already see from the video that the guy swinging the pendulum
is not using 50 Watts of human power..
In my opinion he is only using at maximum maybe 1 Watt of human power to push the pendulum,
if you compare lifting a 5 Kg weight to 1 Meter height in every second..
That would made him very tired very much faster...

So I would say that pump shows already at least an overunity factor of 5 !

Also it is not well built and shakes too much, which still lowers
the efficiency.
If the stand would have been build more solid,
so that it can not rock back and forth, the efficiency would be even higher...


Regards, Stefan.
P.S: Did you ever peddle on a bike that was connected to an electrical  generator with a light bulb
and saw how hard you have to peddle to generate 50 or 100 Watts ?
Almost impossible to do this longer than 10 to 20 seconds !
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: hartiberlin on February 15, 2008, 07:53:19 PM
Hi Hans,
do you know, if this pump can draw up the water from 12 Meters deep?
...

No pump can. The theoretical maximum to which a pump can "draw" water is a little over 10 m assuming a perfect vacuum. Because water pumps generally can only create a partial vacuum and because of friction losses the practical maximum height is around 8 meters, even at that height pumps are not very efficient. These figures are for sea level. In elevated areas the figures are correspondingly less.

I will explain the physics if anyone is interested.

Hans von Lieven




Okay, I see, what you mean, because of the normal air pressure,
so these pumps are laid into the 12 Meter deep water directly and pump the 12 Meters up then..
But then they consume probably more power, if you have 12 Meters to overcome.

At least I am convinced now that the shown Milkovic pump has at least an overunity
factor of 5.
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: shruggedatlas on February 15, 2008, 08:28:24 PM
At least I am convinced now that the shown Milkovic pump has at least an overunity
factor of 5.

I think the Milkovic pump clearly aids the individual by providing a mechanical advantage, allowing a person to apply a smaller force over a longer period of time, making the job less strenuous.  Are you sure about the overunity part?

If it is truly 5 times overunity, it should be a trivial matter to set it up to pump water into a container above itself, and then use the power of that water as it falls to run itself.  And this has never been shown.
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: hartiberlin on February 15, 2008, 08:47:06 PM
Well, I am pretty sure from this video.
It does not need much energy to start the
pendulum to swing and does not need much power to
keep it swinging...

Definately overunity.
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: hansvonlieven on February 15, 2008, 09:42:34 PM
I am sorry to have to rain on your parade Stefan, but it would appear someone is telling a few lies in relation to this device.

Below you will find some pictures of the pump he uses in his device which I have grabbed off the video.

The actual pump that is being used is an off the shelf item that had the pump handle removed so it could be adapted to his mechanism. The arm with the fulcrum that once held the pump handle is clearly visible in the detail top right. These type of pumps are all over the third world. The United Nations and various charitable organisations have installed hundreds of thousands, maybe millions of them in Africa India and so forth. I have seen, handled and repaired a number of them when I was working in those parts of the world.

There is no way a pump like this can bring up water from 12 meters deep. If you can get it to work at a depth of 5 meters you are doing well.

1200 liters per hour is 20 liters per minute, the equivalent of two standard buckets of water. There is no way a pump of this nature can do this, maybe half that but no more. Have a look in the pictures how thin the stream really is. You need a stream of water a lot better than that to fill even one bucket in one minute. Try it at home if you don't believe me.

This is NOT an independent replication by Miroslav Zupkov as claimed. The device was built for Milkovic who has been demonstrating it since 2002 at least. Miroslav Zupkov is Milkovic's offsider. If you watch some of his other movies you can see Milkovic introducing him as his associate.

At a 5 meter depth with say 500 liters per hour it does not look all that good anymore, does it?

Hans von Lieven
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: tao on February 15, 2008, 09:43:48 PM
Concerning actual electrical overunity, Milkovic did the test using the hand flashlights:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IHln0xczRk8

He showed that using only one of the squeeze flashlights and moving the pendulum with it was rather easy to do, and that on the other end 9 squeeze flashlights where being lit up.

The above video with the flashlights and the video with the pump that you all have been talking about certainly look like overunity...

I know it might be hard to consider a strictly mechanical OU device, as it was/is for me, but it seems it might now be in our midst.

Time will most certainly tell...
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: abassign on February 15, 2008, 10:53:43 PM
@hansvonlieven

When I have seen the tape, a few months ago, also I thought it as you, but there are some points by to clarify:
An electric pomp varies water's quantity lifted in function of the depth. Before affirming what you tell, is good to look well at the diagrams with which every pomps is furnished.

For example:
http://www.lgpc.com/ProductFiles/SpecSheets/995117.pdf

This pump at 6 mt. flow 1.800 lt/h with 380 W of power!

If the Milkovic pump flow only 600 lt/h (is possible to think when look the film) end the meters are 6 (may be...) the equivalent electric pump power shuld be 100-120W...

If you observe the tape you will see that the pomp is operated by a finger with the ample movement of the arm, therefore the power engraved to the pendulum should not be small.
We try to calculate it:
1 mt * 2 kg of pressure for the 50% of the application time do around 20 J (20W/s)
If you want to try, tries to move a weight of 2 Kg, with an arm for 1 mt in gym apparatus and you understand how much work him test. Not only, but the structure that sustains the apparatus seems rather underdimension, therefore the efforts applied to it are not small, even if of harmonic nature. To pump the water with a similar pomp is a non small effort, that doesn't seem to be present from the tape, you notice that it uses only a finger, therefore you cannot push, in continuous way, for more than some kg.

Now, let watch the the following fact:

If you try to put in oscillation the pendulum, by lifting and lowering the arm, you will notice that the pendulum doesn't oscillate, If it oscillate is because the junction has some attrition.
When the pendulum is oscillating, this makes to move the arm. Then this apparatus seems a non reversing machine!



Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: hartiberlin on February 15, 2008, 11:10:42 PM

We try to calculate it:
1 mt * 2 kg of pressure for the 50% of the application time do around 20 J (20W/s)
If you want to try, tries to move a weight of 2 Kg, with an arm for 1 mt in gym apparatus and you understand how much work him test.


He is not applying 2KG of pressure 1 Meter long.
He is just giving it a small tip each swing,
then the pendulum swings from itsself on.
So your figure of power is not correct.

Let us just say 2 Kg push for 10 cms,
so via the formular:
mxgxh= Energy
you get 2 Kg x 10 x 0.1= 2 Joules,
now devide this by about 2 for half a second is the force applied,
so you just get 1 Watts of input power
which looks fitting,if you look at his face and see, he is not sweating to
push the pendulum...

I guess with all the mechanical friction involved, also if he is only
pumping it up 5 Meters as Hans said, he is still in overunity mode...
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: tinu on February 16, 2008, 12:27:48 AM
@abassign,

Excellent photo capture!
It proves many points:
1. Look at his finger and notice how much it is back-curved. Try it with yours. You?ll se the force is substantial. He pushes hard.
2. Look at his shoulder and notice how much it is raised. Man is again pushing hard.
3. Look at the red weight. It may easily have 30kg. Look at the height it swings (it?s easy by taking the red lever as reference and compare the vertical distance with the length of his arms). It may swing for 35-40cm on vertical (pendulum radius). Do the math and you?ll see that the weight in its highest position stores maybe close to 100J. That?s quite a significant energy stored there and it came from a person that imparted it BEFORE the camera was turned on. It can probably be done with 1W if bearings are good enough but it will take 100s if no losses at all.
4. If he pushes with his finger with a pressure of only 2kg over the whole arc length, which is pi*r (about 1m, I confirm it hereby), this is indeed 20W. I?ve put myself to test and I found that I could not sustain easily 5kg lifting with one finger for 3minutes (the length of the video), that being roughly 50W. But if I let the finger rest (i.e. during the back swing) it is quite easy. Not comfortable though (hence the finger curvature and the raised shoulder) but doable.
5. Remember that even if not continuously pushed, the pendulum will keep swinging and the system will continue to work for some time due to stored energy.
6. Isn?t it interesting that the movie is not a continuous shooting but it?s made of short added sequences? I?d love to see the unedited version with the pendulum started from rest state followed by continuous pumping for several minutes and the water collected to appreciate its volume?

Cheers,
Tinu
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: hansvonlieven on February 16, 2008, 02:02:45 AM
@ abassin,

If you look at the little submersible bilge pump I posted you will see it pumps 1800l of water and uses 36 Watts. Now I doubt it will push 5 m of head, but still, it is easily more than 3 times the water Milkovic's pump moves.

I as well as a number of others have replicated the Milkovic device and found no overunity. In fact I know of no one other than Milkovic that claims over 10 times the input power as output. If it was that big a difference even the sloppiest of replications should show overunity. The fact that it does not speaks for itself.

Hans von Lieven
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: shruggedatlas on February 16, 2008, 07:28:21 AM
Concerning actual electrical overunity, Milkovic did the test using the hand flashlights:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IHln0xczRk8

He showed that using only one of the squeeze flashlights and moving the pendulum with it was rather easy to do, and that on the other end 9 squeeze flashlights where being lit up.

The above video with the flashlights and the video with the pump that you all have been talking about certainly look like overunity...

I know it might be hard to consider a strictly mechanical OU device, as it was/is for me, but it seems it might now be in our midst.

Time will most certainly tell...

That is a terrible experiment.

Have you considered that the experimenter is pushing the pendulum with more force than is required to activate the flashlight in hand, and it is that additional energy that is making the experiment possible.

Also, the duration of light is entirely ignored.  The flashlight in the hand is squeezed over the entire time require to push the pendulum (say half-second), while the lights on the other end light up for a much shorter time than that.  And often, not all of the lights even light up.
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: tao on February 16, 2008, 08:00:22 AM
Concerning actual electrical overunity, Milkovic did the test using the hand flashlights:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IHln0xczRk8

He showed that using only one of the squeeze flashlights and moving the pendulum with it was rather easy to do, and that on the other end 9 squeeze flashlights where being lit up.

The above video with the flashlights and the video with the pump that you all have been talking about certainly look like overunity...

I know it might be hard to consider a strictly mechanical OU device, as it was/is for me, but it seems it might now be in our midst.

Time will most certainly tell...

That is a terrible experiment.

Have you considered that the experimenter is pushing the pendulum with more force than is required to activate the flashlight in hand, and it is that additional energy that is making the experiment possible.


Yes, I already considered that, and that is why I didn't definitively say that Milkovic's stuff demonstrates OU, just that it SEEMS like OU and that time will tell.

Yet in still, Milkovic has shown in other videos that the pendulum and it's moving swing/amplitude is NOT affected by the movement of the hammer/lever, period. So, taking that into account, how hard is it to keep a pendulum moving? (rhetorical)

Asymmetry...

Again, time will tell...


Quote

Also, the duration of light is entirely ignored.  The flashlight in the hand is squeezed over the entire time require to push the pendulum (say half-second), while the lights on the other end light up for a much shorter time than that.  And often, not all of the lights even light up.


The second guy in the video is clearly just 'trying it out' and he clearly doesn't have the movements down right, hence he seems to be pushing with the handheld flashlight for much longer than would be required. Plus, there is another video showing how much force it takes by hand to light up even one of those things, and to light up 9 at once, even to light them up for a split second, takes a lot more force, IT SEEMS, than what is being imparted to the pendulum (even though the second guy is inefficient with his movements).

Again, time will tell... I am not claiming that I see OU, but it certainly SEEMS like OU as of right now.

Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: hansvonlieven on February 16, 2008, 08:36:43 AM
When I came across across Veljko Mircovic's work it intrigued me and  I did a little work on the subject. I went as far as building the device. These are my thoughts and observations on the matter

The things that stand out is that he comes across as a sincere man who appears to have stumbled across a phenomenon that traditional science is at a loss to explain. From his demonstrations one could easily come to the conclusion that Newtonian physics do not apply where his arrangement is concerned. That in itself is a dangerous road to travel as it stirs up emotions amongst physicists that, as irrelevant as they should be in science, are nevertheless a very real part of human inter-reaction. Right or wrong, people have a tendency to defend whatever they consider their turf to be.

So what does he do? Veljko Milkovic puts a pendulum on a balance beam with a counter weight on the other side to put the arm into equilibrium and then gets the pendulum to swing. The result is an oscillatory movement of the beam.

(http://www.keelytech.com/news/oscillations/secondary.gif)


So far so good, that is what one would expect. He then claims that the mechanism does not work in reverse. He moves the balance beam from the opposite side up and down with the pendulum at a standstill and the pendulum does not swing. Case proved, Newton's third law is wrong. There is no equal and opposite reaction!

He even has a letter from Peter Lindemann D.Sc. to prove it. Lindemann goes as far as stating that something like Milkovic's discovery only comes around every three hundred years.

Sorry guys, but this is not a valid demonstration.

The demonstration is flawed because Milkovic does not truly reverse the process. If he were to agitate the beam at the natural frequency of the pendulum in even strokes he would soon find out that the pendulum would start to swing and gather momentum as he was feeding energy into it.

If the pendulum at all time was perfectly perpendicular and the fulcrum at all times at that axis the pendulum would only move up and down as there was no energy available to move it sideways. But such is not the case here.

There is horizontal movement, admittedly small, but it is there. That is why it takes a while before the pendulum can store enough energy to exhibit this. Inertia has yet to build up to show noticeable levels of movement.

Milkovic's demonstrations are far too short and uncontrolled to demonstrate this.

Let me explain:

(http://www.keelytech.com/news/oscillations/movement.gif)


The pendulum's fulcrum at the end of the balance beam moves in an arc. As the balance beam goes up the fulcrum's position relative to the pendulum is displaced horizontally as well as vertically.. That means that the pendulum is no longer perpendicular to the earth's centre of gravity. That also means that it has to find a new position.

As the pendulum develops inertia when it is forced into the new position it swings past the natural point of equilibrium and will only return when the energy that has been fed to it is expended. But while it is doing that the balance beam is moving back putting the pendulum even more out of equilibrium, but now in the opposite direction.

So the pendulum swings back to repeat the process over and over again with increased amplitude as long as the introductory impulses are of the same frequency.

The only things that will stop the pendulum behaving in this manner is when the agitation stops or when the agitation is out of step with the natural frequency of the pendulum's oscillations in which case we have created forces that are out of phase with each other and therefore cancel each other out.

Consider the following:

You have a balance beam, but this time you have on each end a pendulum of exactly the same length. This is important since the pendulum's frequency in this case is solely dependent on its length. You now give one pendulum a push and it begins to oscillate. The balance beam behaves as before, going up and down at twice the frequency of the pendulum.

What do you think happens after a while?

This is one of the classical experiments in physics because the effects are unexpected.

Say we have given the right pendulum a push. As it swings there is a noticeable diminishing of amplitude. The left pendulum now starts to pick up momentum, which increases with every loss of inertia on the other side. After a while the right pendulum will come to a standstill with the left one in full swing. Slowly the right pendulum will start to pick up momentum as the left one now starts losing energy. After a while, when the left pendulum's energy is spent the right one is in full swing again. The process keeps repeating itself until all energy is spent through friction, drag and heat. If there were no losses the process would carry on forever.

All this flies right into the face of what Milkovic and Lindemann are saying.

So all this Hoo-Haa about Newton being wrong and that the Milkovic device proves it is a lot of crap.

Try the experiment with a coathanger and two pendula of equal length suspended from it on opposite sides, give one of them a push and observe.

Hans von Lieven
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: tao on February 16, 2008, 08:59:17 AM
Great post Hans, very illuminating my good man...
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: hartiberlin on February 16, 2008, 11:12:04 AM

1200 liters per hour is 20 liters per minute, the equivalent of two standard buckets of water. There is no way a pump of this nature can do this, maybe half that but no more. Have a look in the pictures how thin the stream really is. You need a stream of water a lot better than that to fill even one bucket in one minute. Try it at home if you don't believe me.

This is NOT an independent replication by Miroslav Zupkov as claimed. The device was built for Milkovic who has been demonstrating it since 2002 at least. Miroslav Zupkov is Milkovic's offsider. If you watch some of his other movies you can see Milkovic introducing him as his associate.

At a 5 meter depth with say 500 liters per hour it does not look all that good anymore, does it?


Hi Hans,
to me the water stream coming out of pump looks okay and I can believe
that it is really 1200 Liters per hour.

But even if it would be just 500 Liters at 5 Meters deepth, that would require with an ideal
pump already 6,94 Watts.
But as the pump is not optimal and has lots of friction, I guess you would
need at least 10 Watts all the time.

But the guy never puts in 10 Watts with his arm.
As I calculated it is more like only around 1 to 2 Watts at maximum...

You also neglect, that one arm of the see-saw levers is longer, so it has
already a mechanical advantage.
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: abassign on February 16, 2008, 11:53:46 AM
 @hansvonlieven

Excellent the analysis, but it is not the motive for which the object proposed from... it has some strange properties.
I have said that the process is not reversing, or the movement of the arm doesn't influence the oscillation of the pendulum. Non only, the force applicate on the arm not influence the pendulum oscillation. Your clear scheme shows that or move of the arm provokes a move of the pendulum but the energy of the pendulum, at the end of the cycle, it is always nothing.
There is not a transfer of energy between the move of the arm and the pendulum, energy that the pendulum accumulates with visible oscillatory movement.
For instance, if the pendulum oscillates, and I stops the arm, the oscillatory energy in the pendulum remains. From the mechanical point of view, the pendulum is isolated in comparison to the arm, in the direction arm - > pendulum. Instead it is not isolated in the direction pendulum - > arm. The system operates as a sort of diode, the strength applied to the arm, for reaction, can't have influence on the pendulum oscillation.
In mechanics the systems to double pendulum are not often studied, in how much they ask for the calculation of chaotic systems. The study is often made with the theory of the impulse, but the results are always rather scarce, the chaotic systems are not predictable...

However I have wanted to calculate the water flow, it is a simple calculation to do, in how much it is hypothesized a flow of water that is accelerated by the gravity. During the descent, only for the first 10-50 cm, the flow is dominated by the gravity acceleration, therefore it is possible to deduce, through a simple equation, the section that should have the cylinder of water after a certain run.

For example:

0.3 mt is the distance where is possible, from the movie, look a flow water section
9.81 is gravity acceleration
x is the water cylinder diameter

1.2 (m3) is the pump water flow in 3600 seconds

1.2=3600 * (3.14 * (x/2)^2)*sqrt(9.81*0.3)
x we found 1,5 cm of cylinder water diameter

0.6 (m3) is the pump water flow in 3600 seconds

0.6=3600 * (3.14 * (x/2)^2)*sqrt(9.81*0.3)
x we found 1 cm of cylinder water diameter

Is not easy to measure the diameter of water flow, but this two measures are compatible with the film.
Observing where the base the pomp is set it is possible to understand if it deals with a well or of a cistern of harvest of the waters. If it is a cistern the depth it doesn't overcome the 2-3 meters, if a well the depth is surely great.

Note:
I have mistaken saying that a hand pomp cannot work besides the 7-8 mt of depth. it is only a problem of physical effort, there are hand pomp's that also go to 100 mt of depth.

Unfortunately in this moment I am making pure speculation, but it is believable that the depth of the water both among the 12-15 mt, otherwise the pomp would not succeed in working and the 4 meters, otherwise water would be filtered by the ground.

Six meter of deep my be a less value hypothesis.
Ten meter of deep my be a hight value hypothesis.

At this point it is possible to get a whole hypothesis related to the necessary power to pomp the water:

6 mt - 0,6 m3/h -> 10W with a pump eff. 50% -> 20W
6 mt - 1,2 m3/h -> 20W with a pump eff. 50% -> 40W

10mt - 0,6 m3/h -> 16W with a pump eff. 50% -> 32W
10mt - 1,2 m3/h -> 32W with a pump eff. 50% -> 64W


Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: capthook on February 19, 2008, 10:24:39 AM
Man - what a thread!!  Took hours to read it all.  GOOD STUFF   :o

Is it COP>1 ?  Sure seems to be more work done ie. pumping water than energy input ie. hand flick.

The believers make some great arguments - as do the skeptics.

12:1 ?  2:1 would great.  No matter the case - I agree the problem comes with the irregularity of the pulses and syncing them up to create a working OU system.  Lot's of cool ideas presented. 

(I like Hans' airpump diagram  8) )

At this point - I believe OU could be possible with his device - just a matter of engineering the loop??  Wish the inventor showed some good measurements.....
AND wish we could read some of his patents in full....

Anyone have English versions of his full patents relating to these devices??  ???


CH
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: capthook on February 19, 2008, 11:11:49 AM
A screen shot from one of his videos (Universal Two-State Mechanical Oscillator -- A Mechanical Amplifier - near the end) showing a (split-second view) of a diagram of what appears to be an attempt by the inventor to close the loop.

Looks like a piston driving a wheel, powering a generator, powering an electro-magnet repulsing the pendulum at the far right swing.
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: capthook on February 19, 2008, 11:34:16 AM
Hans - (or anyone)  ;D

I've tried to implement a "spiral" cog like this... always results in too much friction as well as a "braking effect" on the transition.
Any recommendations on an ideal way to do this?  Materials to use?  etc?  Have you implemented this design component before?  Successfully?

Many thanks in advance,

CH
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: hansvonlieven on February 19, 2008, 12:32:46 PM
Hans - (or anyone)  ;D

I've tried to implement a "spiral" cog like this... always results in too much friction as well as a "braking effect" on the transition.
Any recommendations on an ideal way to do this?  Materials to use?  etc?  Have you implemented this design component before?  Successfully?

Many thanks in advance,

CH

These types of cams are quite common. The problem you are having is that there is not enough energy in the system to drive it.

The earlier post is Milkovic's think on how to achieve a closed loop. The problem with this design is that the stroke lengths vary. When the pendulum swings towards the fulcrum the stroke length is different to when it swings away from it. A crankshaft as depicted requires even stroke lengths in order to function.

Hans von Lieven
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: Talmin on February 19, 2008, 04:01:36 PM
I watched the video Universal Two-Stage Mechanical Oscillator -- A Mechanical Amplifier again - and it seems to me that the part where this diagram is shown is something like what is copied from internet - I noticed some letters, more diagrams, printed copy of peswiki article, printed copy of this overunity forum topic... so probably this diagram is also something copied from the web...

I tried some google search and I found this forum with the same diagram and Italian description on that diagram that cannot be clearly seen in the video:
http://energierinnovabili.forumcommunity.net/?t=4759206&st=75
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: capthook on February 19, 2008, 06:40:30 PM
Thanks for your replies -

Talmin -
Good find - much better picture. (see attached)

Hans -

"The problem with this design is that the stroke lengths vary."
I agree - as the problem comes with the irregularity of the pulses and syncing them up to create a working OU system.

As to the cog - the attached modified diagram shows the upper point as a bearing reducing friction rather than a static point greatly.  The "spiral" would ideally have a bearing as well?  How to get it to "travel" the "spiral"?  Hmmm - I guess I could put a multiple of bearings around the the length of spiral.... adding a lot of weight... but improving performance?  Even if "there is not enough energy in the system to drive it" - if there was - it would still be ideal to maximize performance by overcoming the friction produced in the original diagram by some such method?
Ideas of better ways to do this?

CH
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: capthook on February 19, 2008, 07:11:12 PM
More directly:

I'm trying to move the pendulum from the 6 o'clock position by 45 degrees to the right applying the spiral cog to the pendulum support.  As such - attaching a bearing to the pendulum "strut" is no good as the angle changes and frustrates proper contact - there by the need to have bearing/bearings on the "spiral" of the cog.  How to reduce the friction/impact of the spiral on the pendulum "strut"??

Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: supersam on February 19, 2008, 11:06:52 PM
@all,

having looked at this site,since the beginning and doing several experiments, i now realize that you can't take the power off of the center fulcrum, without killing the effect.  there is simply not enough torque.  however looking at the water pumping proplems with a very innefficient type of pump even,  i have to ask the stupid question,  has noone ever heard of a "foot valve"?  it seems to work much like a diode, only allowing water to flow in one direction.   when used with air it can effectively increase the distance verticaly that you can pump water by the use of an air tank with a bladder.

it seems to me if we can develop enough head pressure, whith water, and the right water turbine, we should be able to have a closed loop, where we can run the pendulum with the power generated.

lol
sam
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: shruggedatlas on February 20, 2008, 01:45:24 AM
@all,

having looked at this site,since the beginning and doing several experiments, i now realize that you can't take the power off of the center fulcrum, without killing the effect.  there is simply not enough torque.  however looking at the water pumping proplems with a very innefficient type of pump even,  i have to ask the stupid question,  has noone ever heard of a "foot valve"?  it seems to work much like a diode, only allowing water to flow in one direction.   when used with air it can effectively increase the distance verticaly that you can pump water by the use of an air tank with a bladder.

it seems to me if we can develop enough head pressure, whith water, and the right water turbine, we should be able to have a closed loop, where we can run the pendulum with the power generated.

lol
sam

Did you come from the Lead Out thread?  Lawrence Tseung goes on at length about the benefits of a foot pump, one way valves, and mixing air and water.  You should probably read his experiments if you are not familiar with them.
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: capthook on February 21, 2008, 03:57:44 AM
Hi all -

I'm trying to move the pendulum from the 6 o'clock position by 45 degrees to the right applying the rotor "fins" to the pendulum.    The "fins" slope push the pendulum, allowing it to drop at the end of the "fin".

How to reduce the friction/impact to minimize rotor speed reduction?  Materials?  Bearings?  Designs?

Scratch this idea and instead do "_____" ?

Thanks for any ideas!

CH


Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: Prophmaji on February 21, 2008, 04:30:35 AM
Gravity is a polarized, oriented gradient.

Hope that helps.

Edit: Now...what does that mean...concerning inertia?
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: hansvonlieven on February 21, 2008, 07:20:02 AM
G?day all.

Quote from my post 601 page 41 this thread.

Consider the following:

You have a balance beam, but this time you have on each end a pendulum of exactly the same length. This is important since the pendulum's frequency in this case is solely dependent on its length. You now give one pendulum a push and it begins to oscillate. The balance beam behaves as before, going up and down at twice the frequency of the pendulum.

What do you think happens after a while?

This is one of the classical experiments in physics because the effects are unexpected.

Say we have given the right pendulum a push. As it swings there is a noticeable diminishing of amplitude. The left pendulum now starts to pick up momentum, which increases with every loss of inertia on the other side. After a while the right pendulum will come to a standstill with the left one in full swing. Slowly the right pendulum will start to pick up momentum as the left one now starts losing energy. After a while, when the left pendulum's energy is spent the right one is in full swing again. The process keeps repeating itself until all energy is spent through friction, drag and heat. If there were no losses the process would carry on forever.

All this flies right into the face of what Milkovic and Lindemann are saying.

So all this Hoo-Haa about Newton being wrong and that the Milkovic device proves it is a lot of crap.

Try the experiment with a coathanger and two pendula of equal length suspended from it on opposite sides, give one of them a push and observe.

Hans von Lieven


To which I received this reply from abassign:

@hansvonlieven

Excellent the analysis, but it is not the motive for which the object proposed from... it has some strange properties.
I have said that the process is not reversing, or the movement of the arm doesn't influence the oscillation of the pendulum. Non only, the force applicate on the arm not influence the pendulum oscillation. Your clear scheme shows that or move of the arm provokes a move of the pendulum but the energy of the pendulum, at the end of the cycle, it is always nothing.

There is not a transfer of energy between the move of the arm and the pendulum, energy that the pendulum accumulates with visible oscillatory movement.
For instance, if the pendulum oscillates, and I stops the arm, the oscillatory energy in the pendulum remains.  From the mechanical point of view, the pendulum is isolated in comparison to the arm, in the direction arm - > pendulum. Instead it is not isolated in the direction pendulum - > arm. The system operates as a sort of diode, the strength applied to the arm, for reaction, can't have influence on the pendulum oscillation.

In mechanics the systems to double pendulum are not often studied, in how much they ask for the calculation of chaotic systems. The study is often made with the theory of the impulse, but the results are always rather scarce, the chaotic systems are not predictable...


Wrong.

There is transfer of energy through the balance arm. No increase of energy is observable, the total energy in the system is static.

I have made a computer simulation of my proposed demonstration using WorkingModel2005. Only gravity has been programmed into the model, no drag or friction has been allowed for to show what happens in the system without outside influence in an ideal scenario. If there was any excess energy it would show up here since there are no other influencing factors.

I repeat it again, Milkovic cheats.
The demonstration of his that allegedly proves that Newton does not apply where his system is concerned is flawed, as I already pointed out in post 601.

Here is the proof.

I am sorry the avi of the simulation is very large (38MB) but I wanted to show a complete cycle.

You can clearly see the transfer of energy, very slow and almost unnoticeable at first and then speeding up as the process accelerates until all energy is transferred, at which point the cycle reverses.

Newton?s laws remain intact and so does CoE. There is NO overunity in the device as designed by Milkovic.

Hans von Lieven

As I cannot upload the avi to the server here because of its size I have put it on my website.
http://keelytech.com/overunity/milkovicdouble.avi you can download it from there.
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: gaby de wilde on February 21, 2008, 09:56:00 AM
Hi all -

I'm trying to move the pendulum from the 6 o'clock position by 45 degrees to the right applying the rotor "fins" to the pendulum.    The "fins" slope push the pendulum, allowing it to drop at the end of the "fin".

How to reduce the friction/impact to minimize rotor speed reduction?  Materials?  Bearings?  Designs?

Scratch this idea and instead do "_____" ?

Thanks for any ideas!

CH

I don't think I had seen that concept before.

This is a great idea I think. I don't really care what anyone else thinks, I like it :-)

(http://www.overunity.com/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=1763.0;attach=17840;image)

gradually push the pendulum sidewards.

Bessler describes that.

Clocks of course use an escapement mechanism.

As a note:

Keep looking for ways to make gravity powered devices.

I already know how to do it but I'm trying to find attention for my permanent magnet overunity invention.

http://forum.go-here.nl/viewtopic.php?p=750
View topic - Perpetual motion made simple.

That anyone can understand.

 ;)
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: PulsedPower on February 21, 2008, 10:02:36 AM
Just a thought on how to drive this and extract power from it. Variable reluctance driver triggered by a position sensor to drive the pendulum as shown in the italian diagram and a magnet or a stack of magnets moving past a slotted pole piece with a coil to extract power from the magnetic circuit, better known as a linear motor (generator in this case) rectify the output from the coil use the DC to run the pendulum exciter. No problem with variable stroke, cyclic linear motors like this are well proven in the refrigeration and cryogenic fields where they are used to drive compressors.
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: hartiberlin on February 21, 2008, 11:01:51 AM


Newton?s laws remain intact and so does CoE. There is NO overunity in the device as designed by Milkovic.

Hans von Lieven

As I cannot upload the avi to the server here because of its size I have put it on my website.
http://keelytech.com/overunity/milkovicdouble.avi you can download it from there.


Hi Hans,
nice animation. Well done.
Yes, now I see, what you mean.

You mean a 2 coupled oscillator system where the energy swings from one
oscillator back to the other oscillator and back and forth again.

Well, maybe you can post your WM2D file.

I think the Milkovic device can only work,
if the 2 fulcrum lever arms have a different length.
Then there is the needed asymmetry there and THEN
ONLY can the gravity energy conversion work.

The principle to extract gravity energy is to modify the weight
of one fulcrum lever arm and thus lift the other arm up and down
with a much higher force x distance = Energy.

This can only work, if both lever arms have a different length.

So your example does not fit or just describes the case
where the energy amplification has a factor = 1 so COP = 1.

You have to choose the right setup parameters to get COP > 1
that means to set the lever arm length on each side right.

Regards, Stefan.
P.S: Also we have another slightly different setup as in your example,
cause we "rectify" the motion of the pendulum who does the output load work
(pump action in the last example)
cause we just lift and release a weight VERTICALLY, so it can not swing
horizontally, so we "rectify" or "limit" the dimensions it can swing in...( so to say)

If you look again to the guy who is pushing the pendulum at the blue
pump, no way he is using more than 1 to 2 Watts for this action
and the pump needs at least 10 Watts including all the friction to pump up
the water.
Also you see, that it also does not use the leverage of blue pump handle
which you can see, that it is not used anymore, so the
Milkovic lever arm has to pull the pump rod with lots of force
to directly lift the water up.
So the pump device has at least a COP of 5 in my opinion.
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: hansvonlieven on February 21, 2008, 05:56:16 PM


Hi Hans,

...................Well, maybe you can post your WM2D file.


Not a problem Stefan. Here it is:

Hans von Lieven
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: capthook on February 21, 2008, 06:01:22 PM
Upon further evaluation ? I?m not sure it?s over-unity.  In fact ? I think what the device/principle is really doing is:

Applying a long stroke/low power impulse to the pendulum

And converting it to a short stroke/high power impulse to the anvil end.

Thus ? just changing the frequency of the energy.

Someone earlier mentioned something along these lines - to long a topic to search for who......

Anyway ? the device and ideas are interesting.  It?s application as a water pump seems efficient.  Low power applied to pendulum results in high power driving the pump.  Thus the ?work? required by the user is reduced significantly.

A small, elderly woman could do the work that would normally require a strong, young man to do.

- - -

No takers on refinement ideas for my "cog fins" idea?

CH
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: hansvonlieven on February 21, 2008, 06:41:29 PM
Upon further evaluation ? I?m not sure it?s over-unity.  In fact ? I think what the device/principle is really doing is:

Applying a long stroke/low power impulse to the pendulum

And converting it to a short stroke/high power impulse to the anvil end.

Thus ? just changing the frequency of the energy.


That is exactly what it is doing CH.

As far as your cog fin idea is concerned this cannot work as drawn. The pendulum must receive a short sharp push at the correct time in order to absorb energy. Anything else will be counterproductive.

You have two cycles of the working end lever to every one cycle of the pendulum. What you must do is to store that energy and release it in one burst at the correct time. Your arrangement cannot do this.

Hans von Lieven
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: allcanadian on February 21, 2008, 07:54:52 PM
@hansvonlieven
Quote
I have made a computer simulation of my proposed demonstration using WorkingModel2005. Only gravity has been programmed into the model, no drag or friction has been allowed for to show what happens in the system without outside influence in an ideal scenario. If there was any excess energy it would show up here since there are no other influencing factors.

LOL, hans you don't honestly believe a 2bit simulation can accurately describe reality do you  :'(, the first real lesson I learned in the field is that all the sims and calculations in the world cannot prepare you for reality, it has a way of making even the most educated persons look silly sometimes.
I have built the balance beam-dual pendulum on precision bearings, fully adjustable, using weights from 5 to 15 lbs, and I would agree that there is a large oscillation(beat) or transfer of energy between the pendulums . But there is more to see than your simulation is going to show you, one is the fact that the balance beam moves with this beat through a given range of motion proportional to the pendulums period of oscillation, another is that a dampening effect in the beat has no relevance to the period of oscillation in the pendulums nor to the transfer of energy. Another is that should the period of oscillation be very large the balance beam will make 360 Deg rotations and in the right context the upper pendulum will fall through a vertical line drawn through the center of rotation and accelerate the balance beam, I learned all this in 15 minutes ---- Milkovic has been doing this for Years---- you do the math on that one.

Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: hansvonlieven on February 21, 2008, 08:22:01 PM
@ allcanadian,

The main reason for the simulation was to show that the Milkovic demonstration where he moves the balance arm and states that this does not introduce oscillations in the pendulum is wrong.

Having built various versions of the Milkovic device I am aware that a simulation of this kind does not completely show everything there is to know, but for the purpose stated the simulation is valid and shows the interactions of forces accurately.

Milkovic states that the movement of the balance arm does not influence the behaviour of the pendulum. This is also wrong as it clearly does.

Try the following experiment. Use the Milkovic arrangement with the counterweight on the other arm as designed and doing some work as in hammering an anvil. Start the pendulum with a measured push, let it run its course until all energy is expended and the pendulum comes to a standstill. Count the number of oscillations.

Next clamp the balance arm and from the same starting position and with the same amount of push repeat the experiment. Count the number of oscillations.

Perhaps then you will see what I am driving at.

Hans von Lieven
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: allcanadian on February 21, 2008, 09:07:50 PM
@ hansvonlieven
Quote
Try the following experiment. Use the Milkovic arrangement with the counterweight on the other arm as designed and doing some work as in hammering an anvil. Start the pendulum with a measured push, let it run its course until all energy is expended and the pendulum comes to a standstill. Count the number of oscillations.
I tried this experiment as well,  I could not make anything work as claimed but have yet to admit it cannot be done.

Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: hansvonlieven on February 21, 2008, 09:22:49 PM
@ hansvonlieven

I tried this experiment as well,  I could not make anything work as claimed but have yet to admit it cannot be done.


@ allcanadian,

I never said it cannot be done.

All I am saying is that the device as designed by Milkovic does not produce OU. There may be a way of doing this, but it would require major modifications, the nature of which I am presently uncertain of.

Hans von Lieven
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: abassign on February 21, 2008, 11:37:26 PM
@hansvonlieven

If you move toward the fulcrum of the arm of lever the weight of right, the system it behaves in different way. The weight of left salt and it regularly goes down in how much the program of simulation for smaller angles has smaller errors. I have worked in the programs of mechanical simulation as the CSMP, and I know that the simulation happens through enough exact differential equations for small variations, but less and less exact for ample variations.
Don't trust too much such programs, kind if, as in the case of Milkovic we enter the world of the chaotic motions. Sooner or later the pendulum of left certainly starts to scillate, but more than I approach to the right weight, and therefore I considerably increase the mass of it, different it will be the behavior of the left weight. Is sure that there are couples of values, both in the masses of the pendulums and for the positions of application point, that can bring to a stable system as the Lagrangian point L1-L2-L3 of the planet orbits.
The interaction among the two masses is of fact an action of smaller order, respect other actions measured by Milkovic. As I already told you, the system of Milkovic seems to operate as a diode, obviously it doesn't create energy.
Then it doesn't seem to produce energy, but simply to exploit it in correct way.
However it needs to make some measures him to a real device, that operates under the same chaotic conditions of the Milkovic device.
However the example from you done it is stupendous for his genial simplicity!

Ciao
Adriano

Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: hartiberlin on February 22, 2008, 01:38:17 AM
Hi Hans and all,
I also played with it and I came up with a setup
that describes the Milkovic setup much better.

Have a look at the encoded video also.

Here are the files attached.
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: hansvonlieven on February 22, 2008, 07:42:31 AM
G'day Stefan,

As you probably know by now I do most of my work very early in the morning. I usually get up somewhere around 4 o'clock and work until mid-day. Then I do other things until I've had enough. It is 5:30 PM now and I have had a couple of beers and my thinking is not at its best anymore. I have downloaded your WM file and had a quick look at it.

It deserves serious study, not a quick reply. So please bear with me, I will give it due attention and let you know my thoughts on the matter when I am convinced I have seen it right.

Greetings from Australia to you and the old country

Hans von Lieven

@ adriano,

I am aware of the dilemma. Please look at page 37 post 552 this thread and at this : http://www.overunity.com/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=1763.0;attach=14178

Hans
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: abassign on February 22, 2008, 09:54:33 AM
@hansvonlieven
@Stefan

But it is so difficult that someone can build a replica of the invention of Milkovic and to make some appropriate measures ?

Ciao
Adriano
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: PulsedPower on February 22, 2008, 01:10:11 PM
Pmotion, the problem with your perpetual flow device is that the liquid head in the left hand pipe is greater than the head in the right hand pipe from the top to the siphon break (reservior discharge) The fluid will flow backward to what you are expecting and will come out of the lower RHS funnel until enough air is drawn into the system though the reservoir discharge to reduce the head on the LHS. The system may become unstable and oscillate dumping all the reservoir water but accepting none of it into the funnel. You should try it just to get a feel for a bit of fluid dynamics/statics

There was mention of hand pumps achieving 100M lift in this thread, sure by using a down the well pump with a long pump rod, a 100m lift is possible. There is nothing to indicate that the pump shown is a down the well pump it appears to have a bend in the pipe going into it's base in one shot. Down the well pumps are not very portable, needing to have the rod and casing assembled on site, in which case a practical suction limit would be 6M at sea level and it may be almost impossible to get it to prime at 6M if the piston seal isn't close to perfect.
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: allcanadian on February 22, 2008, 05:08:34 PM
@ hansvonlieven
I did not mean to imply you said this cannot be done, I meant that I have yet to convince myself that this cannot be done. I didn't mention one thing I found in my experiments you guys may find  very interesting. In the dual pendulum balance beam we could say the total mass and all forces revolve around the fulcrum, the fulcrum is the center of power, without it the system would collapse. In my experiment I found the fulcrum could be "moved" away from the center of balance when one end of the balance beam was within a range of 30 Degrees from level without expending work as the fulcrum is moving horizontally and is never in a condition of having to lift the beam to find its center. As well the fulcrum and the base are under the influence of the system as a whole when forces within the system change, I think this is what Milkovic is getting at, a large force acting over a small distance ---- work extracted at the perfect moment when it can have very little effect on the system.
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: hansvonlieven on February 22, 2008, 05:14:40 PM
@hansvonlieven
@Stefan

But it is so difficult that someone can build a replica of the invention of Milkovic and to make some appropriate measures ?

Ciao
Adriano

There have been many replications of Milkovic's system. NONE have shown OU!

Hans von Lieven
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: hansvonlieven on February 22, 2008, 06:26:55 PM
G'day Stefan and all.

Quote
Hi Hans and all,
I also played with it and I came up with a setup
that describes the Milkovic setup much better.

I agree that this is a fair simulation of what happens in a Milkovic device. I have made some alterations to your simulation in order to show what I was talking about in my earlier post, which i will repeat here for convenience's sake.

@ allcanadian,

The main reason for the simulation was to show that the Milkovic demonstration where he moves the balance arm and states that this does not introduce oscillations in the pendulum is wrong.

Having built various versions of the Milkovic device I am aware that a simulation of this kind does not completely show everything there is to know, but for the purpose stated the simulation is valid and shows the interactions of forces accurately.

Milkovic states that the movement of the balance arm does not influence the behaviour of the pendulum. This is also wrong as it clearly does.

Try the following experiment. Use the Milkovic arrangement with the counterweight on the other arm as designed and doing some work as in hammering an anvil. Start the pendulum with a measured push, let it run its course until all energy is expended and the pendulum comes to a standstill. Count the number of oscillations.

Next clamp the balance arm and from the same starting position and with the same amount of push repeat the experiment. Count the number of oscillations.

Perhaps then you will see what I am driving at.

Hans von Lieven

All I have done is to duplicate your balance arm arrangement and fixed it in space so it does not perform work anymore. All other parameters are identical. Now watch what happens to the energy stored in the pendulum as the two simulations run simultaneously.

I did not have a simulation programme when I first did my experiments so I had to build the device. Let me assure you this is exactly what I found and judging by his post this is also what allcanadian observed in his replication.

I am only uploading the wm2d file as I have only a landline available here and uploading large avi's is a pain in the butt. Perhaps you would be so kind and do this so everybody can see the simulation.

Hans von Lieven
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: hansvonlieven on February 22, 2008, 08:15:50 PM
G'day again,

I have done a very short avi of the simulation which nevertheless gives a clear idea of what happens to the energy in the Milkovic system. For those of you that have the programme you will have to let it run to 28000 to see the full cycle. You will notice that the bottom pendulum moves for just under 8 minutes longer than the pendulum that is performing work.

Anyway, have a look at this:

Hans von Lieven

Sorry, something went wrong here with the transcription
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: hansvonlieven on February 22, 2008, 09:17:17 PM
Sorry guys,

This one does not work either.

Notice how the top pendulum slows down after every impact in direct ratio to the force of the impact as energy is transferred to the anvil.

My apologies for the f*ck up  >:(

Hans von Lieven

Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: hansvonlieven on February 22, 2008, 09:36:23 PM
deleted

Hans
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: hansvonlieven on February 22, 2008, 11:06:30 PM
I still don't know what went wrong, something to do with the overunity server.

I uploaded the file to my website, it plays from there, I checked.

http://keelytech.com/overunity/milkovic_harti_hans.avi        file size just over 9 MB

Sorry about all the stuff ups on this one, it has been a harrowing morning but I wanted you guys to have a look at this.

Hans von Lieven
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: hansvonlieven on February 25, 2008, 01:45:01 AM
G?day all,

Today I will share with you one of my research simulations in regard to Milkovic and secondary oscillations.

The objective was to compare various configurations that made use of secondary oscillations and compare them to a pendulum of the same length oscillating at its natural frequency. I also wanted to find the source of  the erratic behaviour as observed in Milkovic?s apparatus and others I have built.

Milkovic states that the secondary oscillation does not influence the movement of the pendulum. This is demonstrably untrue.

In this animation there are 9 simulations in all of which only B does not generate secondary oscillations.

All pendula are of equal length so they all have the same natural frequency. Only B runs on it, all others vary to more or less a degree from the natural and must therefore be considered forced oscillations. Some other force feeds back to influence detrimentally the natural frequency of the pendulum.

This is not easily discernible in individual experiments, it only really shows up when the different set-ups are put side by side with the same starting point relative to the pendulum?s fulcrum and started simultaneously.

It looks like i cannot post the avi again so will have to resort to my website once more. The avi is on http://keelytech.com/overunity/milkovic2.avi

A screenshot is below.

Hans von Lieven
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: PulsedPower on February 25, 2008, 02:23:53 AM
@hansvonlieven

Nice demo, much easier than going into the garage for a few days making the stuff, What software was used?

@Pmotion
Quote
One problem with a pendulum is its' swing. As its' fulcrum is being lifted, the bob could lose angular momentum. This would be because as it swings upward, the fulcrum would also be moving upward. A self canceling of the motion.
 The fulcrum would need to be lifted precisely when the bob is at its' apex. Any other time and it would be a self nullifying movement.

You got it, now the problem with lifting the bob of mass m is that you are doing work mgh to lift the bob, you might as well do the work on the end of the lever and get rid of the bob all together.
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: shimondoodkin on February 25, 2008, 03:08:07 AM
in these animations i see a strange behavior
when the 2nd pendulum is at the highest point the mass of the 1st pendulum is dragged by gravity and then the 2nd pendulum moves back and moves the 1st with its force
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: hansvonlieven on February 25, 2008, 08:18:18 AM
@ PulsedPower,

The programme is WorkingModel2005

@ shimondoodkin,

There is a lot more strange behaviour going on than this. I am working on an analysis of the various forces involved in this kind if scenario.

I believe I understand now the physics involved in this. My paper on the subject is maybe a week or two off, so please have patience.

Hans von Lieven
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: gurangax on February 27, 2008, 01:11:45 PM
why dont you guys use the device to compress air and use the air compression to run a gravity wheel. and from the gravity wheel use a bit output to oscillate the pendulum. It might just work like that.

-regards-
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: hansvonlieven on February 27, 2008, 06:03:38 PM
@ gurangax

What is a "Gravity Wheel"? Don't you mean a flywheel?

You can do all sorts of things with it, the sad fact is that there is not enough energy in the system to drive itself.

Hans von Lieven
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: helmut on February 27, 2008, 06:47:59 PM
why dont you guys use the device to compress air and use the air compression to run a gravity wheel. and from the gravity wheel use a bit output to oscillate the pendulum. It might just work like that.

-regards-

@gurangax
Why to go via air? Do you know the fuelles design of their Gravity engine?

Just have a look at it and than emagine to change the air zylinder against a milkovich device.

I have not testet yet.But i think it is worth to do so.

helmut
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: Scorpile on February 29, 2008, 06:06:52 PM
I haven't readen all th thread... an admin should left only "conclusive" comments on this thread.

I have to add my 2 cents... well i think i can.

For what i see, this system produces more energy in form of torque.

What we need to do is use a rotaing motor to rotate an unbalanced flywheel lets say, with 10kg on one end.  Let's start with the weight in the dead upper centre and apply current to the motor only to accelerate it enough (when going down only at the first 15 or 20 degrees i thnk) to complete the revolution and do it again.

Because of kinetic force involved in the rotation of the unbalanced flywheel, the motor should not need to be really powerfull, because we are starting rotation from dead upper centre, so the wieght itself gives the power to the system to complete the revolution when you add the acceleration.

Then measure how much power we use on every revolution (obviously watts).

Then maybe use the same "flashlight" generator he used to see if we can obtain more watts than used on the "unbalanced flywheel motor", and probably attach the flashlight generators to a capacitors, with a mechanical relay on the arm to sent the power from capacitor to the motor.

If this work then i'm the winner of the contest??? Because i live in Panama and my salary isn't enough for sustain my family, i have too many debts right now.

I think this is the simpliest way to make the close loop and will work but have not enough money to build it.  Should i close my mouth, because the calculations of other members shows that the device will not offer any OU?
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: eugene-g on March 03, 2008, 01:42:11 AM
Greetings!
I took the time to read all 43 pages of this discussion. Very interesting and promising.
I'm going to try and build this device, but I would like to break this process into multiple phases.
First, I want to find a way to sustain the amplitude of the pendulum motion without attaching it to the lever.
The two questions I have for this forum:

1 Would it make sense to use a low friction ball-bearing  as a pivot or is there a more efficient way
2 Is it worthwhile to experiment with using a permanent magnet add an additional pool to the bob when it is nearing the point zero-gravity

Look forward to your suggestions.

-Eugene
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: Scorpile on March 03, 2008, 04:55:57 PM
How you plan to complete the close loop?  I belive the way i say is the most easy to do it, and because to make an unbalanced flywheel starting at dead upper center to complete a turn, you need only a small and not really powerfull motor.  You could use a heavy weight and a geared small motor.  That's why i think this system can work.
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: Scorpile on March 03, 2008, 06:08:00 PM
Ok... look at the model i did.

(http://pabo.com.pa/joe/oscilation.jpg)

For me it's interesting that applying a force of 6.6N allows you to lift a mass of 50Kg.  And applying 6.6N only allows you to lift 0.673Kg.

Can this allows us to use a generator geared like the next one, and charge capacitors to generate the 6.6N of force to spin the flywheel?

(http://www.learningthings.us/acatalog/Kineticflashlight.jpg)

Here is my model.

http://pabo.com.pa/joe/oscilation.wm2d (http://pabo.com.pa/joe/oscilation.wm2d)
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: FreeEnergy on March 03, 2008, 10:22:13 PM
Ok... look at the model i did.

(http://pabo.com.pa/joe/oscilation.jpg)

For me it's interesting that applying a force of 6.6N allows you to lift a mass of 50Kg.  And applying 6.6N only allows you to lift 0.673Kg.

Can this allows us to use a generator geared like the next one, and charge capacitors to generate the 6.6N of force to spin the flywheel?

(http://www.learningthings.us/acatalog/Kineticflashlight.jpg)

Here is my model.

http://pabo.com.pa/joe/oscilation.wm2d (http://pabo.com.pa/joe/oscilation.wm2d)

You need to turn on Air Resistance. Go to World>Air Resistance>Hight Speed
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: Scorpile on March 03, 2008, 10:47:21 PM
Hansvonlieven, what's your opinion?
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: hansvonlieven on March 04, 2008, 05:44:35 AM
@ Scorpile

You are not moving 50 kg.

In a finely balanced system such as this it needs only a sparrows fart to tip the scales. All you are doing is disturbing an equilibrium, not doing any work.

Hans von Lieven
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: hartiberlin on March 04, 2008, 10:51:38 PM
@Scorpile
Please post a movie.

I am not at home where I have my WM2D setup.

Do you say, you can lift a 50 Kg weight how high with 6.6 Newton force ?

Normally it would only lift 0.673Kg ?

I still think Hans is wrong with his assumptions,
cause he models his setups wrong.

You have to restrict your motion of the weight lifting side
to the up and down plane ( Y-plane) by mechanical means
like in Milkovic?s latest blue pump
and that is where Hans?s models are wrong.
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: hansvonlieven on March 04, 2008, 10:59:37 PM
G'day Stefan and all,

My model only ever intended to show what happens in the system with various arrangements where no actual work is being done and where the movement is unrestricted.

In other words I am showing its behaviour at maximum.

Any clamping or restrictions imposed on top of this will cost energy, not add it.

Hans von Lieven

Edit:

BTW   I don't know what you are talking about when you say New blue pump.

(http://www.veljkomilkovic.com/Images/rucnaPumpa_clip_image002.jpg)

This picture of the exact same pump was taken in 2002 ! All he did was take a picture of it in a different setting
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: hartiberlin on March 04, 2008, 11:00:14 PM
As:
F= m x g

m= F / g

Energy= m x g x h = F x g x h / g = F x h

it depends how high you can lift your 50 Kg weight
with 6.6 Newton force ?
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: tinu on March 04, 2008, 11:23:03 PM
...
BTW   I don't know what you are talking about when you say New blue pump.

(http://www.veljkomilkovic.com/Images/rucnaPumpa_clip_image002.jpg)

This picture of the exact same pump was taken in 2002 ! All he did was take a picture of it in a different setting

Lol!
I?ve never seen that picture, nor could I ever imagine it is that old!
Besides, it looks like taken during a fair. I doubt there is a water-well beneath the pump. So, water might be only re-circulated from the red bucket and useful work done is very, very low. No wonder that pump is easy to run. If water was not re-circulated, one can bet that curious visitors like me would have pumped tens of minutes just for convincing themselves but then, at 1200liters/min? where would hundreds of liters of water went? Clearly not on the ground.

Lol again and end of story.
Cheers,
Tinu
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: hansvonlieven on March 04, 2008, 11:32:23 PM
@ Tinu,

It is obvious he is pumping it from the red bucket back into the red bucket. And yes, you are right this picture was taken of his exhibit in some agricultural show in Serbia.

Hans von Lieven

BTW I got the dates slightly wrong. Milkovic on his website adds the following commentary to this picture

Quote
Picture 1. Public presentation of the hand water pump with a pendulum during the Agricultural Fair in Novi Sad (Serbia), 2003. The invention won a gold medal during the 2002 fair.

So, the pump was made in or before 2002, the picture was taken in 2003.

My apologies for the mix up. It doesn't alter anything though, does it?
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: tinu on March 04, 2008, 11:54:31 PM
Many thanks Hans!
... and Tinu out of this thread.  ;D
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: Scorpile on March 05, 2008, 02:42:57 PM
But look at these models... there are all the same...

(http://pabo.com.pa/joe/forces2.jpg)

By just adjusting the Dead Upper Center of the flywheel and reverse the rotation, i can lift the 50 Kg BLUE BOX on the right using 5.6 N force, and keep the flywheel rotating.  That's the upper left model.

On the upper right model, placing the flywheel on Dead Lower Center, and aplying the 5.6 N force to the center of the flywheel as the system should do... don't moves the weight.

On the down center model, i needed to apply 100 N of force to do what i have in the upper left model.

I am missing something?  Heres the model:  http://pabo.com.pa/joe/force2.wm2d (http://pabo.com.pa/joe/force2.wm2d)

Heres the video 2.2 MB http://pabo.com.pa/joe/force2.avi (http://pabo.com.pa/joe/force2.avi)
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: Scorpile on March 05, 2008, 06:03:33 PM
My model only ever intended to show what happens in the system with various arrangements where no actual work is being done and where the movement is unrestricted.

But in my model i found that if you restrict the movement, you need even less power to keep the flywheel rotating.  Like 2 N only.
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: aleks on March 05, 2008, 08:20:52 PM
Heres the video 2.2 MB http://pabo.com.pa/joe/force2.avi (http://pabo.com.pa/joe/force2.avi)
Well, the problem when comparing these designs is that topleft design's 50 KG weight raises for a moment only whereas design with 100N force lifts the weight for some time struggling with gravity. Probably the first design is just more efficient at raising the weight since it does it quicker. Even though, I've not found any efficiency estimations of using E=mgh in practical situation, in reality time also matters. E=mgh is valid for free fall only. When raising the weight to the same height you should do it in a speed of light just to be sure you are not loosing energy, because levitation requires energy. However, it's hard to measure it using well known physics equations. One of the problems was mentioned by me in another thread: E=mv^2/2 does not make sense if you are moving using small energy bursts (this also applies to acoustical way of movement - Hans von Lieven, it's for you to consider).

One idea to consider. Let's pretend we have a falling body that we would like to levitate. How much energy we should put in? If the body falls for a long time, it gains a lot of kinetic energy and so putting it back will require much energy. On the other hand, after say 1/10000 of second it has very little kinetic energy and so it can be lifted back easily. In my very own opinion you need NO energy to make a body levitate if you can arrange some clever mechanism. One of such 'clever' mechanisms is to simply put the body on a long shaft. Levitates? Yep. Now just make it levitate without the shaft (just remember that burning fuel is close to zero efficiency even if it works when launching rockets to space). I have a deep belief that you can do it just like a baron Muenchausen did it when he was pulling himself out of the pit by his hair.
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: allcanadian on March 06, 2008, 10:05:38 AM
Wow 44 pages and still going strong ;D I may as well throw my twisted opinions into the mix.
I see some odd things happening in Milkovic's machine that we should maybe consider more carefully concerning the force of gravity, centripetal/centrifugal forces and relative velocities. Imagine yourself freefalling downward at terminal velocity, we could say you are weightless and as such the force of gravity would be zero because you are no longer "accelerating", the force of gravity is an accelerating force. When standing still on earth the force of gravity is maximum as there is no acceleration involved, so the force of gravity is dependent on relative velocity in the vertical plane of motion. In the picture below, on the lower right is a half circle representing the motion of a pendulum, in mid-sectors 1 and 3 we could say the pendulum will undergo maximum accelerations both negative and positive in the vertical plane and in sector 2 minimum accelerations in the vertical plane thus gravity must act with maximum force at points 1, 2 and 3 as represented by "G" (red line) in the graph, the letter "C" represents centripetal force pulling downward/outward on point (B) of the balanced lever. We can see in the graph that maximum forces (G-C)peak at point 2 moving the lever end down at B down.What is odd is that in the upper diagram in sectors 4 and 5 the lever end "B" is rising increasing the potential of the pendulum system this potential released near the bottom of the pendulum swing near point 2. The increased potential must be paid for but from which force?, the centripital forces act in a predictable manner through the arc but the force of gravity would seem to peak just as this potential is paid for at point 2. If we could imagine holding lever end "B" and pulling upward where sectors 1-2 and 2-3 meet we can visualize that the pendulum would stay in motion, but which force provides this timed pull upward? It would seem only the mass "A" can and the force would be the force of gravity on a mass with little vertical velocity but great mass and inertia. The mass "A" must be periodically reset to the top position to lift "B" so we come back to the same question again, is it force "G" or force "C" that lifts lever end "A" through the motion of the pendulum pulling on "B"?. Judging from the quite erratic motion of the mass "A" in the video and the predictable centripital force graph line I would guess the de-acceleration of the pendulum mass on the vertical plane leading to an increase in gravitational forces has some role to play here.
This simple setup is very misleading, there are some very complex timing and force issues involved that I can't quite put my finger on yet.
Best of luck
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: eugene-g on March 06, 2008, 11:42:37 PM
What if instead of pendulum we could use something like this picture in the attachment to keep the system "out of balance"
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: allcanadian on March 07, 2008, 01:39:07 AM
@eugene-g
The problem with your setup is friction, friction reduces motion, motion is produced by force---so there must be an equal force wanting to keep something in motion.
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: astroshima on March 11, 2008, 01:42:39 AM

There have been many replications of Milkovic's system. NONE have shown OU!

Hans von Lieven

Dear Ser Lieven and others,
please give me any or as much references to above claim!
Any link?
I am looking for exact measurements (of input and output work) with videos or photographs!

PS: I have read this thread from page 36 to 44...

I have also made ?Two-stage Mechanical Oscillator? someway (but not exactly) similar to Milkovic's, to test his "12 times overunity" claims, but my measurements in one very limited scenario, that I was able to measure, showed coefficient of efficiency equals to 0.9! That's far below 12!

But I was unable to do all tests or to construct the device by the best way... I will post new post...
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: astroshima on March 11, 2008, 02:15:36 AM

I have also made ?Two-stage Mechanical Oscillator? someway (but not exactly) similar to Milkovic's, to test his "12 times overunity" claims, but my measurements in one very limited scenario, that I was able to measure, showed coefficient of efficiency equals to 0.9! That's far below 12!

But I was unable to do all tests or to construct the device by the best way...

I am an amateur (Java programmer) and I do not do or construct mechanical devices...
I have past one exam in Theoretical Mechanics on college so my knowledge of physics is limited. But Physics was my hobby during elementary and high school.

I have used my bicycle to replicate ?Two-stage Mechanical Oscillator?.
Pedals were balance beam. One pedal had pendulum made of wood and bob and other pedal had a larger (and heavier) bob (to simulate longer and heavier end of balance beam with hammer-head)...PS: The "problem" with this construction is that the both ends of balance beam are the same length...

I have made just one scenario (measurement) test by filing the system with energy JUST ONCE at the beginning.

System was fed with energy by lifting the pendulum just once so I have measured input work: A = m*g*h.
My premise was that output work is equal to mechanical-heat energy made by impact of the large bob at the other side of balance beam.
And that output (mechanical-heat energy) is equal to Sum of potential (E=m*g*h) energies  of the large bob. To mesure that sum I had to count the number of oscillations of large bob and quickly to read its achieved heights on the ruler fixed behind such "oscillator".
I have repeated the same scenario (measurement) test for about 10 times and used average measurements.

So I had coefficient of efficiency equals to 0.54 (54%)in this particular test with this particular device.
I made theoretical approximation for constant oscillation mode, based on previous test, of maximum coefficient of efficiency with my model, and it was 0.9 (90%)

I think I have also noticed things about energy transmissions like Mr. Hans von Lieven speaks about but I didn't put much attention, tests or thought about it...I did this tests more than 5 years ago...(PS: at Dec. 17. 2002.)
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: astroshima on March 11, 2008, 02:41:27 AM
Did anybody constructed and measured coefficient of efficiency (input and output work) of Milkovic's ?Two-stage Mechanical Oscillator??

Can anybody do that please?
Many people wasting huge time on Mr Milkovic's overunity claims ...

I believe that input work of force impulses (dE = A = m*g*dh) is easy to measure with camera, and ruler... and to read it from video clip.
And output work can be measured with dynamo lamp(s) and oscilloscope...or some other way...





Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: nightlife on March 11, 2008, 05:20:20 AM
I don't know why this design wasn't used. If it produces 12 times the energy used then it should produce 12 times the power used to fire a coil to repel a swinging magnet. The posted picture is just one of many ways this could be utilized if it indeed does work as it is said to work. I think if it was timed right, it should put out a continuous flow.
 It would only take one pulse to get two revolutions. It's like a two stroke motor but with two compressions instead of one. It should be very easy to build.
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: shruggedatlas on March 11, 2008, 05:29:01 AM
I don't know why this design wasn't used. If it produces 12 times the energy used then it should produce 12 times the power used to fire a coil to repel a swinging magnet. The posted picture is just one of many ways this could be utilized if it indeed does work as it is said to work. I think if it was timed right, it should put out a continuous flow.
 It would only take one pulse to get two revolutions. It's like a two stroke motor but with two compressions instead of one. It should be very easy to build.

I believe the principle of the Milkovic design is that it produces 12 times the energy used, but only if there is no load.  If you try to put a load on, it immediately reverts to underunity mode.  You cannot trick it so easily, my friend.
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: nightlife on March 11, 2008, 05:47:22 AM
shruggedatlas, "I believe the principle of the Milkovic design is that it produces 12 times the energy used, but only if there is no load.  If you try to put a load on, it immediately reverts to underunity mode."

 That doesn't make sense. As long as the load didn't equal more then 11 times the swinging force, it still should still work and be considered over unity.
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: hartiberlin on March 11, 2008, 02:15:30 PM
But look at these models... there are all the same...

(http://pabo.com.pa/joe/forces2.jpg)

By just adjusting the Dead Upper Center of the flywheel and reverse the rotation, i can lift the 50 Kg BLUE BOX on the right using 5.6 N force, and keep the flywheel rotating.  That's the upper left model.

On the upper right model, placing the flywheel on Dead Lower Center, and aplying the 5.6 N force to the center of the flywheel as the system should do... don't moves the weight.

On the down center model, i needed to apply 100 N of force to do what i have in the upper left model.

I am missing something?  Heres the model:  http://pabo.com.pa/joe/force2.wm2d (http://pabo.com.pa/joe/force2.wm2d)

Heres the video 2.2 MB http://pabo.com.pa/joe/force2.avi (http://pabo.com.pa/joe/force2.avi)

So what is your conclusion ?

Are you saying WM2D does not work ?

Also you have designed  something different, as your pendulum is not swinging,
but indeed your results with the left upper example are quite interesting !

Maybe you are using the centrifugal forces to get maximum force at the lower position of the moved
weight on the disc ?
Maybe this will be a method to use centrifugal forces in such a system ?
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: Scorpile on March 11, 2008, 08:39:19 PM
So what is your conclusion ?

Are you saying WM2D does not work ?

Also you have designed  something different, as your pendulum is not swinging,
but indeed your results with the left upper example are quite interesting !

Maybe you are using the centrifugal forces to get maximum force at the lower position of the moved
weight on the disc ?
Maybe this will be a method to use centrifugal forces in such a system ?

I think WM2D does works.

As you said, i had the conclusion that using centrifugal forces will allow us to apply a even smaller force to get maximum force at lower position, and the smaller force will be enough to keep the flywheel rotating.  I know will only give 1 pull per revolution, but that's not what i think we are testing here.

All 3 systems shows that the system is giving (the way i did) something like 17 times the input power, but i guess is because of the way the weights are arranged.

Because of that, Hans suggested that the "well balanced system" was what allows me to lift the 50kg weight, and even some bird fart will, but i did the other 2 system to prove he's worng.

About some other theories about restricting the system will make the pendulum loose power i will say that you (my dear Stefan) are right, because you pointed some post ago, that restricting the system is even better.

I found, the less the system moves, the less energy requiered to keep the flywheel to rotate.

I think Hans is right about energy transfer, but i think this system is a way to gain some energy from gravity trough centrifugal pull of pendulum instead of the torque gain (like torque wrench tools).

I will not get into controversy about all the physics or mechanics (sorry my english :) ) on the system, why not or why yes.

What i cannot test with w2dm is the generator part.  Using sproket system to rotate really fast some generator, instead of the 50 Kg weight to see if i can produce more than the 5.6 N i have in my system.
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: hartiberlin on March 11, 2008, 10:30:39 PM
Hi All,
I can get now a 100 Kg weight lifted up about 1 Meter every revolution
with this new idea from user Scorpile.

I am posting here now the picture and will upload the movie and WM2D file I just made in the
Downloads area.

P.S: I am using the green 10 Newton Force vector( see  green arroy)
all the time on a 80 Kg yellow disc and at the 33 Kg additional weight,
which is attached at the yellow disc, so how do I calculate the used input energy ?
( The same works, when I am just using 10 Newtonmeters of torque onto the disc on its axis)

The 100 Kg weight lifted by 1 Meter is about Energy= 100 kg x 1 meter x 9,81= about 1000 Joules of energy per revolution.
But how much input energy is spent for this ?
( I am a bit tired right now to think more about it...)

This design can be surely still optimized with better leverage fulcrum arm length and
other weight combinations...
there is a lot of room for improvements...

Regards, Stefan.
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: hartiberlin on March 11, 2008, 10:37:07 PM
Okay, the movie and WM2D file
are now downloadable in this ZIP archive file from here:

http://www.overunity.com/index.php?action=tpmod;dl=get15

Regards, Stefan.
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: nightlife on March 12, 2008, 05:22:25 AM
I have messed with this thing for a couple of hours and it will not work without added force or attraction. You do get more power from the opposite end of the wheel but the out put of the excess power is not timed right to give the wheel the added power it needs to keep going.

 It will take some altering. Some of the excess power from the opposite end of the wheel, will have to be used and then it might just work.

 Something like a rear bike wheel freewheeling hub. With added pressure it engages but without pressure, it freewheels. The front wheel in this next picture would have a freewheel on both sides to accommodate both the down push and the up pull. Both the front and rear wheel may need to be the same size but I haven't thought ahead that far as of yet to say which would be best.
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: nightlife on March 12, 2008, 06:16:05 AM
Scratch the up pull thought. It will not help. But I would suggest keeping a freewheel on both sides just for balance of torque reasons. As a matter of fact, it may be best to put the freewheels on the rear wheel. I think I can modify a old bicycle to see how this concept works. I just happen to have a couple old bikes at the shop that no one has used in years.

 I have what is needed to build this and if it does produce over unity, this build should be able to tell.
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: FreeEnergy on March 12, 2008, 09:27:11 AM
ok here you go again.

i have made minor modification to the system and turned on air resistance to high!


wow!


please see file attachment.
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: FreeEnergy on March 12, 2008, 09:56:57 AM
(see my previous reply)


....and when you set it to low air resistance the thing seems to speed up!!!!!  :o
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: Low-Q on March 12, 2008, 10:15:18 AM
Many pages now, and I haven't read all of it. Anyway, this device is by my opinion the most interesting approach to OU. It should be an easy match to close that loop. Simply by using an electromagnet right under a swinging iron pendulum. The electromgnet is driven by the output via a simple generator - like these in batteryless flashlights. So the pendulum is activated synchronously to its swing frequency. Should be easy to make such device.

I think however, that hartiberlins thought about tapping gravitional force, should at the very end result in no gravitional field at all, and the pendulum will stop... Too long time to worry about that :D

Vidar
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: hartiberlin on March 12, 2008, 10:29:12 AM
ok here you go again.

i have made minor modification to the system and turned on air resistance to high!


wow!


please see file attachment.

Well just changing the force from 10 Newton to 15 Newton then also works with high
air resistance, butas this is a low speed application air resistance will not play
any effect on it.
So how can we calculate best the input energy this way ?
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: hartiberlin on March 12, 2008, 10:33:24 AM
Scratch the up pull thought. It will not help. But I would suggest keeping a freewheel on both sides just for balance of torque reasons. As a matter of fact, it may be best to put the freewheels on the rear wheel. I think I can modify a old bicycle to see how this concept works. I just happen to have a couple old bikes at the shop that no one has used in years.

 I have what is needed to build this and if it does produce over unity, this build should be able to tell.

@nightlife,
I think you have missed the principle, cause it is used to lift at the right side of the fulcrum
a 100 Kg weight for 1 Meter, but you tried to rotate something...
So instead of lifting a 100 Kg weight by 1 Meter is could be used to lift something else, which is heavy
or push a flywheel.
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: FreeEnergy on March 12, 2008, 10:34:28 AM
maybe for every revolution or two the weight locks at 12 o'clock then the system balances, then you unlock it from 12 o'clock and the whole thing starts over. know what i am saying?
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: FreeEnergy on March 12, 2008, 10:36:53 AM
the only energy being used is to lock and unlock the weight at 12 o'clock which is very little.
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: FreeEnergy on March 12, 2008, 10:49:53 AM
here
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: hartiberlin on March 12, 2008, 11:50:10 AM
Does anybody know, how Gears work in WM2D ?

Are there any good video tutorials out there for WM2D ?
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: nightlife on March 12, 2008, 01:43:17 PM
hartiberlin, "@nightlife, I think you have missed the principle, cause it is used to lift at the right side of the fulcrum
a 100 Kg weight for 1 Meter, but you tried to rotate something...
So instead of lifting a 100 Kg weight by 1 Meter is could be used to lift something else, which is heavy
or push a flywheel."

 If you take off the 100 kg, then the pull could be utilized too, but I think it would work better if the weight stayed and all the focus was put on the push because of the timing of the wheels most useful force. It starts to loose most of it's momentum at 9oclock and that?s when the weight is lifted. Then the weight drops at about 10oclock and that push is when the wheel needs it the most. You lose nothing from the added weight because it is utilized by the push by adding more power the push when the wheel needs it the most.
 This would give the wheel more force when the wheels weight is fighting gravity. The wheel should speed up to a certain speed depending on the gears.

 I will be building one using a ten speed rear bike wheel. I believe the crank I have is a three piece crank which will allow me to have equal pressure on both sides of the front sprocket.

 I will attach a gear on the opposite side of the rear wheel to test the power achieved. If that gear can turn anything attached to it, the device would then be proven to be a over unity device.
 
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: Scorpile on March 12, 2008, 02:36:02 PM
What i think is to take off the weight, and add something to rotate a generator with gears, which needs the same force applied to make the generator rotate really fast, just like the kinetic lights the original inventor used.
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: hartiberlin on March 12, 2008, 02:55:38 PM
Here is also another great physics simulation program
Newton lab:

http://de.youtube.com/watch?v=11rmKvT-R7U

http://www.dsmm.net/demos/demo_newton.php


Maybe we can simulate with this program it much better in 3D ?

Regards, Stefan.
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: hartiberlin on March 12, 2008, 03:02:56 PM
the only energy being used is to lock and unlock the weight at 12 o'clock which is very little.

Hi You don?t need tolock  it,
it works by its own movements.

I just played with the concept now for a few hours,
but it is very hard to synchronize several discs, weights,
gears, etc...
Also I really need a good video tutorial how to use and setup gears
and ropes to pull things or move discs...

Can anybody provide a good video tutorial on youtube or
somewhere else about this topic ?

It all comes down to the right resonance frequencies or weight disc size-pendulum
swinging cycles...
very hard to synchronize it all.

If also somebody could teach me, how to use locks on springs
and how they could be released on purpose again,that would be really great.
So I need to compress a spring with a moving weight.
Then at a certain position of the spring and weight the lock
must apply and hold the position of the spring or connected weight
and then wait a dedicated time and then release the spring or attached weight again..
How could this be modelled in WM2D or NewtonLab ?

Many thanks.

Regards,Stefan.
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: Scorpile on March 12, 2008, 03:59:00 PM
Well.. i used MOI to give all a simple idea of the generator side.

(http://pabo.com.pa/joe/mgen.jpg)
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: astroshima on March 12, 2008, 05:47:41 PM
I have made some corrections to my previous post:

Here are these corrections:

"...PS: The "problem" with this construction is that the both ends of balance beam are the same length..."

"So I had coefficient of efficiency equals to 0.54 (54%)in this particular test with this particular device.
I made theoretical approximation for constant oscillation mode, based on previous test, of maximum coefficient of efficiency with my model,  and it was 0.9 (90%)"

"...I did this tests more than 5 years ago...(PS: at Dec. 17. 2002.)"
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: aleks on March 12, 2008, 06:20:37 PM
Well.. i used MOI to give all a simple idea of the generator side.
You have to find someone with a 3D printer to test your ideas. :)
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: astroshima on March 12, 2008, 09:22:19 PM
Well.. i used MOI to give all a simple idea of the generator side.

Scorpile your idea is excellent! Thanks.
It is possible to use bike for all this (I mean for Milkovics model!)
Pedals could be balance beam and rear wheel could be used to lift weight (with rope) or to generate electricity with dynamo!
We can mount pendulum on one pedal and extra weight or ledge on other pedal.
So input work (on pendulum) could be measured with video camera and ruler by formula dA = m*g*dh.
And output work could be measured with unimer (on dynamo) or by formula dE = m*g*h if we lift the weight (m) with rope by rear wheel!
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: nightlife on March 13, 2008, 01:39:15 AM
 I built it today but found that the derailleur was taking to much energy away. The derailleur is necessary when the sprocket is attached to the stationary frame because it is used to control the chains slack. It will not work that way so I mounted the sprocket to the moving frame and I am doing away with the derailleur. I will now be using the pull instead of the push because that is the most powerful action this design has. After the wheel is steady turning, it does not take much power to keep it going. I did find that a load is a must to achieve a steady action. The faster it goes, the more erratic the motion gets. The load has to be pared with the RPM's to keep a steady motion.

 I hope to have better results tomorrow with the alterations I have made. I have to buy another chain in the morning to add to the old one, to meet the new design spec's.
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: nightlife on March 13, 2008, 11:36:21 PM
I tried every way possible and I could not get it to power it's self. There is no over unity here with this design. I am done here and I am off to try another idea. Not sure which one as of yet but I am sure i will figure out before the night is over.

 Good luck to those still playing with this threads concept.
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: FreeEnergy on March 14, 2008, 12:50:57 PM
look i am telling you guys to get free energy all you need is to pause/start the rotating weight after every revolution or so at 12 o'clock, then let the whole system balance, then after that let the weight loose again to repeat the process. the system provides more than enough energy to self lock/unlock from 12 o'clock.
just need simple circuit and some kind of mechanical locking-unlocking mechanism for the rotating weight.

Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: nightlife on March 14, 2008, 01:25:33 PM
FreeEnergy, if that is true, then I should be able to put a weight on a bedini school girl pulse motor design and I should get a better end result then I did without it.

 I will test it using two different coil designs. One with power wrapped with 24 gauge and the pickup wrapped with 22 gauge and the reversed.

 That should be a fair way to test your theory. Do you agree?
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: Scorpile on March 14, 2008, 03:05:21 PM
This is interesting, because asuming that bedini design gives you a 99.99% eficient motor, and assuming this system really works, at least .01% , adding more charge to the other side of the system could maybe allow you to run on capacitors.
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: FreeEnergy on March 14, 2008, 09:11:04 PM
i don't know much about bedini but try it out and see. i have a good feeling about this! but it has to be Milkovic style. just go back and see my last attached image.
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: Scorpile on March 15, 2008, 03:26:00 PM
I have seen a lot of physics errors when modeling those aparatus like the discused in this thread.

I don't know others, but i have the theory that those errors probably are because the software detects the overunity and show it as an error because that will be ripping some of the "well known" laws.

What i want to set clear for everyone, is that in my case, i am seeking a way to "gain" more energy than the energy i spent generating it, but without ripping any thermodinamics, or physic law.  I think we can do some tricks to "extract" that exceding energy free and contained on it own "battery".  Think this like when a bomb explodes, because you use less energy to start the bomb, than the energy the bomb releases when it explodes, no matter if the energy was contained on chemicals, i know we are not creating energy...  That's not what i seek.
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: nightlife on March 15, 2008, 04:54:01 PM
Adding a weight to a bedini wheels design does not make a difference so scratch that idea.

 I did how ever find a very interesting thing about the bedini design that I think most have over looked. I will test my new design and let you all know the results after I am done.
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: aleks on March 15, 2008, 11:34:44 PM
The huge problem with gravity-based devices is that kinetic energy's direction cannot be reversed. So, if a body have gained a velocity due to gravity pull, whatever you do - rotate it, skew, dissect, etc - it will still be falling into the same direction. Pendulum is a way to "redirect" kinetic energy, but it is redirected at the expense of pendulum's arm stretching on atomic level. You really have to create an "inertia shield" first (if that one exists at all) before gravity pull can be used as an energy source (but then the "inertia shield" should be efficient enough so that gain is higher than expense).
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: aleks on March 16, 2008, 03:43:57 PM
Uh, actually I think that torsion is not wasted energy as it is not converted to another form.
With a pendulum, most likely its' v would be calculated by the vertical drop and the distance it would travel.
 In other words, if its' swing is twice the distance as the vertical drop, then it would have 1/2 the acceleration rate of gravity.
 So what would need to be accounted for is the slower rate of acceleration. And how does its' motion effect this ? Does it cause a further slowing in its' acceleration or does it help to increase it ?
 Such as, if the fulcrum is being lifted, does this cause the bob to lose force relative to the lift of the fulcrum ?
I do not mean torsion, but when pendulum swings it stretches. Stretching usually wastes energy by turning into heat and the material that stretches loses its mechanic durability. On the other hand if we pretend that pendulum's arm stretching does not cause energy loss and always recovers then this suggests that inertia inversion in a large body without much energy expense is possible. You just have to think how it's possible. However, if you change inertia into the direction opposite to fall, the inertia will quickly revert to zero due to ever-lasting gravity pull. This means that the other element of "gravity engine" beside inertia shielding (or redirecting) is required: which is gravity pull shielding, and that is out of the scope of just the mechanical device. Well, if my speculations on gravity are valid: http://peswiki.com/index.php/Directory:Anti-Gravity:DC_Acoustic_Waves_Hypothesis then gravity device should include some exploding or imploding processes just to be able to shield the earthly gravity force.
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: petersone on March 22, 2008, 08:56:01 PM
Spent hours reading this topic,and others,one thing comes to mind,that is,if it is so important to have the correct balance between pendalum and lever,how come you can"do what you like with the lever,and it makes no difference to the pendalum."when in reality it will make a lot of difference,I've tried it.I think if it is going to work,anythink you do with the lever has to be factored in to the set up,any change to the work done by the lever, the setup must be redone.
smashing forum,I spend far more hours on here than I should.
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: JBB on April 14, 2008, 05:31:42 PM
Hi all,

I had a chance to work and experiment with the two-stage mechanical oscillator of Veljko Milkovic you are talking here about.

I did several analyses that confirmed Milkovic's claims and here are the first two that are translated in English:
 
ANALYSIS OF THE INFLUENCE OF THE CENTRIFUGAL FORCE DURING OPERATION OF THE TWO-STAGE MECHANICAL OSCILLATOR BY VELJKO MILKOVIĆ:
"...It seems clear that the influence of the centrifugal force is the key to the explanation of the energy surplus of the two-stage oscillator by Veljko Milković, the inventor."
http://www.veljkomilkovic.com/Images/Analysis_Jovan_Bebic_1.pdf

MEASURING THE RATIO OF OUTPUT AND INPUT ENERGY OF THE TWO-STAGE MECHANICAL OSCILLATOR BY VELJKO MILKOVIĆ:
"...Therefore, ratio of energy at the output and energy at the input is 22.89..."
http://www.veljkomilkovic.com/Images/Analysis_Jovan_Bebic_2-measuring.pdf


Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: ChileanOne on April 14, 2008, 05:54:05 PM
Hello JBB:

Thanks for bringing these papers here. I am not math wizard, but I see some outstanding oversimplifications in your ideas, that might lead to very heated debate. Not telling that your conclusions are wrong, not at all, just that the numbers will be debated and probably for a long time, so I amsking you to take a step back and look at it from a bit more far to try and see what I might be refereing to.

Regards!
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: astroshima on April 14, 2008, 11:19:17 PM
MEASURING THE RATIO OF OUTPUT AND INPUT ENERGY OF THE TWO-STAGE MECHANICAL OSCILLATOR BY VELJKO MILKOVIĆ:
"...Therefore, ratio of energy at the output and energy at the input is 22.89..."
http://www.veljkomilkovic.com/Images/Analysis_Jovan_Bebic_2-measuring.pdf[/li][/list]

Congratulations Jovan!!!
Finally somebody (trying to) do a real work-energy measurement.
BTW I did the same measurement but with different device so our results are different.
The way I solved "the problem" with measuring heights on weight 2 (output) was to do 10 experiments and use average or minimal heights values...but I suppose that even this one experiment could be enough for the insight about the magnitude of output work...
1. For your measurement to have more scientific and other influence I think you should shot experiment with video camera... ofcourse if you have time and resources... You can use paper and draw lines on it as a ruler. Then put the paper behind weights ...so the camera(s) can catch almost exact heights!

2. I think the one more (little) different experiment is needed so I ask you, or somebody else, to do it! PLEASE!
That would be the final proof!
Put some consumer or generator to measure output work!!! For example try to do electric measurement with unimer or oscilloscope or ...
Since we now exactly know input work, by putting consumer or generator on the output end, we could precisely measure and prove or disprove overunity! If you or somebody else do this and document whole experiment with video camera and if that measurement show overunity, you (or somebody who do this) will be world famous (scientist and) person!!!
PC: I think all previous experiments (done by other people) that show forces "measurement" have no scientific or real value, but this type of (work, energy) measurement, like you do, are the real ones!!! You have precise data about input work. That is something that hasn't been done  yet! (Stroking pendulum with dynamo lamp do not show input (energy or) work and observing large output forces also do not show output (energy or) work!)

One more Congratulations on your effort to do the real scientific measurements!!!
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: astroshima on April 14, 2008, 11:50:49 PM
Hello JBB:

Thanks for bringing these papers here. I am not math wizard, but I see some outstanding oversimplifications in your ideas, that might lead to very heated debate. Not telling that your conclusions are wrong, not at all, just that the numbers will be debated and probably for a long time, so I amsking you to take a step back and look at it from a bit more far to try and see what I might be refereing to.

Regards!

Man Help us all! Please tell us what you see!
What oversimplifications? I am not professor of physics. I am not even a student. But I see and "understand" Jovan's experiment. He is finally trying to use scientific measurements here! So please help us! Tell us what we can't or do not see!
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: astroshima on April 15, 2008, 12:30:10 AM
"It is also important to notice that, according to the energy conservation law; total
potential energy of the lifted weight is wasted on deforming the surface and heat emitted
into the surroundings, when the freefalling weight hits the surface."

Damn... I do not know physics well, but I think we could maybe have a problem here...
What if this whole system behaves like one big pendulum?

If we lift the pendulum weight and measure heights that it reaches we will also have "overunity" on a single pendulum weight itself! 
But as I remember from physics book that its not the case because of the "pendulum law" - forgive my ignorance if I made mistake!
Our "deforming the surface and heat emitted" in that case could be air resistance and sliding friction at pendulum joint point.

So (I think) the only way to prove "overunity" is to do real useful work on output end of the system and to measure it!
So we should put some generator or consumer and measure useful output work!
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: Mr.Entropy on April 15, 2008, 05:04:46 AM
MEASURING THE RATIO OF OUTPUT AND INPUT ENERGY OF THE TWO-STAGE MECHANICAL OSCILLATOR BY VELJKO MILKOVIĆ:
"...Therefore, ratio of energy at the output and energy at the input is 22.89..."
http://www.veljkomilkovic.com/Images/Analysis_Jovan_Bebic_2-measuring.pdf[/li]
[li][/li]
[/list]
Your output measurement is incorrect.  Even when falling, the hammer is being held up to a large extent by the pendulum on the other end of the lever.  It therefore hits the anvil much more slowly than it would if it were falling freely, and delivers only a small part the potential that was stored by lifting it.
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: AlanA on April 15, 2008, 08:40:06 PM
Hi Jovan,

I am not in the position to doubt about your measurements. My question is: What con I do with Milkovics mechanical socillation system. For what is it good for? Is it possible to get energy form it? I think no one want to stand beside a pendulum and push them every 10 seconds?
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: Kul_ash on April 16, 2008, 01:58:22 PM
I am having trouble in digesting a concept that at the peak of pendulum swing, it will have "weightlessness". If the pendulum is weightless for say fraction of a second means PE = mgh  = 0 and KE = 0 and that all energy is totally taken out of pendulum system to provide work to the weight of hammer, then how does it get back the energy to run the system again and going down?
If pendulum is going down then it means it also gave away all its energy and generated enough energy again from no where to fall back. If you are calling inertia will take back the pendulum then if there is no mass, no PE, what is its value?
Also can any one tell me is any one ever closed this loop or is it still in theory only?
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: Kul_ash on April 16, 2008, 02:09:31 PM
I am also failing to understand Jovan's analysis of centrifugal work doing extra work. Isn't it the centripetal force that is responsible for circular movement of pendulum? If there is no centripetal force, then pendulum can not move in that motion. And isn't this centripetal force equal and opposite to centrifugal force as per Newtons law? Then how come centrifugal force is doing additional work?
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: PYRODIN123321 on April 16, 2008, 05:50:10 PM

hmmm
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: Prophmaji on April 18, 2008, 06:38:40 AM
it is very simple to test. Make a basic set up that functions, use a large heavy wheel on the output side..and connect to the central bearing of the heavy wheel by the use of two ratchets, one on each side of the rotating wheel's bearing.  Connect to the vertical arm via springs, to the ratchets. This keeps the energy in the springs and releases it effectively to the rotating massive wheel.

Then pull power off the rotating wheel.

Of course..that experiment then brings other ideas to mind......

This device, is 'sound'.. it is an application of the fact that gravitation is a 'polarized-oriented-gradient'.
It is NOT equal in the vertical vs the horizontal orientation, with regards to energy given and taken, with respects to physical distances moved. This application takes advantage of that simple point.

This point, in combination with Bessler type massive wheels and magnets, can be used to move the steel balls around the wheel positions when the balls are nearly in the horizontal domain/position, to positions either closer in or further out for greater or less leverage. Far less energy is required to move the balls when they are horizontal. Static magnets positioned slightly away from the moving wheel can be used to force the balls about.
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: 2b on April 28, 2008, 07:27:36 PM
Veljko Milkovic

all he has to do is use 2 big syringes and some tubing
to show "overunity" or "perpetual motion".  you just
connect the "needle end" of each syringe with tubing
(best to use as big of holes and tubing as possible),
fill one syringe and the tubing with water, and then
use the downward force of the dead weight to press on the
syringe full of water, and then use the force of the
empty syringe expanding (on the other end of the tubing)
to push the pendulum weight.  on the upward stroke of
the dead weight, the respective syringe refills itself.
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: 2b on April 28, 2008, 09:05:36 PM
in other words ...

you need to use hydraulics to prove "over-unity" or "perpetual motion" with the Milkovic machine.  you might be able to improvise with 2 syringes, some tubing, & water.

hydraulics will also allow you to convert from a "small distance, large force" (the dead weight), to a "long distance, small force" (to push the oscillating weight).
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: 2b on April 28, 2008, 11:10:02 PM
i was amused by the device at first, and so i built one with some 2 liter bottles, one full, and one half-full.  and after reading some materials on the device, i noticed that everything was pretty much similar:

1. the pendulum weight is 2x the 'dead-weight'.

2. the pendulum weight is 1/2 the distance from the axis as the 'dead-weight'.

so, the system is already close to balanced, leverage wise.  and swinging the pendulum merely alternates between leveraging the load on the opposite side (mid-swing - with a little help of centrifical force provide by the hand), and allowing full gravitational force on the opposite side (the ends of each swing, where the pendulum is weightless).  so, i don't see what the big deal is now with this machine.

1. the machine is already near-balanced to begin with.

2. the force of the hand pushing the pendulum is approximately equal to the additional centrifical force used by the pendulum to lift the opposing side (the dead weight), plus the anti-gravitational force used by the pendulum to reach the end of its swing (where it then becomes weightless).

i don't see any free-energy here - only ordinary leverage and hand-force turned to centrifical force (pendulum mid-swing), and a force against gravity (pendulum at ends of the swing).

so what about the "flashlight proof" and all these measurements citing the pounds of force applied to the pendulum by the hand, and by the dead-weight to scales?

1. the flashlight proof is meaningless because, as previously stated, 10lbs of force can lift a 200lb man when leveraged properly; and with this device, the pendulum is leveraging things beyond what a static weight would do.

2. 'pounds' are pretty much meaningless as they are used - because the length of time and distance the pendulum is being accelerated by the applied force, and the length of time and distance the 'dead-weight' applies its force, are not being taken into account.  and as above, the action of the pendulums oscillating leveraging is not being taken into account.
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: Kul_ash on April 29, 2008, 11:48:21 AM
in other words ...

you need to use hydraulics to prove "over-unity" or "perpetual motion" with the Milkovic machine.  you might be able to improvise with 2 syringes, some tubing, & water.

hydraulics will also allow you to convert from a "small distance, large force" (the dead weight), to a "long distance, small force" (to push the oscillating weight).


Dear Friend
But won't that defeat the purpose of extracting large work from small input concept? You are extracting large work, converting it in to small work and then supplying it to the system again. What's the use? How will you extract additional energy?
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: 2b on May 01, 2008, 02:09:49 PM
> But won't that defeat the purpose of extracting large work from small input concept? You are extracting large work, converting it in to small work and then supplying it to the system again. What's the use? How will you extract additional energy?

the purpose of using hydraulics is to prove that the machine can run itself perpetually, which it should be able to do if it outputs 12x more work than is input, as claimed.  hydraulics only transfer work, they don't modify the amount of it.  but hydraulics can be used to modify Force x Distance (Work), exchanging Force for Distance, and vice versa.

for example, a big fat syringe under the 'dead-weight' could push 1cc of water with only 1cm of travel - yet a thin syringe on the 'pedulum-weight' side might move 5cm when that 1cc of water enters into it.

it would be simple enough to do, and if someone wants to prove this machine can output more work than is input, they should do it.
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: scorpion on May 03, 2008, 12:05:58 AM
greetings of france, very interesting your forum dual m?canical oscillation system. I know that the movement is said impossible, but I made a replica of this dual oscillator, I tested the last few months, the first trials, I was very surprised by the vast power output compared to 'entry which seems to give 9 / 1 or more? I calculated many systems that could allocate a portion of energy to maintain the momentum of the pendulum, but it is not simple, because we need the impetus is given at the right time because the pendulum has not always the same amplitude, if the impetus comes too early cancels it, and if the momentum is behind it is useless because the clock ran away, we need a variable timing of the pulse amplitude of the following pendulum, it can be done mechanically compressing a spring when the weight falls, and return the relaxation of a clear system of levers or rods pendulum when he is at top dead centre, it requires that the pendulum has that triggers relaxation of the spring at the right time, when he began to descend, there must be a mechanical sensor position on the pendulum, which detects the exact top dead centre (which is variable!). pity that I did not much free time, because I like to invent small systems to adapt, improve, but I studied well before the construction and correct the defects on the plans before making a draft
But over the past few months that I observe, testing, conducts measures (simple) on this oscillator, overunity that seemed apparent at the beginning decreases steadily, I am pleased to have achieved.
I will still try my system, but with little hope of valid results? because I think he understood how this double oscillator .....
greetings to all, very happy to take your comments, maybe soon
(text translated into English by a translator; hopes legible)
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: scorpion on May 03, 2008, 12:10:17 AM
salutations de la france,tr?s int?ressant votre forum dual m?canical oscillation system . Je sais que le mouvement perp?tuel est dit impossible , mais j'ai fabriqu? une r?plique de ce double oscillateur, je le teste depuis quelques mois, aux premiers essais, j'ai ?t? tr?s surpris par la tr?s grande force de sortie par rapport ? l'entr?e qui parait donner 9/1 ou plus ??? j'ai calcul? beaucoup de syst?mes qui pourraient renvoyer une partie de l'?nergie pour maintenir le mouvement du pendule,mais cela n'est pas simple ,car il faut que l'impulsion soit donn?e au bon moment car le pendule n'a pas toujours la m?me amplitude,si l'impulsion arrive trop en avance elle annule , et si l'impulsion est en retard elle ne sert ? rien car le pendule s'enfuit,il faut une synchronisation variable de l'impulsion suivant l'amplitude du pendule ,?a peut ?tre fait m?caniquement en comprimant un ressort quand le poids tombe,et renvoyer la d?tente du ressort par syst?mes de leviers ou bielles au pendule quand il se trouve au point mort haut ,il faut pour cela que se soit le pendule qui d?clenche la d?tente du ressort au bon moment, quand il commence ? descendre,il faut un capteur m?canique de position sur le pendule qui d?tecte avec pr?cision le point mort haut (qui est variable!!!) .Dommage que je n'ai pas beaucoup de temps libre ,car j'aime inventer des petits syst?mes  pour adapter ,am?liorer,mais je les ?tudie bien avant de les construire et rectifier les d?fauts sur les plans avant de r?aliser un projet
Mais depuis quelques mois que j'observe,teste,effectue des mesures (simple) sur cet oscillateur ,la overunity qui me semblait apparente au d?but d?croit sans cesse ,je suis cependant heureux de l'avoir r?alis?.
je vais quand m?me essayer mon syst?me , mais sans grand espoir de r?sultats valables??? car je crois avoir compris comment fonctionne ce double oscillateur.....
salutations ? tous, tr?s heureux de suivre vos commentaires,? bient?t peut-?tre
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: Talmin on May 04, 2008, 01:57:47 AM
It's now published a full paper by physicist Nebojsa Simin:
 
Original scientific paper - Free energy of the oscillating pendulum-lever system:
"...The effect of creating the free energy results from the difference between the work of the orbital damping forces of the lever and the work of the radial damping force of the pendulum motion. This effect enables increase of the input energy. The coefficient of efficiency of the machine can be more than one."
http://www.veljkomilkovic.com/Images/Nebojsa_Simin_paper_Free_Energy_of_the_oscillating_pendulum-lever_system.pdf
 
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: scorpion on May 09, 2008, 06:27:40 PM
Hi all
Here some pictures of my oscllateur Vilkovic,
weight of the pendulum 12 kg weight on the release lever is a spring, spring tension is adjustable to several positions with a lever that allows me to instruct its output by 14 kg to 25 kg, it is much simpler than setting a fixed weight, borne down much faster because there is almost no inertia, the load increases with the amount of leverage output.
The ensemble is constructed of wood and iron, rigid construction for the minimum vibration,
all this construction is set firmly on a chest filled with sand around 100kg, front ago weighing 50 kg over 4 feet, which improves stability,
and the rear is fixed to the wall of the building with the help of a clamp, cel? is perhaps an exaggeration, but not cel? there are too many shocks pests as the pendulum of 12 kg generates a lot of high-strength at the bottom and front to back
it would achieve much stronger if the pendulum would have a weight of 20 kg 30kg or 50 kg
see you
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: scorpion on May 09, 2008, 06:32:39 PM
MORE PHOTOS
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: scorpion on May 09, 2008, 06:38:52 PM
MORE PHOTOS
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: scorpion on May 09, 2008, 06:40:18 PM
MORE PHOTOS
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: scorpion on May 09, 2008, 06:40:57 PM
MORE PHOTOS
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: scorpion on May 09, 2008, 06:42:55 PM
MORE PHOTOS
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: Lgal on May 19, 2008, 03:43:37 AM
Hi,

I see that you discussed here the analyses of Jovan Bebic that I found very interesting, so I did one analysis too that is related to first Jovan's paper. Here is my conclusion and full paper on the link below:

"Given the fact that F1 is always smaller than the total amount of the centrifugal force which is acting vertically downwards on the pendulum axis for small angles f, the conclusion is that the efficiency of a two-stage mechanical oscillator by Veljko Milković is always bigger than 1 because cosf is always less than 1!  "
http://www.veljkomilkovic.com/Images/Analysis_Ljubo_Panic.pdf
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: bradpitt on May 22, 2008, 10:59:02 PM
Here is sort of a different idea I had...let me know what you think....It is really simple to try at home with almost anything.
 
Just wanted people to actually try this at home and see what they think. This is my video.

Even if you try it without a lever you can feel there is a lot going on with gravity.
I would love it if someone with more computer experience could make a model a real model and see what they can get out it??
Thanks

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EdV9233_pnQ
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: Nihilanth on May 27, 2008, 10:50:30 PM
http://www.veljkomilkovic.com/OscilacijeEng.html

"The combination of these two models is the first model of perpetuum mobile."
The piston water pump with the pendulum and electromagnets (http://www.veljkomilkovic.com/Images/Patenti/Patent12.jpg)
Electric generator with the pendulum and magnetic bumpers (http://www.veljkomilkovic.com/Images/Patenti/Patent3.jpg)

Would anyone here happen to know how to translate the first one?
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: Talmin on June 06, 2008, 03:27:46 AM
The latest news...

CALCULATION OF ENERGY SURPLUS OF THE TWO-STAGE MECHANICAL OSCILLATOR IN THE EXPERIMENT WITH MANUAL DYNAMO LAMPS
In one more analysis and measurement, Jovan Bebic considers the efficiency of Veljko Milkovic's two-stage mechanical oscillator in the famous experiment with the hand flashlights and reports that the output/input ratio is 2.8 times in his same replicated experiment.

http://www.veljkomilkovic.com/Images/Analysis_Jovan_Bebic_3-experiment_dynamo_lamps.pdf

Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: Nihilanth on June 08, 2008, 01:01:18 AM
Sorry to be a bother, but does anyone know where I could download whatever that physics simulation software is, or better yet, If someone could test this for me, I'd appreciate it.
(http://img405.imageshack.us/img405/5561/2stagebd1.png)
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: FreeEnergy on June 08, 2008, 01:21:41 AM
Sorry to be a bother, but does anyone know where I could download whatever that physics simulation software is, or better yet, If someone could test this for me, I'd appreciate it.
(http://img405.imageshack.us/img405/5561/2stagebd1.png)

go here: http://workingmodel.design-simulation.com/WM2D/download.php
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: Nihilanth on June 09, 2008, 09:29:47 AM
Thank you, but for some strange reason, I can't seem to figure out how to find the dimensions of an object. Also, It won't let me save.
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: bradpitt on June 14, 2008, 06:01:38 PM
I asked Stephen to do the Computer sim for this and he said to give him a chance to get caught up on things.
Thanks
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: bradpitt on June 19, 2008, 06:58:53 AM
Hey everyone,
 

I don't know if you ever saw this???? There is no other details about it it just says someone built
9 kg pendulum running on 5 watts - download the video clip to see it - 5.21 MB

If you can't open the one above just go to the link below
 
Look at this one and scroll down a little (you'll see the picture of it a pendulum)
There is very told about what is going on and no details about the builder?? I tried look Ron up and could not find anything on google or youtube???????

http://www.veljkomilkovic.com/AktuelnoEng.html
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: petersone on June 19, 2008, 03:28:50 PM
Hi Everybody
Just some questions someone may have the answer to.
Anyone who has tested this seems to find ou,where is the extra energy coming from? perhaps no one has told the machine it needs it!!!
Why is there no self runner,generate some juice,feed it to a coil to attract the pendulum,can't be that difficult for the very learned people in this forum.
happy hunting
peter
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: i_ron on June 19, 2008, 07:15:45 PM
Hey everyone,
 

I don't know if you ever saw this???? There is no other details about it it just says someone built
9 kg pendulum running on 5 watts - download the video clip to see it - 5.21 MB

If you can't open the one above just go to the link below
 
Look at this one and scroll down a little (you'll see the picture of it a pendulum)
There is very told about what is going on and no details about the builder?? I tried look Ron up and could not find anything on google or youtube???????

http://www.veljkomilkovic.com/AktuelnoEng.html


Hi Brad,

Thank you for your interest! Ron is a retired machinist, living in Victoria BC.
He works closely with Veljko and, as a matter of fact, is an honorary member of the Novi Sad Crew.

The pictures on Veljko's site are of an earlier build. For the latest build go here...

http://www.driveway.com/a8e6e8f3h8

This is the double solenoid operated 18 Kg Mk 5.3 version

Ron

Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: Nihilanth on June 20, 2008, 03:35:47 AM
That double solenoid video is pretty amazing. Makes me think I should change my design idea:

Attaching the pendulum's axis to a crankwheel with the arm extendible only to half the diameter of the crank wheel. and powered by hydraulics, like in 2b's diagram. Maybe with a second. crank on the stationary weights side to turn an electric motor.

My head hurts right now, so I hope I'm making sense.
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: bradpitt on June 20, 2008, 05:18:04 AM
I Ron
Are you THE Ron???
can you tell me if the device actually worked?? and IF so I would love to give you a call to talk about it??
Thanks
Jeff
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: i_ron on June 23, 2008, 01:04:47 AM
I Ron
Are you THE Ron???
can you tell me if the device actually worked?? and IF so I would love to give you a call to talk about it??
Thanks
Jeff

The lesson was just how to drive the pendulum.
What you hang on it for power extraction is another story (that hasn't happened yet, here)

Ron
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: bradpitt on June 26, 2008, 06:38:36 AM
Ok her is my question...I have set something up to see what happens ....It is basically Milivoc set up with a pendulum and cross bar. What if on the pendulum I have a 2 pound weight and on the lifting end I have a 5 pound weight set on the ground with a cable set up too and when I swing the 2 pound weight it lifts the 5 pound weight up off the ground (it lifts it up about 3 times before it can not pick it up anymore) Pendulum is beinging lifted 2 feet and it lifts the 5lbs off the ground about 5-6 inchs......What is going on???
Anyone????
Thanks for the input
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: greendoor on June 26, 2008, 07:49:16 AM
Can somebody please explain to me how anyone with even half a brain for physics can think that the "flashlight" expermiment proves power output?  This is a fools paradise if anything ever was - and I will explain why:

The motion required to light an LED flashlight is very small.  Simply holding one flashlight and giving the input pendulum a little tap is going to give a small flash - for sure.  It is consuming hardly any power - possibly milliwatts. 

Hanging a whole bunch of the same flashlights on the output end is proving nothing either.  Sure - each one will extract a few milliwatts - but that is nothing compared to the power you are pumping into it with your hand.

You could equally "prove" massive Underunity by strapping the 12 flashlights onto your hand, and placing only one flashlight on the output beam ...

I'm intrigued by Milkovic, but this part of his "science" is utter bollocks that a child should be able to debunk. 

A pendulum is a storage device, and a beam is a lever.  I can't see any dynamics here that can't be explained by a pendulum an a lever.  One their own, pendulums and levers have a fascination but are clearly not overunity.  Combined, they get a little more interesting, and the maths obviously gets beyond most of us.  But i'm not seeing anything that should amuse a real scientist for more than a few minutes ...

I am not a skeptic - I suspect it's possible to build a gravity wheel that works - but i'm not seeing it here. 

 

Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: greendoor on June 26, 2008, 08:13:22 AM
Ok her is my question...I have set something up to see what happens ....It is basically Milivoc set up with a pendulum and cross bar. What if on the pendulum I have a 2 pound weight and on the lifting end I have a 5 pound weight set on the ground with a cable set up too and when I swing the 2 pound weight it lifts the 5 pound weight up off the ground (it lifts it up about 3 times before it can not pick it up anymore) Pendulum is beinging lifted 2 feet and it lifts the 5lbs off the ground about 5-6 inchs......What is going on???
Anyone????
Thanks for the input

It's just like a swinging pendulum.  Potential energy is converted into kinetic energy, and then converted back into potential energy - it does this a few times until friction has consumed it all.  Net result: 0.

We are fooled into thinking that this is overunity - but it is simply a series of energy conversions, each a little lossy.
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: utilitarian on June 26, 2008, 08:55:13 AM
Can somebody please explain to me how anyone with even half a brain for physics can think that the "flashlight" expermiment proves power output?  This is a fools paradise if anything ever was - and I will explain why:

The motion required to light an LED flashlight is very small.  Simply holding one flashlight and giving the input pendulum a little tap is going to give a small flash - for sure.  It is consuming hardly any power - possibly milliwatts. 

Hanging a whole bunch of the same flashlights on the output end is proving nothing either.  Sure - each one will extract a few milliwatts - but that is nothing compared to the power you are pumping into it with your hand.

You could equally "prove" massive Underunity by strapping the 12 flashlights onto your hand, and placing only one flashlight on the output beam ...

You are absolutely right, and a wittier person than I has made the comment that the experiment with the flashlights would work equally well if the flashlight in the hand was broken.
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: Paul-R on June 26, 2008, 03:54:50 PM
Can somebody please explain to me how anyone with even a brain for physics can think that the "flashlight" expermiment proves power output? 
Yes. What is needed is an Avometer.
Paul.
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: bradpitt on June 26, 2008, 06:16:43 PM
Greendor,
I am not saying that the flashlight is a real example but all I was asking is what I have done ....is it doing extra work??
I am attaching a hand crank (like the hand drills) to a AC generator and seeing what I can get it out of it and then running that to a small motor that will run a flywheel that I am hoping to attach back into the crank...because the crank only needs a small amount of power to keep running too??
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: broli on June 26, 2008, 10:07:08 PM
I'm curious why noone has tried the following simple setup already...

(http://broli.dommel.be/2stagebd.PNG)

Maybe it's not the best setup for an electrical setup but the point is having a pulsing input and continuous ouput and measuring the differential.
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: hansvonlieven on June 26, 2008, 11:44:13 PM
G'day Broli and all,

This has been done many times. Brian Berrett and Ron Pugh have used similar arrangements. This is all documented. All have walked away from it since there is NO energy gain in the device!

Hans von Lieven
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: allcanadian on June 26, 2008, 11:52:52 PM
@greendoor
Quote
It's just like a swinging pendulum.  Potential energy is converted into kinetic energy, and then converted back into potential energy - it does this a few times until friction has consumed it all.  Net result: 0.
We are fooled into thinking that this is overunity - but it is simply a series of energy conversions, each a little lossy.
A bunch of genius types at MIT once said they would need 1000X more computing power to solve the inertial moments of a simple fluid filled pendulum and even then they conceeded that the accuracy would be too low to matter. Now put a pendulum on a lever weighted AND loaded on the other end---- the inertial,velocity,time variables are near infinite and yet you presume to understand what the boys at MIT admitted could never be calculated. When I built this machine I understood no simulator would solve this and that it could take years to get all the variables correct to produce the desired effects so I moved on to easier projects. Can you imagine an engineer of 20 years having operated 10,000HP turbines in a 160MW power plant intimidated by a simple pendulum as you say.
Go back to school you have no idea what your talking about ;D
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: utilitarian on June 27, 2008, 12:17:24 AM
@greendoorA bunch of genius types at MIT once said they would need 1000X more computing power to solve the inertial moments of a simple fluid filled pendulum and even then they conceeded that the accuracy would be too low to matter. Now put a pendulum on a lever weighted AND loaded on the other end---- the inertial,velocity,time variables are near infinite and yet you presume to understand what the boys at MIT admitted could never be calculated. When I built this machine I understood no simulator would solve this and that it could take years to get all the variables correct to produce the desired effects so I moved on to easier projects. Can you imagine an engineer of 20 years having operated 10,000HP turbines in a 160MW power plant intimidated by a simple pendulum as you say.
Go back to school you have no idea what your talking about ;D


Just because we don't know exactly when it will stop swinging, doesn't mean we cannot predict that it will eventually.  I am sure the MIT guys could not predict which number on the roulette wheel a ball will stop on - doesn't mean it will keep hopping forever.
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: broli on June 27, 2008, 12:50:56 AM
Just because we don't know exactly when it will stop swinging, doesn't mean we cannot predict that it will eventually.  I am sure the MIT guys could not predict which number on the roulette wheel a ball will stop on - doesn't mean it will keep hopping forever.

"Yeah it might circle earth and go to the moon a few times but at the end it'll end up 1cm from its starting position." Kind of the same sense you're using. Predictions are useless in some cases you know.
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: allcanadian on June 27, 2008, 02:15:01 AM
Sorry for being rude in my last post Im having a bad hair day, my point is until we have spent 20 years exploring every possibility as some inventors have we will never know. We all know history is littered with examples where 99.9 percent of the people on this planet were wrong in there opinions ie Columbus--the world is flat, the Wright brothers airplane,Teslas alternating currents, Goddards rockets etc......So how can we be so sure we are not wrong now, in truth we cannot know until we have explored every concievable option which nobody seems to care to do. Read the history books---- we have been completely wrong many more times than we have ever been right.
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: greendoor on June 27, 2008, 11:58:51 AM
@greendoorA bunch of genius types at MIT once said they would need 1000X more computing power to solve the inertial moments of a simple fluid filled pendulum and even then they conceeded that the accuracy would be too low to matter. Now put a pendulum on a lever weighted AND loaded on the other end---- the inertial,velocity,time variables are near infinite and yet you presume to understand what the boys at MIT admitted could never be calculated. When I built this machine I understood no simulator would solve this and that it could take years to get all the variables correct to produce the desired effects so I moved on to easier projects. Can you imagine an engineer of 20 years having operated 10,000HP turbines in a 160MW power plant intimidated by a simple pendulum as you say.
Go back to school you have no idea what your talking about ;D

You are right - I haven't got a clue what i'm talking about.  I must be a frikken moron.  But at least I didn't confuse a relatively simple pendulum & lever system with a hydrodynamic fluid-flow analysis.  That would be really ignorant ...  ;D

Fluid flow has much greater potential for free-energy - especially if vortex flow is created.  You would basically have to account for the movements of every single molecule.  For example - does fluid flow impart some order out of chaos, and perhaps negative entropy?  Could the random brownian movement of particles be given a bias in one direction?  That would not add any new Energy into the system - but could it allow for some unexpected velocity increases? ... and from a local reference frame might this be percieved as power increase - like a tornado-in-a-can?  If we used some of this power, would the temperature of the fluid drop ... and would energy flow into this system? ... the questions go on and on ...

But you are right - I have no idea what i'm talking about.  Go right on looking for power out of a simple pendulum & lever ... you might get lucky.



Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: edelind on June 27, 2008, 03:44:21 PM
G'day Broli and all,

This has been done many times. Brian Berrett and Ron Pugh have used similar arrangements. This is all documented. All have walked away from it since there is NO energy gain in the device!

Hans von Lieven

Where is documented? Do you have a link?

Also, they have walked away from what? From using an electromagnet to keep the pendulum working or from the entire Milcovitz device?
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: bradpitt on June 27, 2008, 04:46:24 PM
Here are my new videos,
These are just test models, if I feel like we might get something out of this I will be making a large better built model
I reallly want to keep this as simple as I can and when I run this through a computer simulator it doesn't stop??? AND YES the friction is on...lol ..give it a try



http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D1juFXh_1hQ

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L0GNAgbkp-Y

Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: hansvonlieven on June 27, 2008, 07:18:20 PM
Where is documented? Do you have a link?

Also, they have walked away from what? From using an electromagnet to keep the pendulum working or from the entire Milcovitz device?


Here are the references Edelind:

http://peswiki.com/index.php/OS:Milkovic-Berrett_Secondary_Oscillator_Generator

http://pesn.com/2007/03/18/9500462_Berrett_pendulums/

http://peswiki.com/index.php/Directory:Milkovic_Two-Stage_Mechanical_Oscillator

Ron Pugh?s pendulum set-up is on the Milkovic site somewhere

Brian Berrett has publicly stated he would not do any further work on the device, Ron Pugh after some initial effort was never heard of again.

My own work on the device can be followed by the links in the Milkovic article in Peswiki as well as through a number of postings in this thread, if you want to go back far enough.

Hope that helps.

Hans von Lieven


Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: bradpitt on June 28, 2008, 12:52:12 AM
Where is documented? Do you have a link?

Also, they have walked away from what? From using an electromagnet to keep the pendulum working or from the entire Milcovitz device?



Here are the references Edelind:

http://peswiki.com/index.php/OS:Milkovic-Berrett_Secondary_Oscillator_Generator

http://pesn.com/2007/03/18/9500462_Berrett_pendulums/

http://peswiki.com/index.php/Directory:Milkovic_Two-Stage_Mechanical_Oscillator

Ron Pugh?s pendulum set-up is on the Milkovic site somewhere

Brian Berrett has publicly stated he would not do any further work on the device, Ron Pugh after some initial effort was never heard of again.

My own work on the device can be followed by the links in the Milkovic article in Peswiki as well as through a number of postings in this thread, if you want to go back far enough.

Hope that helps.

Hans von Lieven


Hello Hans,
I am trying to find your info but can't?? Can you cut and paste it for me??? I have gone back all the way in this link and could not find anyone doing a set up like mine???(with the crank)?? it is a very easy set up and I am having trouble building the crank but I trying??!!
:)
Have you were you trying to get the energy from the lever??
I know about the ones from the sight and I don't know if you noticed those are just pendulums ??? someone on here (I RON) is building a nice set up for the pendulum.
After I have gotten going on the crank a little better today I was thinking about putting a small and the bottom of the cranks and see what happens ?? I am going to try a bunch of stuff so any input you can give would be great!!
Thanks
Jeff
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: hansvonlieven on June 28, 2008, 01:39:33 AM
@bradpitt

G'day Jeff,

I cannot recall at the moment what your setup looks like, can you give me a link?

Berret mounted his magnet on a small wheel with a weight on the bottom so it would act as a pendulum. This gave him the precision he needed to activate it in spite of the irregular up and down movement of the fulcrum.

Hans
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: bradpitt on June 28, 2008, 02:36:40 AM
 Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
? Reply #755 on: June 27, 2008, 11:39:33 PM ? Quote 

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
@bradpitt

G'day Jeff,

I cannot recall at the moment what your setup looks like, can you give me a link?

Berret mounted his magnet on



Hans
Here is were I got today...

http://youtube.com/watch?v=0HYl5mNaorY
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: bradpitt on June 28, 2008, 04:51:04 AM
Guess what I am finding ...the wheel has to be just below where the center of the pendulum weight it

Hans,
 if you have a computer SIM then I recommend running it and I think you will be surprised what you will find??? I can not paste anything here from the computer sim
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: hansvonlieven on June 28, 2008, 04:55:11 AM
I have WM2D  my e-mail is hans@keelytech.com

Hans
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: fletcher on June 28, 2008, 04:57:46 AM
Jeff .. I suggest you attach some sort of flywheel to your crank axle e.g. a cast iron or steel pulley wheel or a large castor wheel etc - this will store some of the rotational kinetic energy & give it back again in the direction of rotation - if the pendulum action is erratic or irregular then a flywheel is IMO the best way to smooth out energy demands.

As you have it, frictional losses will slow things down & reduce the average amplitude of the pendulum making it harder & harder to get it over 12 o'cl, IMO.
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: neptune on June 29, 2008, 05:53:08 PM
The Milkovich device has been around for years, and yet no one has proved if it is overunity or not. Presure of work means I have no time to experiment. I have thought of a simple experiment , which will take little time, which will prove one way or the other if it is overunity. First imagine a typical set-up. Horizontal beam pivoted near the centre, with pendulum at th right. on the left, the beam is used to lift a known weight at each stroke. Now imagine a piece of sting. Yhis is fixed to the pendulum at a point about midway between the pendulums weight and its bearing. This string now runs through a pulley or guide placed as near the beam pivot as pssible under the beam. From here, the string hangs vertically, and on its end is a known weight. Midway between this wight and the beam pivot is another guide consisting of a flat plate with a hole in it mounted on a bracket. We will call this guide 2. Finally we attach a second string to the weight and run it through guide 2.
             If we now pull on this second string, we raise the weight up to the underside of guide 2. Keer it hel there, and set the pendulum swinging. When the pendulum is at its right hand end of the swing, release the weight and allow it to fall, thus pulling on thependulum and giving it an input of energy. As soon as the weight hits the floor, pullit back up, and hold it untill the pendulum again reaches the right hand end of its swing, and release it. Carefully synchronise your pulling with the swinging of the pendulum.
           By measuring the weight, and the distance it falls, we can express the input energy to the pendulum per cycle in gram-centimetres or inch ounces. If the left side of the beam is used to lift a heavier weight, we can measure the out put pr cycle in the same units. This is proof beyond doubt.
before doing the test ensure the device is tuned for max performance. Please post your results wether pos or neg. Note that this tesr would be easier on a large model with a slow pendulum
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: bradpitt on July 01, 2008, 04:36:47 AM
Here is my new video...because what I realized is that I was just making a bigger over balanced wheel....so I went smaller (easy to work on)
Still not working
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-zpl2u-buSw
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: edelind on July 01, 2008, 09:24:30 AM
G'day Broli and all,

This has been done many times. Brian Berrett and Ron Pugh have used similar arrangements. This is all documented. All have walked away from it since there is NO energy gain in the device!

Hans von Lieven



Thank you for the links. They are very instructive. Anyway, I don't see anywhere where it's said that there is no energy gain. In fact everywhere is noticed more energy at output than at input. Brian Berret looks like he abandoned this design not because of the efficiency, but because of the extremely difficult tuning that is required (he also has a video where he shows the random move of the lever with no weight).  At the time of making his project open source he only was able to run the device for 15 seconds.
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: edelind on July 01, 2008, 09:43:59 AM
Regarding the complexity of oscillations, I think a pendulum with a lever is somehow similar with a double pendulum, at least as complexity.

Watch a demonstration here (who dares to tune that?):
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Whvl6CikDxA

And a simulation here:
http://www.maths.tcd.ie/~plynch/SwingingSpring/doublependulum.html

In fact, with the attached spring, the complexity becomes even wilder, maybe similar with this:
http://www.maths.tcd.ie/~plynch/SwingingSpring/springpendulum.html
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: stevensuf on July 06, 2008, 06:55:25 AM
I wonder why some people find this example so difficult to get into their heads.

Imagine a see saw saw one side was 10m and the other 2m, one side had 10kg on it then other 2kg,
(ie the 2m end has 10kg and the 10m end 2 kg)
it would sit in balance, say i added 1kg to either side it would fall and the other rise , if i removed the
kilo it would eventually return to balance.

OK so say on the side with 2m i put a 1 kg weight and a 9kilo pendulum.
 With no motion it is all balanced, so say i raise the pendulum by 90 degrees the system is no unblanaced
and will fall towards the 10m end.

Once the pendulum is released it simply falls,  the lever will begin to raise, when the pendulum reaches mid
point ie vertical it will have an effective force akin to its original weight, ie say 9kg x 10ms for gravity say 90n (rounding
i do know g=9.81 n) which would make the system balanced again, but you also have the force of its velocity at this
point acting directly downwards, now say it was moving at 2 m/s it now has a force of 118n ie effectively making it act
like a weight which is 20% heavier upsetting the balance and raising the beam higher than it would if it were stationary.
the pendulum then reaches the other 90 degree apex repeating the effective weightless ie no force acting on the lever
part of the cycle and it falls again.

It is extremely simple, the reason for the long beam is so as not to upset the pendulum cycle by its motion, the only
extra energy put in to maintaining the pendulum is to overcome natural forces - wind , frictions etc

No energy  is lost in the pendulum swing ie put into the lever, the lever simply moves due to decreases/increases of force
on the lever by the pendulum changing position. ie the effective weight on the pendulum side changes during its swing.

Ie at 90 degrees we have an effective weight reduction of -9kg at vertical bottom and increase of +2kg

remember people weight is an illusion there is only mass and the force acting on it that give us this number! 10kg on earth weighs 6kg on mars or 3kg on the moon!

A simple test ie swing the pendulum with the lever locked time how long it takes to stop, unlock the lever change the pendulum length to adjust to the lever motion , swing it again and time how long it takes to stop, if no difference (others have reported this) then certainly nothing goes from the pendulum to the lever.

If only people would question the nonsense taught at school, if you ignore the teaching that says you cant get work out of gravity and look at it logically and reasonably then it is all extremely simple.
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: i_ron on July 07, 2008, 01:02:35 AM

snip
Once the pendulum is released it simply falls,  the lever will begin to raise, when the pendulum reaches mid point ie vertical it will have an effective force akin to its original weight, the only
extra energy put in to maintaining the pendulum is to overcome natural forces - wind , frictions etc

No energy  is lost in the pendulum swing ie put into the lever, the lever simply moves due to decreases/increases of force on the lever by the pendulum changing position. ie the effective weight on the pendulum side changes during its swing.
snip
Ie at 90 degrees we have an effective weight reduction of -9kg at vertical bottom and increase of +2kg

snip

A simple test ie swing the pendulum with the lever locked time how long it takes to stop, unlock the lever change the pendulum length to adjust to the lever motion , swing it again and time how long it takes to stop, if no difference (others have reported this) then certainly nothing goes from the pendulum to the lever.

snip


True up to a certain point but several ambiguities have crept in.

"the lever will begin to raise" (sic) Which side of the lever? You mean the lever on the opposite
side to the pendulum will rise, I assume.

"no energy is lost..." is simply not true. The rise and fall of the pendulum pivot point, at the end of
the lever, directly disturbs the swing of the pendulum. You are in effect dropping the pendulum as
it approaches the bottom of it's swing. This is an energy loss. A further loss occurs as the pendulum
swings up to it's apogee, there the pivot point rises as the weight lessens.This perturbation of the
pendulum is exactly opposite to the natural motion needed to maintain the swing, as shown in the
Botafumeiro scene, where the monks pull down on the rope... raising the incense burner, at the
bottom of it's swing.I am not advocating this labor intensive approach... just using it as an example.
Try it and you will see.

Ron




Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: greendoor on July 07, 2008, 12:11:53 PM
A simple way of looking at where the energy goes is this:

If your Milkovic beam is stalled - the pendulum just oscillates like an ordinary pendulum.  This proves nothing.

If the beam moves - doing work - then consider the degrees of angular momentum that are "lost" - they are the exact same number of degrees that the beam moves.  The energy that keeps a pendulum going is the pull of gravity on the fall down.  As the beam moves X number of degrees down, the pendulum is robbed of exactly X number of degrees of gravity assist. 

The reason we are fooled by Milkovic is because a Lever is a cool torque amplifier - at the expense of distance.  And a pendulum is a cool energy storage device.  Coupled together - we can fool ourselves by putting in a small force - applied over a greater distance, and over a greater period of time - to achieve a great thumping impulse for a very short period of time, over a very short distance ...
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: i_ron on July 11, 2008, 12:27:30 AM
A simple way of looking at where the energy goes is this:

If your Milkovic beam is stalled - the pendulum just oscillates like an ordinary pendulum.  This proves nothing.

If the beam moves - doing work - then consider the degrees of angular momentum that are "lost" - they are the exact same number of degrees that the beam moves.  The energy that keeps a pendulum going is the pull of gravity on the fall down.  As the beam moves X number of degrees down, the pendulum is robbed of exactly X number of degrees of gravity assist. 

The reason we are fooled by Milkovic is because a Lever is a cool torque amplifier - at the expense of distance.  And a pendulum is a cool energy storage device.  Coupled together - we can fool ourselves by putting in a small force - applied over a greater distance, and over a greater period of time - to achieve a great thumping impulse for a very short period of time, over a very short distance ...


Unfortunately, you offer this as an opinion only. 
Where is the experiment and the numbers to back up your pronouncements?

Ron
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: Talmin on July 16, 2008, 03:43:41 AM
Latest news from www.veljkomilkovic.com
 
Dear friends,

recently Mr. Bojan Petkovic completed the draft version of his mathematical model and analysis of the two-stage mechanical oscillator and now he wishes to share it with the scientific community for public discussion and peer review.

Modeling and simulation of a double pendulum with pad by Bojan Petkovic, engineer:
An independent mathematical analysis by Bojan Petkovic considers the Veljko Milkovic's two-stage mechanical oscillator in a form of double pendulum with a pad that presents a mechanical system which is not analyzed in the literature:
"In this paper, results of the simulation of a double pendulum with a horizontal pad are presented. Pendulums are arranged in such a way that in the static equilibrium, small pendulum takes the vertical position, while the big pendulum is in a horizontal position and rests on the pad. Motion during one half oscillation is investigated. Impact of the big pendulum on the pad is considered to be ideally inelastic. Characteristic positions and angular velocities of both pendulums, as well as their energies at each instant of time are presented. Obtained results proved to be in accordance with the motion of the real physical system. Double pendulum with pad refers to the two-stage mechanical oscillator that is invented, patented and constructed by Serbian inventor Veljko Milković..."

You can read and download the paper on the next link (213 KB - PDF):
http://www.veljkomilkovic.com/Images/Bojan_Petkovic-Modeling_and_Simulation_of_a_Double_Pendulum_With_Pad.pdf

Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: cleanfuture on July 16, 2008, 05:30:55 AM
I have built and tested a replica of the Milcovitc design myself. It is about 1m tall and is entirely made from a K-Nex construction kit. The model incorporates a .8m diameter wheel that is driven by a geared up ratchet mechanism attached to the pivot shaft of the main cross beam. The idea was to convert the oscillation into a rotation of a flywheel. Mechanically, It was actually not all  that hard to do. That is why I can't work out that Milcovitc has not build a model like that himself yet. He has registered a patent on a design like this but has, to the best of my knowledge, not built one like that. If you want to prove if you can make self sustainable power, a rotational output is ideal because it interfaces with of the shelf electric generator/alternators. Milcovitc does not seem to be very professional. When I saw his video where he is proposing that the pendulum pump could alleviate unemployment in the country by employing people to hand operate pendulum pumps allover the place, I knew he was a propeller-head. Anyway, my tests showed clearly that the load from the wheel does indeed reflect back on the movement of the pendulum. With the main beam locked rigid, the pendulum will swing considerably longer than if the beam is allowed to oscillate and create power through the wheel. The rate of damping on the pendulum is proportional to the rate of amplitude of the beam. If you gays are interested, I will post a picture of the thing.
Uli
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: neptune on July 16, 2008, 05:38:47 PM
@Cleanfurure. I still believe this device may be overunity. If you study the work of RHEAD100 on Youtube, his maths seems to suggest that max efficiency is achieved at small movements of the beam. Out put must be extracted from both the up and down movements of the beam. Tuning would seem to be the whole key. I am slowly collecting parts for a new model. Final proof of overunity in my opinion can accurately be measured by rising/falling weights, see my last post.
                    In my opinion the mathematical analysis by Bojan Petkovic is a waste of time, because having waded through his pages of B/S we are still left wondering is he saying it is overunity or not?????
                      @Cleanfuture, please read my last post. This idea, after tuning will tell you the truth.
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: cleanfuture on July 17, 2008, 07:55:28 AM
@Cleanfurure. I still believe this device may be overunity. If you study the work of RHEAD100 on Youtube, his maths seems to suggest that max efficiency is achieved at small movements of the beam. Out put must be extracted from both the up and down movements of the beam. Tuning would seem to be the whole key. I am slowly collecting parts for a new model. Final proof of overunity in my opinion can accurately be measured by rising/falling weights, see my last post.
                    In my opinion the mathematical analysis by Bojan Petkovic is a waste of time, because having waded through his pages of B/S we are still left wondering is he saying it is overunity or not?????
                      @Cleanfuture, please read my last post. This idea, after tuning will tell you the truth.

I appreciate your comment. I did try to keep the stroke as short as possible though. The output from the beam axle is geared up 12 to 1 to get appreciable angular movement on the drive gear to the flywheel. This shows, since power is force over distance, as soon as the power output is increased, the pendulum is dampened. What you are saying is that there is some kind of non linear harmonic relationship going between the pendulum period and the beam movement. I think the way you are proposing to prove this will work. I just cannot understand that Milcovitc has not been able to build a device himself that provides irrefutable prove of overunity.
Uli
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: neptune on July 18, 2008, 08:07:55 PM
@Cleanfuture. Does your ratchet flywheel extract energy from both the up and down movements of the beam? I was looking at a replication that drives the pendulum by an electromagnet. the beam drives a crude generator. Claimed figures are 2.4 watts in and 3.5 Watts out. I think a bicycle hub type generator would give a bigger output for less drag. 50 years ago when I was at school. the school had a master/slave clock system. The master clock had a long pendulum. This was pulsed by an electromagnet about once per minute. A simple elegant mechanical device detected the reduction of amplitude of the pendulum, and it was this that switched on the electromagnet. I understood how it worked, and can still picture it in my mind. I would post diagrams, but I do not have the ability. If anyone is interested I will try to describe it. It would drive a pendulum to the same average amplitude in spite of variable damping.
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: gyulasun on July 18, 2008, 08:22:12 PM
Hi Neptune,

 It would drive a pendulum to the same average amplitude in spite of variable damping.

but the question is: at what input energy with respect to any useful damping?  (on damping we mean useful load, right?)

thanks,  Gyula
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: edelind on July 19, 2008, 09:10:39 AM
@Cleanfuture. Does your ratchet flywheel extract energy from both the up and down movements of the beam? I was looking at a replication that drives the pendulum by an electromagnet. the beam drives a crude generator. Claimed figures are 2.4 watts in and 3.5 Watts out. I think a bicycle hub type generator would give a bigger output for less drag. 50 years ago when I was at school. the school had a master/slave clock system. The master clock had a long pendulum. This was pulsed by an electromagnet about once per minute. A simple elegant mechanical device detected the reduction of amplitude of the pendulum, and it was this that switched on the electromagnet. I understood how it worked, and can still picture it in my mind. I would post diagrams, but I do not have the ability. If anyone is interested I will try to describe it. It would drive a pendulum to the same average amplitude in spite of variable damping.
Please describe it! Many thanks.
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: neptune on July 19, 2008, 02:45:27 PM
@edelind.Imagine a simple pendulum. Now imagine a hinge about one quarter down from the top.  attached to this a hinge is a horizontal bar , in the same plane as the pendulum swing. At the far end of this bar is a another hinge from which hangs a short vertical bar, say 2 cms long. This second hinge is arranged to allow the short vertical bar to swing only 45 degrees either side of the vertical. As the main pendulum swings. this vertical bar wipes back and forth along a fixed horizontal plate. The length of this plate is such that , at each end, the vertical bar drops over the end of the plate, and thus on its return journey swing the opposite way on its hinge,so that it always trails behind its hinge. Near one end of the horizontal plate, is a groove, parallel to the axis on which the main pendulum swings. Normally the vertical bar passes over this groove. But as the pendulums swing decays, a stroke will occur when the vertical bar, instead of dropping over the end of the plate, will stop with its lower edge in the groove. when the pendulum changes direction, the vertical bar will move on its hinge, forcing the horizontal bar from which it hangs, to rise higher than normal. As it rises, it briefly closes apair of contacts to energise the drive magnet .If anyone understands this, maybe they could post a diagram, as this is beyond my skills.
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: neptune on July 19, 2008, 08:27:15 PM
My last post, describing this mechanism was not quite right. I only saw it 50 years ago in the headmasters study. The only time you got to see it was when bending over to receive corporal punishment, so my mind was perhaps on other things. Further research has shown that this device is called the HIPP TOGGLE.
   Enter this on Youtube and see the video by RODALCO2007 . This shows it perfectly. Also notice the design of the electromagnet that drives the pendulum. Very efficient because the air gap is consistently small. I guess a picture really is worth a thousand words. Hope this helps someone.
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: neptune on July 20, 2008, 12:32:11 PM
@gyulasun. re the question in your last post. This is the question everybody would like answered. This needs to be answered in practice , not by mathematical theory. I think that the key is an efficient pendulum drive that wastes no energy. Could that key be the Hipp toggle?
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: Talmin on July 23, 2008, 08:06:13 AM
The latest news from www.veljkomilkovic.com - New video by Veljko Milkovic

Dear friends,

we are very proud to present you our new (old) video presentation.

Video: Cart with a pendulum - Vehicles with internal and inertial drive


New video presentation of Serbian inventor, Veljko Milkovic, demonstrating his perennial research work on the idea of moving vehicle without indirect mechanism (transmission). Milkovic explains a new power and how the isolated powers can perform one-way moving of model using tensile forces of physical pendulum.

There is also an attempt to improve and to confirm the law of action and reaction (The third Newton’s law), which hadn’t undergone any revision from its beginning.

From the contents: Tensile forces of physical pendulum, Motion without usual reflection, An addition to the Law of action and reaction (The third Newton’s law), Cart with a pendulum, Truck with horizontal physical pendulum...

This video is an excerpt from the TV show “Svet ideja”, Radio Television of Novi Sad (Serbia) recorded in 1996.

You can find and watch this video on the next link (YouTube video in English, 7 min.):
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4foY5r2TMOo

More info: http://www.veljkomilkovic.com/Antigravitacioni_motorEng.html

Additional information can be found also in the book by Veljko Milkovic "Anti-gravity motor":
http://www.veljkomilkovic.com/KnjigeEng.html#motor

Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: Talmin on August 12, 2008, 11:57:42 PM
Convincing proof?

testing large Milkovic 2 stage oscillator Video 6
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gC6Qlj1Mbo8
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: tagor on August 24, 2008, 07:35:29 PM
Convincing proof?

testing large Milkovic 2 stage oscillator Video 6
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gC6Qlj1Mbo8

sorry but it is not a convincing proof
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: Nabo00o on August 31, 2008, 10:41:18 PM
sorry but it is not a convincing proof

It shows something very interesting, that you can create motion/action without a reaction which defies newtons third law of motion.
Both this pendulum and a precessed gyroscope is able to do this, allthough scientists haven't deared to accept this, as daubting a law as fundamental to science as the third law of motion is an easy way of loosing your credible reputation as a scientist. But its true.
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: Marctwo on September 01, 2008, 02:08:34 PM
Although I'd expect this mechanism to be obvious to most, I can understand how a casual observer may be mislead by the 'magic' it seems to possess.

However, it's painfull to see a grown man put so much time and effort into something he obviously hasn't thought about.

It's a bit like the secondary momentum conduction device...  Ok, it's a tray on wheels.  But you can push 20kg on it with your little finger.  All I need to figure out is how to get the wheels to push the tray.  ::)
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: tagor on September 01, 2008, 02:44:58 PM
It shows something very interesting, that you can create motion/action without a reaction which defies newtons third law of motion.

where do you see this action without reaction ?

if you can proof this fact , you are a genius
you have to become more famous than Einstein
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: Paul-R on September 01, 2008, 02:46:11 PM
Ok, it's a tray on wheels.  But you can push 20kg on it with your little finger.  All I need to figure out is how to get the wheels to push the tray.  ::)
You've missed the point. If you want to learn, go back to the inventors site, and read the papers.
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: Marctwo on September 01, 2008, 03:27:06 PM
You've missed the point. If you want to learn, go back to the inventors site, and read the papers.
No, I'm one of those that hasn't missed the point.

This device simply transfers energy to and fro between the pendulum and lever.  And quite inefficiently too.  The energy losses are mostly due to the usual friction and enertia acting on the load.  So it doesn't take much energy to keep it going as not much energy is lost in the first place.

Useful?  Given an appropriate context and an efficient design, yes.
Over-unity?  No.
Special or unusual?  No.
Worthy of a fancy name?  No.

Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: Nabo00o on September 01, 2008, 05:42:50 PM
No, I'm one of those that hasn't missed the point.

This device simply transfers energy to and fro between the pendulum and lever.  And quite inefficiently too.  The energy losses are mostly due to the usual friction and enertia acting on the load.  So it doesn't take much energy to keep it going as not much energy is lost in the first place.

Useful?  Given an appropriate context and an efficient design, yes.
Over-unity?  No.
Special or unusual?  No.
Worthy of a fancy name?  No.


I can only disagree to what you have said here, as this clearly demonstrates an incredibly easy way to collect more energy from either or both gravitation and centrifugal force. It as been either ignored or not yet stumbled upon for centuries, but it without a doubt working.
When the pendulum swings back and forth, it loses only a tiny percentage of its energy in the process because of its low friction and air resistance, but still though it manages to manifest a force in the hinge, and that force is not related to the swing of the pendulum, as any ammount of work done by the hinge will not relate back to the pendulum. It is, to me at least, very easy to understand, and can also easly be demonstrated by yourself.

Its funny, because normaly that's the thing we allways want to restrict or remove as much as possible, at least when we want to make a wheel or anything rotating be as stable as possible.
Tell me why you think the pendulum is in some way diminishing its energy to the hinge, as their motions is totaly unrelated to each other and unable of affecting each other. Because really, the only thing that is affecting the hinge is the weight of the pendulum, which is more or less work free.
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: tagor on September 01, 2008, 07:58:58 PM
I can only disagree to what you have said here, as this clearly demonstrates an incredibly easy way to collect more energy

what you say is so so so funny !!
if it is so easy to collect more energy ? so can you tell me , they work on this mecanical dual oscillation for 30 years and they have done a self runner ?

it is easy or not easy that is the question ?

Quote
Tell me why you think the pendulum is in some way diminishing its energy to the hinge, as their motions is totaly unrelated to each other and unable of affecting each other.

you are totaly wrong
the 2 motions are totaly = related
but they are mecanicaly unrelated
 
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: Nabo00o on September 01, 2008, 08:40:47 PM
what you say is so so so funny !!
if it is so easy to collect more energy ? so can you tell me , they work on this mecanical dual oscillation for 30 years and they have done a self runner ?

it is easy or not easy that is the question ?

you are totaly wrong
the 2 motions are totaly = related
but they are mecanicaly unrelated
 

Its not easy, there you have it.
To make it be a self-runner you need to very accuratly time the hinge to pull or do something else which in turn can add energy to the pendulum for each turn, and not disturb or even halt it if the adjustments are done wrong.
I guess the man that created these machines wasn't interested in using a lot of time to make them drive themself when he easly could demonstrate the principle that made these machines exhibit an increased output of energy, (which is the force of gravity and centrifugal force in a state of ocsillation) which then would make people wanna try to do it for themselfs, at least it might be the reason :)

You can say that the moition of the pendulum and the hinge is connected, but still not all true since the pendulums swing doesn't directly add energy to the hinge, but the weight increase and decrease does, but is not related to the speed or "load" of the swing.
I mean, it wouldn't matter if the hinge stayed stationary all the time or if it was in full motion, the pendulum would swing with the same energy because no resistance or load was directly connected to the swing.

Therefore, the pendulum will continiously add energy to the hinge, no matter if you use it or not, and since the extraction of energy from the hinge doesn't affect the total energy of the pendulum you can say that they are not directly affected by each other, at least in one direction.

The way I see the mechanics of this is that when you add a pressure to the pendulum you can then collect the same presure in the hinge but in much larger quantities as it causes no drag on the pendulum.

I don't see any problem with this, of course though it remains to be tested to see if it can run itself, but as I see it its only a matter of skill and not a matter of limitation. I actually got a very crude drawing of a system which could in 'theory' make it run itself, mabye when I get the time I will try to build it ;)
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: tagor on September 01, 2008, 10:16:17 PM
To make it be a self-runner you need to very accuratly time the hinge to pull or do something else which in turn can add energy to the pendulum for each turn,

i do a dual oscillation peuduleum
 a coil give a pull, each turn , to the oscillation system
the input is 1Volt and some mili amps !!  it is truly very easy to do it
but if the pull is week , the dual oscillation stops !!
the link beetween the 2 oscillations is very real , not virtual !!!

have you try what you say ?

Quote
Therefore, the pendulum will continiously add energy to the hinge, no matter if you use it or not,

this is totaly false !
do you know something of physics ? what is the conservation of energy ?

if you don t understand what hapen in this oscillation
you need to try and verify  all your theory by yourself
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: Nabo00o on September 01, 2008, 11:09:22 PM
i do a dual oscillation peuduleum
 a coil give a pull, each turn , to the oscillation system
the input is 1Volt and some mili amps !!  it is truly very easy to do it
but if the pull is week , the dual oscillation stops !!
the link beetween the 2 oscillations is very real , not virtual !!!

have you try what you say ?

this is totaly false !
do you know something of physics ? what is the conservation of energy ?

if you don t understand what hapen in this oscillation
you need to try and verify  all your theory by yourself


I know that law very well and I also know that there are many experiments that is supposed be violating it.
The way I had thought of making it run by itself was purly mechanical and not electrical like you did, because it would be alot more easy and clear to understand, no need of messuring the input voltage/amps versus output and many other variables.
Also, mabye you didn't understand what i said.
The speed, power and resistance of the pendulum is totaly independent of the movment, power and resistance of the hinge.
It does not directly add energy to it, only indirectly via weight, and will not possibly by any means be loaded by the hinge (please test that claim for youself if you do not belive me).
And I thougth you understood that the whole point of this machine was that it broke that law (at least to the extent of what is known to us), and so creating more energy than input by us (not the total energy input).
I also thought that was the purpose of this site, but of course everyone should be allowed to be sceptical of claims that seems to good to be true.



Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: utilitarian on September 02, 2008, 01:49:44 AM
I know that law very well and I also know that there are many experiments that is supposed be violating it.

There is not a single experiment that demonstrates violation of the principle of conservation of energy.  If there was, it would be the biggest scientific news to come about in a long time.  Do you have any examples we do not know about?
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: Nabo00o on September 02, 2008, 02:40:32 AM
Sorry im going to bed now, but i'll try to post some links to experiments which has violated the "law" tomorrow.
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: tagor on September 02, 2008, 07:38:03 AM
There is not a single experiment that demonstrates violation of the principle of conservation of energy.  If there was, it would be the biggest scientific news to come about in a long time.  Do you have any examples we do not know about?
this is totaly true like I said at the begining
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: FreeEnergy on September 02, 2008, 09:07:34 AM
energy cannot be created nor destroyed it can only change form. the constant change of form is free energy. this is everything now, then, and before, forever, eternal, no beginning or end. it is universally indivisibly everywhere, absolute. in other words this thing which is the beginning & end of any circumstance has always been which means it has no beginning or end because it is eternal and we are part of this. so yes free energy exists because it is self evident existence is always in constant change to become more and more of its complete self, we just haven't learned exactly how to harness this power yet.

people say you cannot get something for nothing. but what is nothing? if nothing of itself is applicable then there is something there no?
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: utilitarian on September 02, 2008, 09:23:05 AM
energy cannot be created nor destroyed it can only change form. the constant change of form is free energy. this is everything now, then, and before, forever, eternal, no beginning or end. it is universally indivisibly everywhere, absolute. in other words this thing which is the beginning & end of any circumstance has always been which means it has no beginning or end because it is eternal and we are part of this. so yes free energy exists because it is self evident existence is always in constant change to become more and more of its complete self, we just haven't learned exactly how to harness this power yet.

people say you cannot get something for nothing. but what is nothing? if nothing of itself is applicable then there is something there no?

The only thing you can get for nothing is nothing.  And if nothing is something to you, well, I guess you are getting something, but it's really nothing.

And no, the constant change of energy form is not free energy.  For example, in a pendulum, and, more relevantly, in Milkovic's device, kinetic energy is constantly being exchanged for potential, plus some heat to friction.  However, there is no free energy to be gotten from such a device.  If you are calling this action free energy, well, that's not the free energy we are all looking for, and it cannot be harnessed in any way.  So really, none of what you said makes any sense at all.

It's like saying - this bar down the street offers free beer to everyone.  All you need to do is exchange your money for it, and you can have the free beer.
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: FreeEnergy on September 02, 2008, 09:34:12 AM
never mind what i said.
peace
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: ChileanOne on September 03, 2008, 06:03:10 AM
this is totaly true like I said at the begining

Not for too long, at least in the sense of public and general knowledge.
 ;D
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: tagor on September 03, 2008, 08:48:40 AM
Not for too long, at least in the sense of public and general knowledge.
 ;D

can you explain ?
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: ChileanOne on September 04, 2008, 04:18:47 PM
can you explain ?

CoE is going to take a major hit in the near future. And from where you would least expect. Patience my friend, patience.
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: tagor on September 04, 2008, 06:54:58 PM
CoE is going to take a major hit in the near future. And from where you would least expect. Patience my friend, patience.

I am waiting

I am waiting ...
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: Talmin on September 12, 2008, 04:14:40 AM
Latest news from veljkomilkovic.com:

Veljko Milkovic - Video: Pendulum-Lever system different from simple machines better than transmissions

In a new video presentation, Veljko Milkovic, presents great advantages of using pendulum-lever system and ultra efficiency of two-stage mechanical oscillator experimentally demonstrating how it is many times better and effective than the simple machines and transmission systems.

From the contents:
Two-stage mechanical oscillator and two-armed lever;
Two-stage mechanical oscillator and transmission systems with gears, pulley wheels...;
Two-stage mechanical oscillator and pulley (simple machine), screw (simple machine), inclined plane, fly press;
Possible applications in industrial processes - pump jack example;
Hand water pump with a pendulum;
Two-stage mechanical oscillator as a big mechanical hammer...


You can find and watch this video on the next link (Google Video: English subtitles, 35 min.):
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=951414596138700872
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: Talmin on October 10, 2008, 11:29:30 AM
Latest:

Jovan Marjanovic - paper: Keys of Understanding Gravity Machines of Veljko Milkovic
http://www.veljkomilkovic.com/Images/Jovan_Marjanovic_Key_of_Gravity_Machines.pdf
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: astroshima on October 11, 2008, 12:33:57 AM
If you gays are interested, I will post a picture of the thing.
Uli
Why do you let that thousands of people waste enormous time?
Why haven't you published picture and made a video?
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: astroshima on October 11, 2008, 12:58:36 AM
Jovan Marjanovic - paper: Keys of Understanding Gravity Machines of Veljko Milkovic
http://www.veljkomilkovic.com/Images/Jovan_Marjanovic_Key_of_Gravity_Machines.pdf

From the paper above:

Quote
"Errors in Output Energy Calculation by Jovan Bebic

This part of the document is dedicated to measurement of oscillator performance by
Jovan Bebic (http://www.veljkomilkovic.com/Images/Analysis_Jovan_Bebic_2-measuring.pdf).
Input energy is given to the system only once by increasing potential energy of the
pendulum. It has been calculated using formula (8: Ep = mgh) for potential energy. Output energy has
been calculated by measuring distances left side of the level passed from the upper
position till striking down into the pillar until pendulum stopped. Then formula (8: Ep = mgh) has been
taken again with mass m2 of the level."

1. I believe that in this particular scenario, input Energy is measured OK. Ep = mgh.
2. But the "only" way to measure output Energy is to add some consumer or generator and to measure output energy.
Like dynamo lamps with oscilloscope:
http://www.veljkomilkovic.com/Images/Analysis_of_the_dynamo_lamp.pdf
http://www.veljkomilkovic.com/Images/Measurement_with_oscilloscope.pdf
That system has been built years ago* and this type of input AND otput measurement has not been shown yet?
Why?

*
(http://www.veljkomilkovic.com/Images/masina4.jpg)
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: Merg on October 29, 2008, 04:50:58 PM
From the paper above:

1. I believe that in this particular scenario, input Energy is measured OK. Ep = mgh.
2. But the "only" way to measure output Energy is to add some consumer or generator and to measure output energy.
Like dynamo lamps with oscilloscope:
http://www.veljkomilkovic.com/Images/Analysis_of_the_dynamo_lamp.pdf
http://www.veljkomilkovic.com/Images/Measurement_with_oscilloscope.pdf
That system has been built years ago* and this type of input AND otput measurement has not been shown yet?
Why?


I have just read this news from www.freeenergynews.com:

Precise Energy Surplus Measurement (pdf) - Jovan Bebic demonstrates the new efficiency measurement of Milkovic’s two-stage oscillator in his new paper and reports that the output/input energy ratio is 2.284.

http://www.veljkomilkovic.com/Images/Jovan_Bebic_Precise_input-output_energy_measurement.pdf

Is this what you were looking for?!
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: astroshima on October 29, 2008, 08:55:24 PM
Is this what you were looking for?!
No.
Thats completely different scenario.
Why haven't the experimenter used previous scenario and measurement of Input Energy: E=mgh?
I think that  E=mgh is correct input Energy measurement...
That's so simple to measure and publish the results ... and again he did  not do it!
Why?
And if he can't make video he could at least try to make photographs of whole apparatus and its parts.

Thanks for the link...


Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: astroshima on October 29, 2008, 09:43:55 PM
Thats completely different scenario.
About this "new" scenario.
It's similar with measurement with dynamo lamps. At least we have video with that measurement so we see what experimenter does.

But with this "new" measurement we do not have video so we do not see what is experimenter doing. We can only guess!
For example:
Experimenter can change the speed of its arm that pushes dynamo lamp or dynamo meter. So I can speculate that:
1. If speed of the arm is almost constant we will almost have no light on dynamo lamp or almost no force on Dynamo meter.
(Check the video where one Guy pushes pendulum with the constant speed so Dynamo lamp producing NO ligt!!!(a=0, F=m*a=0, E=F*s=m*a*s=0 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IHln0xczRk8)
2. But if speed of the arm is variable we will have acceleration (a > 0) = measurable Force (F=m*a) on Dynamo meter = light ( = measurable Energy E=F*s=m*a*s) on Dynamo lamp. (Check the same video from above when that guy has to push the pendulum with accelerated speed so that lamp can produce light!)
I think that in both cases (1. and 2.) there is equal input Energy in the system that cause one full oscillation.
But the measured input energy is completely different! (In 1. you have NO light at lamp = small "input" Energy = "overunity" and in 2. you have full light).
And another thing: how can you tell how much of that measured energy is eaqual to the one that is injected in the system! How do you know that dynamo lamp or dynamo meter measures that particular energy?

So I guess that this type of measurement need more scientific theoretical bases.
First you have to prove that force that you measure is equal to the force that influence on the input Energy of the system...
I think it is not completely the same Force...
(see all explanation above).

The point is that it is better to first measure and publish results for the scenario where input Energy is measured by formula E=mgh.
It's more simple and this scenario can be more simple explained than the one with dynamo lamps and dynamo meter that is more complex and in my opinion where is more possibility to make wrong Input Energy measurement.

Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: sm0ky2 on October 29, 2008, 10:00:36 PM

That system has been built years ago* and this type of input AND otput measurement has not been shown yet?
Why?


Because this system, under the proper analysis, is NOT over unity, as it is "claimed" to be.

The output energy can not only be measured, but it can also be calculated.
It is the sum of the verticle (downward) force, and its associated duration, acting on the pendulum at maximum velocity. [ as it passes bottom dead center]   m*g sin (angle from verticle when released)
there are dozens of other equations that could be substituted here, pendulum mechanics have been studied into the ground hundreds of years ago..  What is being done in this system, is the verticle force is being utilized, instead of just wasted as "stress" on the arm as the pendulum swings past the bottom center.  This does not interupt the horizontal momentum of the pendulum, so it keeps oscillating as normal, this force being obtained with each 1/2 cycle for a short duration.

The sum of all these energy values [force * distance moved verticaly] is equal to the original m*g*h of the pendulum starting position.
(in practice slightly less energy is obtained out, due to frictional losses)

the working end of the machine is simple leverage, the get the "mass equivalent" for each swing of the lever equations, simply divide the verticle force on the pendulum, by gravity [9.8 m/s]
then divide again by the verticle displacement. (this is the distance the pendulum moves up/down when it passed the bottom center)

with this value, you can calculate the capacity of your working lever, for instance - to operate a water pump, or small dynamo.

with each half cycle, the lever is 're-set' because the downward force only acts on the arm for a short duration, after which time, the working end of the lever has 100% of the mass.

This will continue until a time slightly less than that of a normal pendulum winddown, and all the input energy is consumed, then the pendulum must be reset.

You could attach some clockwork to wind up a weight, or spring mechanism to keep the pendulum going and close the cycle. It could prolong the system for a very long time, but this will eventually wind down and stop.

It is a very efficient machine, and has advantages of being able to expend energy cyclically over a duration of time. Which works great for manualy operated machines like remote water/oil pumps, dynamos, compressors, air-pumps, ect...

Watt for Watt you get back slightly less energy than you put into it.

Title: orion aero fraud!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Post by: empiricalobserver2012 on October 29, 2008, 10:20:22 PM
Steven Greer's AERO and Orion Project: sincere effort to usher in free energy or eloquent intel. front
 
 
Steven Greer, the chairman of The Disclosure Project, the organization founded in the early ninety nineties to disclose the presence of extraterrestrials and government suppression of evidence regarding the matter has taken on a newer, more daring escapade. This time, disclosing free energy technology to the world by presenting a robust , functional, closed loop, multiple kilowatt free energy device to the world, in tandem with a myriad of free energy inventors and a network of elite celebrities who are determined to see clean abundant alternatives into to the light. All this will be presented at a conference at the
National Press Club, in the same fashion as his famed 01 conference. The idea is to reach hundreds of millions, to make them aware that there are more clean alternatives than wind , geothermal and solar. He has stated that he is working on having a demonstrator unit built  and have it be duplicated and verified by at least three independent sources. So, we assume that there are no robust units available in the public domain and that this is the obstacle to the grand press conference. He founded two organizations in this light- a non profit- Orion Project- to develop technology  and a standard company- AERO(Advanced Energy Research Organization) for marketing. In addition to this, he has asked for the public to donate three million dollars for a research facility. He states repeatedly through radio talk shows and visual presentations that all free energy inventors needs to work with him because that's the only way they can get around the ardent suppression of the last 100 years. The suppression is without doubt but the fact of the matter is that there are numerous free energy machines in the public domain, robust , multiple kilowatt. They are few and far between , but the holders of these units would be more than happy to give Greer a unit if they believed he was sincere. Greer does not have to have it build and some have been on record for multiple decades and their validity is incontrovertible, already verified and either ready for production as is or on the
brink of it. It is doubtful that he is not aware of:
 
 
1. testatika 3kw self running, harnessing electrostatic energy, multiple units, ranging from 300 watts to 30 kilowatts have been running Meternitha ,Switzerland for the last 30 years
 
 
 
2. bedini generator 10kw, runs John Bedini's workshop lights, New Energy Series dvds
 
 
 
3. newman generator - has been on record for 20 years , validated by 40 professionals, Joe Newman  appeared on johnny Carson, and given wide media coverage, has videos on google video showing his machines work
 
 
4. Daniel Dingel water cars, on record since 1968, has multiple cars running on water for everyday driving and farm work, Daniel Dingel is not dead and his cars, which exist today are as functional as anything Stan Meyer came up with.
 
 
Based of of his cozy relationship with people like the Rockefellers( the illuminati) and his lack of action as far the obvious is concerned, it must be looked upon as a likely possibility that whole affair may be nothing but a trojan hose, keeping tracks on inventors  and keeping them from attempting anything on their own.this is not a novel concept, the Noetics Institute of Edgar mitchell is just that. On the other hand , free energy is not intangible such as aliens, and we are at the cusp of a totalitarian police state- the new world order- and free energy would disrupt that
 
i call upon governing members of the free energy movement, such as Sterling d Allan and Tom Beardan to look into this affair because something stinks
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: Nabo00o on October 29, 2008, 10:54:21 PM
Well, there you have some of the reasons to why I haven't yet managed to pulls myself up and donate some money to their project, its still to little they are going for. But apperently bearden has cooporated with Greer on some of these technologies, even though he hasn't introduced the meg there.

The reason to why I don't think its a setup is because of the 2001 press conferance, which was so far past what you'd normally would have expected to be publicly avaiable. That seemed honest. But I think they are a little stuck now, mabye if the are about to release some stanly meiers technology and do some Pulse motor testing.

But that meeting was all along about both aliens and about free energy technologies and the releated gravity propulsion systems, so that bit isn't so hard to understand.
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: Merg on November 04, 2008, 06:00:12 PM
Why haven't the experimenter used previous scenario and measurement of Input Energy: E=mgh?
I think that  E=mgh is correct input Energy measurement...
That's so simple to measure and publish the results ... and again he did  not do it!
Why?

I have just got this paper - the author explained very well why E=mgh is NOT correct input Energy measurement and adequate method for this machine?!:

http://www.veljkomilkovic.com/Images/Jovan_Marjanovic_Recommendations_for_Efficiency_Measuring.pdf
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: Xaverius on November 05, 2008, 06:31:31 AM
YouTube:  testing milkovic 2 stage oscillator video 6
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: tagor on November 05, 2008, 12:11:59 PM
YouTube:  testing milkovic 2 stage oscillator video 6
this is not a test
see http://www.overunity.com/index.php?topic=1763.msg124981#msg124981
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: tagor on November 05, 2008, 12:12:58 PM

http://www.veljkomilkovic.com/Images/Jovan_Bebic_Precise_input-output_energy_measurement.pdf



sorry but the maths are not correct
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: astroshima on November 05, 2008, 02:05:27 PM
I have just got this paper - the author explained very well why E=mgh is NOT correct input Energy measurement and adequate method for this machine?!:
http://www.veljkomilkovic.com/Images/Jovan_Marjanovic_Recommendations_for_Efficiency_Measuring.pdf
Thank you for the link!
There are few issues about it but I will comment only one:
If you read my previous posts you will see that I have commented one particular measurement scenario described by Jovan Bebic in paper:
http://www.veljkomilkovic.com/Images/Analysis_Jovan_Bebic_2-measuring.pdf
That scenario includes only one lift of the pendulum!!!
And for that particular scenario and that particular apparatus, I think measurement of input energy calculated by formula E=m*g*h is correct.

In that paper Bebic claims that "ratio of energy at the output and energy at the input is 22.89"
To prove that (overunity) claim all he have to do is to put Generator at lever-beam side (to measure output Energy) and (since input Energy is measured correctly by formula E=m*g*h) to pick up the Nobel Prize (and money with it)!

I personally believe he and Milkovic did that measurement but decided not to publish the results.
I think that they have no problem to constantly publish the measurement results of "overunity", but seems (to me) that they have problem to publish other (correct and scientific) measurements that do not show overunity... I think that this people maybe believe that by hiding some measured data will help "their" cause.
Well I also think that when somebody measure and publish all relevant data we will all better see with what we are dealing here...
Seems that now we can't see the whole picture because the people that have oscillators do not publish all measured data.
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: astroshima on November 05, 2008, 02:23:10 PM
Quote
Quote from: Merg on October 29, 2008, 03:50:58 PM
http://www.veljkomilkovic.com/Images/Jovan_Bebic_Precise_input-output_energy_measurement.pdf
sorry but the maths are not correct
And to be able to figure out correct math we need correct Physics!
Author (Jovan Bebic or somebody other...) should post System Equations first and then we could see what force is he measuring.

Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: tagor on November 05, 2008, 04:02:30 PM
And to be able to figure out correct math we need correct Physics!
what is this correct physics ?
until now the standart model is correct !
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: astroshima on November 05, 2008, 05:33:19 PM
what is this correct physics ?
until now the standart model is correct !
Yeah that's exactly what I mean.
But as we can all see there is no System Equations in quoted "measurement" by Jovan Bebic.
So my "analysis" of that measurement is:
No (system) equations = No correct physics = No correct Math = No correct measurement ...
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: tagor on November 05, 2008, 06:36:49 PM
Yeah that's exactly what I mean.
But as we can all see there is no System Equations in quoted "measurement" by Jovan Bebic.
So my "analysis" of that measurement is:
No (system) equations = No correct physics = No correct Math = No correct measurement ...

ok
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: Merg on November 05, 2008, 09:33:04 PM
And for that particular scenario and that particular apparatus, I think measurement of input energy calculated by formula E=m*g*h is correct.

What I see is that the same author explained very well, shortly and clearly, what is the problem with that formula for input measurement E=mgh and why it cannot be correct for efficiency measurements of this two-stage oscillator:

However, over time, two problems using this simple formula (E=mgh) were found:
1) Once the pendulum starts swinging and moving the lever arm up and down, its
starting angle (position 1 or position 5 in Fig. 3, see below) will go down each
new period. The Pendulum will not be able to move the lever arm until the
end of its swing
. It will stop moving the lever arm once its starting angle
comes close to position 2 or 4, see below. Then it will continue swinging in
vain, one hour or more. This means that the pendulum has spent around half
of its potential energy on moving the lever arm and the other half as friction
loses while swinging in vain
. This ratio could be even worse, depending on
the oscillator.
2) The second problem is, that each new pendulum period would diminish the
amplitude of the lever arm
. This would complicate measuring of the output
energy by any chosen method.  

The method chosen by Jovan Bebic has solved both these problems. That is, to
keep adding energy to the pendulum once its starting angle was in position 1 at all times.
Thus the amplitude of the lever arm, as well as the output energy on the generator is
constant and easy to measure.

Also, Mr. Veljko Milkovic has always had an opinion that the efficiency of the
oscillator is in the fact that it is necessary to invest less energy to keep the pendulum
swinging than the energy received from the lever arm
. Using a formula for potential
energy would be the same as measuring the efficiency of an engine before it reached its
working temperature.

Extract from:
http://www.veljkomilkovic.com/Images/Jovan_Marjanovic_Recommendations_for_Efficiency_Measuring.pdf
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: astroshima on November 05, 2008, 11:13:31 PM
http://www.veljkomilkovic.com/Images/Jovan_Marjanovic_Recommendations_for_Efficiency_Measuring.pdf

1.
Quote
"The method chosen by Jovan Bebic has solved both these problems. That is, to
keep adding energy to the pendulum once its starting angle was in position 1 at all times."

I think that instead Ep= m*g*h we will have Ep=m*g*dh (dh=height differential) which is the same formula.
BTW you need here precise strokes to the pendulum + very accurate (slow motion mode) camera with visual scale measuring system + error of the measurement as approximation of the last pendulum swing angle recorded by the camera in slow motion mode...

2.
Quote
"For short term usage of the oscillator, formula Ep = mgh can be used..."
If the oscillator is intended for long term usage (and it is) then the initial energy for raising the pendulum up
can be easy disregarded. For short term usage it can not.

And for only one! lift of the pendulum, we have no problems to calculate Ep = mgh.
Since Jovan Bebic uses only one lift of the pendulum here:
http://www.veljkomilkovic.com/Images/Analysis_Jovan_Bebic_2-measuring.pdf
formula for input Energy Ep = mgh is correct!

3.
Quote
"Then it will continue swinging in
vain, one hour or more. This means that the pendulum has spent around half
of its potential energy on moving the lever arm and the other half as friction
loses while swinging in vain. This ratio could be even worse, depending on
the oscillator."

I have seen live apparatus used by Bebic:
http://www.veljkomilkovic.com/Images/Analysis_Jovan_Bebic_2-measuring.pdf
I think it has been optimized to reduce loses in potential energy of the pendulum. So it is capable to move lever arm longer than other apparatuses. But anyway we can subtract loses by the formula Ep=m*g*(h1-h2).
However all this is not very relevant to for the scenario described in Bebic's paper ("Analysis_Jovan_Bebic_2-measuring")
He has no problem with input measurement (Ep=mgh) there!!!

4.
Quote
Using a formula for potential energy would be the same as measuring the efficiency of an engine before it reached its
working temperature.

a) I think that formula for potential Energy is universal and as shown in item 1. can be used in many measurement scenarios including some when aparatus has reached "working temperature"

b) If I remember well, Milkovic claimed that extracting the work at lever arm side do not impact the oscillation of the pendulum! So why do we need "working mode"? If you claim that you can do whatever you like at lever arm side and that this do not impact the pendulum side and that machine is overunity why have you been bothered with Ep=m*g*h? You can input Ep=m*g*h and extract 22 or (12) times more energy at lever arm side with no impact on pendulum side!!!
 
c) If Milkovic, Bebic, or somebody else publish the measurements of this scenario:
http://www.veljkomilkovic.com/Images/Analysis_Jovan_Bebic_2-measuring.pdf
using formula Ep=m*g*h for measuring input energy and some Generator or lifter etc... for measuring output energy, and if this measuring do not show overunity then I think it would maybe be "proof" that Extracting the Work (Energy) at lever arm side actually impact the pendulum swing!
And if extracting the work at lever arm side impact the pendulum energy than we maybe have the proof of the Energy Conservation Law in affect!
IF previous deduction is correct then it seems to me that somebody is trying to hide that eventual fact!

d) I think that any attempt not to do or show all measurements (including ones with Ep=m*g*h)
has nothing to do with science but only with some (in my opinion) marketing...
Serious scientific people do all measurements in all scenarios and publish all results!
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: astroshima on November 06, 2008, 02:01:58 PM
I think that instead Ep= m*g*h we will have Ep=m*g*dh (dh=height differential) which is the same formula.
BTW you need here precise strokes to the pendulum + very accurate (slow motion mode) camera with visual scale measuring system + error of the measurement as approximation of the last pendulum swing angle recorded by the camera in slow motion mode...

Or (maybe) even simpler and more easy to measure:
1. When pendulum fulcrum reach starting point (= maximum height) (and lever arm weight is in contact with the base so it has minimum heigth h=0)
and
2. when pendulum weight reach appropriate angle-amplitude
then just:
3. Grab the pendulum weight with hand and
4. lift it for some height: dh (or h) (dE= m*g*dh)
5. repeat this energy input when necessary
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: Merg on November 14, 2008, 07:39:22 PM
Can anyone explain me how we will calculate the output energy of generator in case of using E=mgdh for input energy??? If I attach simple wattmeter it cannot show me precise output energy cause volts and amperes will vary (decrease) during the work of oscillator.

Since we read above that pendulum amplitude will decrease during the time - it means the lever movement will decrease too.
Does anyone know any measuring device that can calculate output power graph where volts and amperes vary? We will have the output result as an output graph and I suppose we need some clever software to calculate output energy from this graph in the unit of time e.g. 10 secons or 1 minute.

We need constant oscillation of pendulum to precisely measure the output energy.
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: TinselKoala on November 14, 2008, 09:09:13 PM
The very best way that I can think of, without a fancy and expensive DSO, is to run your output current through a resistor immersed in, say, water, and then look at the temperature change in the water. The water acts as an "integrator" that stores and sums the incremental Joule heating caused by the volt-amps from the source flowing thru the resistance, however much they vary over time.
There is some math involved and things have to be done precisely, but in principle it is something that the home experimenter should be able to do fairly accurately.

Using this technique (which is basically Joule's method) you don't even need to convert the output to electricity first. With a suitable mechanical arrangement, the water can be stirred directly by the mechanical oscillator's output and the heating measured.
In theory, anyway.

Another way to do it, the old timer's way, is to display the curren t( ie voltage drop across a known resistence) and voltage waveforms on an ordinary scope, then trace the waveforms on tracing paper, cut out the appropriate segments and weigh them on an accurate scale. This process is equivalent to integration. Some math magic, and voila!
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: sm0ky2 on November 21, 2008, 09:36:27 PM
apparently someone must intervene here, because this malkovich pump is being analyzed in completely the wrong way......

the energy of the pendulum is well known, and most seem to grasp the understanding of this.

BUT - the force acting on the lever arm is causing a whole lot of unnecessary confusion.
allow me to clear this up::::

Force (downward) causes the action of the lever.  <-- this is the force we must calculate.
the 'reset' (upward) is caused by the other end of the lever arm being heavier, and does not affect the energy value of the pendulum.

The equation that gives you the downward power of each swing is the equation for Tension (Force) on the rod, for a duration of T ( where T is the duration of time it takes the pendulum to pass 1 radian at maximum velocity @ bottom dead center) 
Tension is often overlooked, for the simple fact that most pendulums are constructed on a rigid fulcrum, and Tension normally has no effective value.
Tension is represented by:     Tens =  [ mv^2 / r ] + m g (3 cos {} - 2)
     Where:  m = mass
                 v = velocity
                 r = rod length (or radius)
                 g = gravity
           and {} = 0 @ bottom dead center

The tangential force on the pendulum is effectively 0 @ bottom dead center and can be ignored.
   This is due to the angle from verticle being itsef 0.

  Thus:  E =  (T * Tension)
         where E is the energy of each lever action.
                   T = duration for pendulum to pass 1 radian @ max velocity

example:
if you raise a given pendulum and let it swing , and it oscillates 100 swings,
   then:  E(average) =  MGH/100
   where E =  energy of each lever action
     MGH is that of the original pendulum bob when raised to its starting position.
In practice, E is max on the first swing, and decreases slightly with each swing, and eventually ends up at 0 when the pendulum stops.
 This is observed when the pumps are used by the decrease in water-flow*pressure as the pendulum slows down.


This extracted energy does not affect the swinging of the pendulum, but is rather a derrivitive thereof.
it is essentially re-obtaining the energy from the natural decelleration of the pendulum in a unique way.
The total energy value is = to that obtained by an identicle impact hammer.
This device is not "overunity". it's "overconvenient", at least for the purposes for which it is used.
It is quite possibly the most efficient method of energy transfer we have to date.

I hope this clears everything up. if anyone needs further explanation, feel free to ask.
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: Talmin on December 10, 2008, 04:39:06 PM
"Mechanical Fission: Two-stage mechanical oscillators should be set in accordance with geometry progression system, by which mechanical chain reaction could be achieved: 1<2<4<8< oscillators...
This could be the best way to confirm the overunity effect and accomplish replacement for nuclear fission."

hmm interesting thinking - mechanical fission!
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: Merg on December 18, 2008, 10:52:41 AM
To all,

I have just read this paper and I believe it deserves to be shared with others.
We have here one very good described experimental work on Milkovic's two-stage oscillator by Jovan Marjanovic where he reports on his replication work and attempt to close the loop…

I am very grateful for this excellent paper – it will be very useful for all experimenters. It’s better you first read it.

Jovan Marjanovic – Mechanical Feedback Loop Problems and Possible Solutions in the Two-Stage Oscillator of Veljko Milkovic
http://www.veljkomilkovic.com/Images/Jovan_Marjanovic_Mechanical_Feedback_Loop.pdf
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: tagor on December 18, 2008, 11:41:19 AM

Jovan Marjanovic – Mechanical Feedback Loop Problems and Possible Solutions in the Two-Stage Oscillator of Veljko Milkovic
http://www.veljkomilkovic.com/Images/Jovan_Marjanovic_Mechanical_Feedback_Loop.pdf


this is the wrong way to loop the  Two-Stage Oscillator !
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: Paul-R on December 19, 2008, 03:30:25 PM
this is the wrong way to loop the  Two-Stage Oscillator !
...then tell us what the right way is.
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: astroshima on December 20, 2008, 05:49:17 AM
Can anyone explain me how we will calculate the output energy of generator in case of using E=mgdh for input energy??? If I attach simple wattmeter it cannot show me precise output energy cause volts and amperes will vary (decrease) during the work of oscillator.

If you have all that, (I believe) you have all tools that you need for complete system analysis!
Please do not be fooled by some (you know who) "overunitists" claims that you need "this and that" or that it is "too complicated". I believe its easy if you are really honest person!

1. For Output energy measurement I think you could use:
- your "wattmeter" +
- good timer (or watch) +
- simple video camera (that clearly captures: time + "wattmeter" data + oscillator) + (*)

If you have previous and publish good made video (which Milkovics "team" newer do!) on youtube, other people could calculate(!!!) and they (or you) would also need:
(*)
- pencil +
- paper with precise (millimeter) grid (to draw "volts and amperes" or Electric Power graph as a function of time) +
- Few formulas from Physics (dA=dE= P*dt, A=E=Sum(or Integral) P*dt) - please correct me if I made mistake with this formulas...it was long ago when I have used them. But it is very easy to use them! Trivial! Every student knows them!

So after watching good made video and drawing Electric Power (P) Graph as function of time P(t), it is needed to Sum all Energy differentials (dE) (= Work differentials dA) = Power(P(t)) * Time differentials (dt). (or Sum(dA=dE= P*dt)).
So the final formula is E (=A) = Sum (or Integral) (P(t) * dt)

That Sum (or integral) is equal to physical area between Electric power graph line (P(t) or P) and time axis line (t).
So use precise (millimeter) grid on paper to approximate area that is consisted of many little squares (or columns of squares = polygons) that forms it! Its Easy! Students do this!
The units for this physical area calculation are: seconds (s = time from horizontal time axis line (t)) and Watts (W = (electric) power from vertical Power axis line (P)). A = E = P*t
And you made it! And we all made it!

2. For Input Energy measurement you need:

- good timer (or watch) +
- simple video camera +
- felt tip (to make a visible dot at pendulum mass center) +
- Paper with precise grid (behind pendulum so you could measure heights recorded by video camera)

And please publish intelligently made videos (and or measurements) on youtube...

PS: I believe that (if one know physics), the most simple experiment that is needed is a single pendulum swing recorded with all necessary measurements data by video camera. Ofcourse other experiments could be also usefull like: single Energy input scenario (is enough I think...) or more (repeated) energy inputs scenario (which is same as previous but repeated many times)...
Personally I do not believe Milkovic. As to my knowledge he is a historian and not a physicist so I believe he do not know physics! I also do not know physics but at least I have past Theoretical Mechanics and Some Electric Engineering exams in College.
And Real Scientists do all measurements and publish all measured data! But people who do marketing publish only data that serves they private purpose!
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: TinselKoala on December 20, 2008, 01:45:55 PM
@astroshima: You make too much good sense. You had better be careful, you will be placed in the "Evil Skeptic" category and be accused of impeding progress in this important area of research that might be the Answer that will free us from the Tyranny of Oil!!

The reason what you have suggested isn't being done, or shown, is very clear.

It is because your suggested method will not indicate overunity performance...therefore it must be wrong.

Because Milkovic has already proven that his device is overunity. Don't you recall the hand-pumped flashlight demo? What could possibly be better proof than that??

Why, soon we will all be driving around in Milkovic-oscillator powered cars, our cellphones will be powered by tiny 12x pendulum stacks, air travel will be revolutionized...

Now, if only we could get rid of the noise...
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: astroshima on December 20, 2008, 05:37:43 PM
Just want again to illustrate how useful are measurements so I will borrow this quote for that purpose:

... Milkovic has already proven that his device is overunity. Don't you recall the hand-pumped flashlight demo? What could possibly be better proof than that??

That same apparatus and experiment could be used with measurements!
Video camera could capture whole experiment (one or several times repeated).

1. For output Energy measurement and calculation:
Wattmeter could measure output power on dynamo lamp(s).

2. For Input Energy measurement and calculation:
a) We need Paper with Ruler Grid behind pendulum for measuring pendulum heights (h or dh - depending on experiment and input energy calculation method: E=m*g*(h1-h2) or dE = m*g*dh).
b) When pendulum Fulcrum reach starting point (or maximum height) then Pendulum mass should be stroked or lifted in other direction - to go up instead of down so we could measure dh (height) before pendulum lose that input energy...
c)However if we do just one pendulum lift scenario and record it with camera (I believe) we could calculate that dh with formula dh = h1 - h2 so we do not need repeated pendulum strokes or lifting.

By the way (one digression):
1. As Physics learns us, Force integral formula used for dynamometer (with fish scale) is the same as potential energy formula. (A = E = Sum(F*ds) = Sum((m*a)*ds) = Sum((m*g)*dh) = m*g*h). So I think that all talk, that we can not use second one, because it is "wrong" one, and, that we have to use the first one, because it is "good" one, has nothing to do with physics because its the same formula. All useful input work (when pendulum fulcrum reach starting point) is done against gravity force (so we have only vertical components of path (s) and acceleration (a) vectors and that are: g and h). And since experimenter (J. Bebic) do not draw Forces Schema or sets System Equations, before dynamometer measurement, he (and we) can not see what is he measuring. Not to mention that without good made video, experiment is practically useless to other people .
2. One also need to lift or stroke pendulum weight at the same moment as it would do with dynamometer pulling. So I believe that we have practically the same experiment...See also 2. b) remark here. (from: "For Input Energy measurement and calculation")
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: TinselKoala on December 20, 2008, 06:07:37 PM
Ermm...yes.

I realize my sarcasm can be rather subtle at times. Just to be clear, I find the Milkovic system to be an elaborate pendulum energy storage system, with possible chaotic performance at times :
 
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TKXVl-W6HGc&feature=related

There is no way that it is "overunity", and in fact it really isn't even a very efficient way to store energy. It may at times magnify force or power, but so what, so does a flywheel, and it cannot continue to do so without corresponding energy input, plus a little more to overcome losses.
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: hansvonlieven on December 20, 2008, 07:30:06 PM
@ TK

You are right about the system being chaotic. When you look at the pendulum side of the system say from the balance beam fulcrum onwards you will notice that you have in effect a double pendulum. The chaotic movement of a double pendulum is well known.

The fact that the balance beam part has only limited movement only dampens the chaos effect, but does not eliminate it. That is why you cannot fit a crankshaft to the device because the strokes are uneven.

Hans von Lieven
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: truth on December 21, 2008, 03:04:10 AM
 ::)

If the weight of the pendulum(W) must be lifted to a start height(H), then the combined force of the stokes output by the business end of the lever should be enough to lift a weight to that same height(WH).

Any energy REQUIRED to SUSTAIN the pendulum swing must be output by the lever PRIOR to that added pendulum lift.

Ratchet a 1:1 pulley with equal weight and measure height.

I hate that it is all really that SIMPLE.
 ;D
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: SteinerP on December 28, 2008, 05:26:32 PM
::)

If the weight of the pendulum(W) must be lifted to a start height(H), then the combined force of the stokes output by the business end of the lever should be enough to lift a weight to that same height(WH).

Any energy REQUIRED to SUSTAIN the pendulum swing must be output by the lever PRIOR to that added pendulum lift.

Ratchet a 1:1 pulley with equal weight and measure height.

I hate that it is all really that SIMPLE.
 ;D



The Question of Understanding and Patience

It is clear that there are new mechanical effects that are beyond common conceptions: you can see videos, opinions and expert analyses www.veljkomilkovic.com (http://www.veljkomilkovic.com).
Nevertheless, all of this has to be worked on further to show the overunity effect more clearly.
There is a need for patient analyses beside the fact that the usability is obvious, both in theory and practice.
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: TinselKoala on December 29, 2008, 12:57:33 AM
What is clear, is that SteinerP and the rest of the crew at veljkomilkovic.com have decided, based on theory, that their device is overunity, and will not do any appropriate control experiments to determine whether it really is or not.

Of course it isn't, and the theory is severely flawed.

There are several ways that one may test a device like this, in an appropriate manner. For example, the business end could work a piston air compressor and the compressed air could be used to power a pump. Or another milkovic pendulum. Or anything. The losses in compressed air systems are well-understood and the overall energy throughput could be accurately calculated.

But experiments like this, which would show that the pendulum is under-unity, obviously are flawed--because the system is already known to be OU and if your experiment doesn't show this, the experiment is flawed.

I kid you not--this is the way these people will "reason" about their experimentation and their device.

If the usability is obvious, please give a single design for a device that would work better, powered by a milkovic pendulum. Other than a chaotic pendulum demonstrator, perhaps!

Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: Merg on January 07, 2009, 08:27:12 PM
Milkovic + Bedini test
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oDeX_Tst2tU
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: SteinerP on January 17, 2009, 07:41:48 PM
What is clear, is that SteinerP and the rest of the crew at veljkomilkovic.com have decided, based on theory, that their device is overunity, and will not do any appropriate control experiments to determine whether it really is or not.

Of course it isn't, and the theory is severely flawed.

There are several ways that one may test a device like this, in an appropriate manner. For example, the business end could work a piston air compressor and the compressed air could be used to power a pump. Or another milkovic pendulum. Or anything. The losses in compressed air systems are well-understood and the overall energy throughput could be accurately calculated.

But experiments like this, which would show that the pendulum is under-unity, obviously are flawed--because the system is already known to be OU and if your experiment doesn't show this, the experiment is flawed.

I kid you not--this is the way these people will "reason" about their experimentation and their device.

If the usability is obvious, please give a single design for a device that would work better, powered by a milkovic pendulum. Other than a chaotic pendulum demonstrator, perhaps!



"...the rest of the crew at veljkomilkovic.com"
"...this is the way these people will "reason" about their experimentation and their device"

Instead of this kind of language (which obviously can augment the numbers of posts and receive a rank of hero member in quantity over quality), could you please focus solely on what is the topic instead of addressing people that you do not know and cannot by any means label as somebody's crew. Your expertise would than be more than appreciated and be given a proper attention, satisfying your obvious need for it.

Best regards


Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: TinselKoala on January 19, 2009, 06:16:46 PM
"...the rest of the crew at veljkomilkovic.com"
"...this is the way these people will "reason" about their experimentation and their device"

Instead of this kind of language (which obviously can augment the numbers of posts and receive a rank of hero member in quantity over quality), could you please focus solely on what is the topic instead of addressing people that you do not know and cannot by any means label as somebody's crew. Your expertise would than be more than appreciated and be given a proper attention, satisfying your obvious need for it.

Best regards




OK, you object to my characterization of the honored research team at Milkovic Laboratories as
"the crew" and as "those people".
And you ask me to stay on topic. Fine.
When I have suggested proper control experiments or ways to effectively utilize the output of the Milkovic system, I have been ignored. I figured this was because the scientists (and I do use that term advisedly) were dodging the issues, since these experiments and methods would ALMOST CERTAINLY (and I include the "almost" out of sheer politeness) reveal unequivocally that the system is far, far from OU and is in fact rather inefficient as an energy storage system.
So, instead of publishing pdf reports of "proof" experiments, let's see the proper performance of a "disproof" experiment, and when that experiment FAILS, let's start talking about staying on topic, again.
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: TinselKoala on January 19, 2009, 06:19:53 PM
"...the rest of the crew at veljkomilkovic.com"
"...this is the way these people will "reason" about their experimentation and their device"

Instead of this kind of language (which obviously can augment the numbers of posts and receive a rank of hero member in quantity over quality), could you please focus solely on what is the topic instead of addressing people that you do not know and cannot by any means label as somebody's crew. Your expertise would than be more than appreciated and be given a proper attention, satisfying your obvious need for it.

Best regards




And, Steiner, newbie, if you would care to look at my posts, you might actually learn something about the content of postings that go into making a poster's ratings what they are. Many people on this forum troll, criticise and sling mud without any evidence, good ideas, or contributions of their own. Perhaps I do not fall into this category.
Into which category will you fall, when you have accumulated enough posts to acquire some credibility? I suppose that is up to you.
You have not, however, gotten off to a good start.
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: Paul-R on January 19, 2009, 07:28:45 PM
Many people on this forum troll, criticise and sling mud without any evidence...
...and that sums up your contribution to three separate threads on this site that I have
noticed. Probably a dozen more that I have not.

If you doubt the value of the "12 times more..." ideas, then try one of the water pumps.

Paul.
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: utilitarian on January 19, 2009, 08:01:50 PM
...and that sums up your contribution to three separate threads on this site that I have
noticed. Probably a dozen more that I have not.

If you doubt the value of the "12 times more..." ideas, then try one of the water pumps.

Paul.

I have seen the water pumps.  Not impressive.  Look, this entire contraption is just a see-saw with a pendulum on one end of it?  How in the world do you get overunity out of that?  You can't, and the fact that there are zero self-propelling examples of the Milkovic pendulum speaks pretty loudly.
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: Nabo00o on January 19, 2009, 08:11:45 PM
...and that sums up your contribution to three separate threads on this site that I have
noticed. Probably a dozen more that I have not.

If you doubt the value of the "12 times more..." ideas, then try one of the water pumps.

Paul.

Well I don't really understand why people do still continue to argue on whether or not this machine works when it is so simple.
People should instead try to build it with spare parts and junk that they got around, and see that it will still do much more than what a simple machine could do (which is to convert distance into force).

It does not directly use the rotation energy which we store in the moving pendulum, instead it uses the centripetal force created by its rotation. The loss of momentum in the pendulum is a result only of the pendulums displacement, and not effected by how much force you allow it to transfer to the other side. This is why a heavy load should be used, because it will increase the pendulums efficiency.

If any of you here have seen Tommey Lee Reed's videos before his account was suspended, that very efficient linear to angular ratched system could have been great if combined with this machine. Hope I get some time soon to try it out :)
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: Paul-R on January 20, 2009, 12:55:44 AM
Well I don't really understand why people do still continue to argue on whether or not this machine works when it is so simple....
Its not that simple; quite a few tuning and probably resonance issues
Paul.
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: Nabo00o on January 20, 2009, 06:36:14 AM
Its not that simple; quite a few tuning and probably resonance issues
Paul.


Well yes. The timing is really the hard part, at least that's my view.

But the actual mechanics involved is really as simple as one could have wished for.

Btw, for any of you have built this thing, is it possible to use wood as the main hinge, or would that maybe be to weak?
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: truth on January 20, 2009, 11:43:40 AM
 8)
How many of you have ever operated an overhead crane?
In order to stop the thing you are lifting from swinging around you move the point of lift directly over the location the item is swing to. That means you change the location of the axis of the swinging load. The change in the location of this device also changes the momentum of the swing with random either positive or negative results.

One swing may have more centripetal force while the next may have less.

Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: Paul-R on January 20, 2009, 02:55:16 PM
Well yes. The timing is really the hard part, at least that's my view.

But the actual mechanics involved is really as simple as one could have wished for.

Btw, for any of you have built this thing, is it possible to use wood as the main hinge, or would that maybe be to weak?
Good quality wood or plywood is fine for the basic device, but the actual bearing should be steel. Try a replacement
router bearing:
http://www.axminster.co.uk/product-CMT-CMT-Router-Cutter-Bearings-20906.htm
or the pedal from a scrapped bicycle.
Paul.
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: TinselKoala on January 20, 2009, 07:41:51 PM
Yes, I doubt the "12 times overunity" value, and I doubt the water pumps. However, as I have suggested before, the geometry of the machine would EASILY allow the output end to be hooked up to bicycle-style cylinder-piston air compression pumps, and the compressed air thus produced could be stored. And, the input end of the Milkovic device could EASILY be actuated by a compressed-air pneumatic cylinder. AND, the losses and energy balances in pneumatic systems are WELL-UNDERSTOOD. So a team of competent engineers and researchers should be able, in short order, to construct and perform experiments using this pneumatic system, to close the loop and have the thing run itself, since it is SO MUCH overunity, and losses in the pneumatic system would only be on the order of a few tens of percent.

Now, I will sit back and wait for the reports of this carefully done experiment, which could reasonably either falsify or support the Milkovic hypothesis.

I wager, however, that for one reason or another, this simple and to my mind conclusive experiment will NOT be performed--because I believe that the smart engineers and scientists on the Milkovic team know exactly how it would come out.

PROVE ME WRONG.
Please.
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: SteinerP on January 21, 2009, 02:00:33 PM
And, Steiner, newbie, if you would care to look at my posts, you might actually learn something about the content of postings that go into making a poster's ratings what they are. Many people on this forum troll, criticise and sling mud without any evidence, good ideas, or contributions of their own. Perhaps I do not fall into this category.
Into which category will you fall, when you have accumulated enough posts to acquire some credibility? I suppose that is up to you.
You have not, however, gotten off to a good start.


If you really had understood the meaning of my post, you would have reacted at least positively.
Instead, you continue with the way of communication which was the only reason for my addressing you.
I am in no way interested in making any kind of success in polemics making ego stronger, being in front of the screen putting people in categories and knowing nothing about them.
Obviously it makes you feeling good more than it does with really objective parts of your texts where one could think it is a person that strive to better understanding of issues he/she writes about. This contrast is what caught my eye. That is all, and there is neither any kind of start nor continuation of mastering the forum.

Best regards
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: TinselKoala on January 21, 2009, 04:37:19 PM

If you really had understood the meaning of my post, you would have reacted at least positively.
Instead, you continue with the way of communication which was the only reason for my addressing you.
I am in no way interested in making any kind of success in polemics making ego stronger, being in front of the screen putting people in categories and knowing nothing about them.
Obviously it makes you feeling good more than it does with really objective parts of your texts where one could think it is a person that strive to better understanding of issues he/she writes about. This contrast is what caught my eye. That is all, and there is neither any kind of start nor continuation of mastering the forum.

Best regards


As you can see from the post immediately above, I have proposed (and did so several times earlier) a simple and easy experiment that would conveniently test the hypothesis:
"The Milkovic oscillator described here will produce 12 times more power out, on a continuous bases, than it receives as input."
Now, whether you want to argue about communicative style or not, the fact remains: an experiment has been proposed which could conceivably falsify the Milkovic hypothesis.
Now, the onus is on the claimants to properly perform such an experiment. The experiment I have proposed is not problematic at all; any competent mechanic could design and implement the system with off-the-shelf components in a short time.
If the Milkovic system is even near a COP of 1, this experiment will show it. If the system really has 12x OU, it will easily run itself through my pneumatic pumps, accumulators and actuators.

So, attack my style if you like, I really don't mind. But the issue is still there, and I have proposed a method to resolve it. Why not try to build something, instead of getting all huffy because of a turn of phrase?
I know the answer: It is because it is far easier to complain and attack a person's words, than to address the ideas behind them.
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: SteinerP on January 23, 2009, 06:43:28 AM
As you can see from the post immediately above, I have proposed (and did so several times earlier) a simple and easy experiment that would conveniently test the hypothesis:
"The Milkovic oscillator described here will produce 12 times more power out, on a continuous bases, than it receives as input."
Now, whether you want to argue about communicative style or not, the fact remains: an experiment has been proposed which could conceivably falsify the Milkovic hypothesis.
Now, the onus is on the claimants to properly perform such an experiment. The experiment I have proposed is not problematic at all; any competent mechanic could design and implement the system with off-the-shelf components in a short time.
If the Milkovic system is even near a COP of 1, this experiment will show it. If the system really has 12x OU, it will easily run itself through my pneumatic pumps, accumulators and actuators.

So, attack my style if you like, I really don't mind. But the issue is still there, and I have proposed a method to resolve it. Why not try to build something, instead of getting all huffy because of a turn of phrase?
I know the answer: It is because it is far easier to complain and attack a person's words, than to address the ideas behind them.

to argue about communicative style
attack my style if you like, I really don't mind

Yes, even if this site has predominantly to do with technical aspects, it would lead all of its participants to the unwanted result of becoming machines itself if there is not an approach of mutual respect. No matter how much irony or even sarcasm one might use, there is an easy way for anyone to feel if it is addressing a problem (and I agree sometimes a person could and should be addressed as a problem itself, but even then there should be no triumphant satisfaction in doing it) or a person (in most cases it is highly inappropriate to do so).
I entered this forum not to derogate or blindly support anyone, but to see determination, strength and character of people that use their time and effort to make this world cleaner, healthier and more humane. Not much as a technical expert, but a person who is interested in issues this forum deals with from the above mentioned aspects. I am more than convinced that you share my opinion about the civilized, cultivated and refined communication with either friends or foes, and it comes from my respect of your texts - why else would I spend my time and energy to this correspondence.
As for the insinuations of being somebody's crew, just from a totally impartial post that had nothing to do with mere pro et contra style, I couldn't agree more with your conclusion:
It is because it is far easier to complain and attack a person's words, than to address the ideas behind them.

Having this said, I would add that maybe I am more agile critic of Mr. Milkovic work than many of his overt opponents. It is about the meaning and use of criticism that differs positive and negative approach, the former being far more productive and not less painful.

As for your suggestions and the overall tone that you use when speaking about technical matters, I find it very constructive and it is one of the reasons of what I have already said about this correspondence being worth time and energy spent on.

Best regards
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: Nabo00o on January 23, 2009, 03:37:34 PM
Thanks!
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: Merg on January 29, 2009, 05:57:43 PM
Automatic pendulum driver system for Milkovic oscillator!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iI_ooL8hcrE
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: tagor on January 29, 2009, 08:28:56 PM
Automatic pendulum driver system for Milkovic oscillator!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iI_ooL8hcrE

very nice system
we are waiting for data ( positive or negative one )
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: AB Hammer on January 29, 2009, 08:54:26 PM
Automatic pendulum driver system for Milkovic oscillator!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iI_ooL8hcrE

Interesting device there on youtube. Are you part of that program Merg?
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: rlortie on January 30, 2009, 12:08:33 AM
Alan B. brought this thread to my attention via a phone call regarding the above 'youtube' link. I told him that it looked like 'Ron P's earlier version which has been considerably updated. 

I have not by any means read all that has been posted here, so bear with me as what I am about to say may have already been said.

There seems to be a lot of debate regarding the claimed 12:1 output of this machine and how to prove or disprove said claim. So I have a suggestion that may or may not have already been tried.

Attach a secondary pivoting lever with adjustable fulcrum to the output side of the machine. Place the fulcrum of this secondary lever at various distance from the pivot point. If a 1:12 ratio can be achieved then the output of the secondary lever should offer 12 times the distance of the working stroke. Sufficient travel to do something with. Test weights could be added at designated points on said lever.

Or with the amplified stroke one may attempt adding a connecting rod to achieve a rotating flywheel.
Picture an early 'walking beam steam engine' for an example.  The connecting rod would have to be slotted with compression springs to allow for the random effect created by the machines output, once turning, the flywheel should dampen the effect and in turn feed back a small portion of this dampening to help resonate the machine.

For those who have actually built or have experience with such a machine, I look forward to  your input on my suggestion.

Ralph   
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: Merg on February 01, 2009, 05:19:37 AM
Just found on a forum also considering Veljko Milkovic's oscillator
Source:

http://www.besslerwheel.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=2374&postdays=0&postorder=asc&start=30


While doing some mail box cleaning this post popped up, it was written by a contact of mine who is known as "the builder" on the Milkovic forum. It does not necessarily reflect my personal views on the subject.

Quote:
Ralph, you were doing pretty good!

But in all these types of discussions it is much like trying to explain color to a blind man.
Then of course my favorite,,," you can lead a horse to water but you can't make him think"

You are at a one down disadvantage in that you don't have hands on experience with this. Even I will admit to you that after two years
I don't have the answer. But I will keep on until I do.

So what are most people missing?

The pendulum is an old device, as close to a pm machine as we can get. It has always been build with a rigid structure, to prevent any motion
at the pivot point. It was Veljko that saw that if you could loosen off the pivot point, it will flop up and down and in looking at this movement, understand the theory of the energy released at this point.

As the pendulum falls through the 6:00 position the pivot has to restrain the fall. The whole gravity addition must be contained and diverted
into uphill swing, right? Then at the end of this swing the pendulum bob actually starts to lose weight. Just do the math or experiment...
at about a 120° swing the bob will weigh half it's weight... and at the bottom of the swing it will weigh half as much again.

This is the "force" then, that is on the axle/pivot point. No one before Veljko had ever tried to harvest this "potential energy" in this manner.

If, as Veljiko has done, we fasten the pivot point to a secondary arm and allow this arm to translate this previously hidden energy then the
possibility to extract and utilize this "force" is a possibility. In a grandfather clock the pendulum motion is a very modest 6 to 10° say, but to
generate the most "force" we try for from 120° to 180° of swing. The force is multiplied correspondingly but the DRIVING force is also
increased. Then too as I pointed out in the "botafumeiro" example the motion of the combined pendulum and secondary arm is counter-
productive, in that we are actually dropping the pendulum when to sustain the pendulums motion we should be raising it.

So if we have a 20 Kg pendulum swinging say 120° we have a force of 20Kg's at the pivot point that is relatively cost free, over a short distance.

This is a machine that becomes more practical as the size is scaled up. It might never be proven at small scale.

It will never be proven with bike parts, the lost motion of the ratchet clutch defeats it. One must use a zero backlash indexing clutch.

The motion of the secondary arm is slow and limited, electrical generation is nonexistent at this speed, yet to speed the "force" up 100
times diminishes the torque by 100 times....the end result, friction wins.

But coupled with an invention as postulated by Felix Wüth, such as the "Living Energy" machine....?

Another possibility is the Wilt device...http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nMb-mab7ad4

I hope I have shed a small ray of light?

Be of good cheer,

(Author name deleted)

PS: you have my permission to post parts, or all of this...
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: rlortie on February 01, 2009, 06:08:41 AM
Merg,

Yup! one of my posts on Besslerwheel.com, and the whole thing should be in a quote box. But tha'ts OK as the point is made.

A number of people have and are involved with this Milkovic contraption and as stated elswhere none have been able to make a self-sustainer out of the alleged 12 X power gain????

From what I understand using a stationary suspended pendulum the best one can expect is 3 X the static weight,  but here again the amount of dynamic input is not measured. I would think that the moving pivot would dampen this making it less not more.

My above post regarding the secondary lever was simply throwing a concept out to see what kind of response and discussion it would bring.  No much response was there!  ;)

Ralph   
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: Merg on February 25, 2009, 06:44:17 PM
I think this recommendation for all those who are making the replicas haven't been posted earlier:

"Preposition for decreasing of the friction:
Two-stage mechanical oscillator or some other gadget lay in direction east-west in order to decrease axial friction on bearings caused by Coriolis force."

I was wondering why this was so simple, but in the same time hard to work with it - interesting thought...
"To someone it is a problem if the idea was simple, but coming to the simple solution is the hardest and there are the most reasons for that."
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: Merg on February 25, 2009, 06:46:17 PM
"
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: rlortie on February 25, 2009, 07:59:46 PM
Edit; DP
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: Bessler007 on February 26, 2009, 08:11:34 AM
Merg,
. . .

My above post regarding the secondary lever was simply throwing a concept out to see what kind of response and discussion it would bring.  No much response was there!  ;)

Ralph   

Quote
rlortie said:  While doing some mail box cleaning this post popped up, it was written by a contact of mine who is known as "the builder" on the Milkovic forum. It does not necessarily reflect my personal views on the subject.


Quote
The Builder said:  If, as Veljiko has done, we fasten the pivot point to a secondary arm and allow this arm to translate this previously hidden energy then the
possibility to extract and utilize this "force" is a possibility.


Good idea the builder had.



Bessler007
Cmdr, MIB
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: Bessler007 on February 26, 2009, 08:21:16 AM
I don't know if anyone has built a model to measure the difference between the energy of the bob swinging and the energy of the arm lifting up and down.  I used wm2d to see the difference in the rotational kinetic energy of the two.

Here's the results.  It does appear to me there's adequate energy in the arm moving up and down to cause the pendulum to swing forever.

I might have to launch the black helicopters.



Bessler007
Cmdr, MIB
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: Bessler007 on February 26, 2009, 09:41:39 AM
Some ideas from Hans @ Kelly.net:

http://www.keelytech.com/news/milkovic.html

Hello Hans,

I was wondering if you could tell me where the patent you got this graphic from is.


Bessler007

edit:

Interesting site with double pendulums:

http://www.myphysicslab.com/dbl_pendulum.html
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: Nabo00o on February 26, 2009, 10:24:37 AM
Merg,

Yup! one of my posts on Besslerwheel.com, and the whole thing should be in a quote box. But tha'ts OK as the point is made.

A number of people have and are involved with this Milkovic contraption and as stated elswhere none have been able to make a self-sustainer out of the alleged 12 X power gain????

From what I understand using a stationary suspended pendulum the best one can expect is 3 X the static weight,  but here again the amount of dynamic input is not measured. I would think that the moving pivot would dampen this making it less not more.

My above post regarding the secondary lever was simply throwing a concept out to see what kind of response and discussion it would bring.  No much response was there!  ;)

Ralph   

rlortie, Yes we can see this. The more you allow the pivot of the pendulum to move, then more of the stored energy will be lost.
There is one simple trick to take the efficiency or COP of this thing from maybe 3 or 4 to high up into 100! And that is to restrict the pivot from moving almost at all, by increasing the resistance it meets in the load (a heavy lead weight perhaps or adjusting the leverage on the hinge).

But then you will need a bigger weight on the pendulum side, but still the efficiency will be much higher. So easily put, going big with this machine will increase its performance many times. Hope some of you guys can soon show up with some positive results on this.
As for me I am going to make a modification to this, by making it fully rotational :)
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: Merg on February 26, 2009, 05:19:55 PM
Some ideas from Hans @ Kelly.net:

http://www.keelytech.com/news/milkovic.html

Hello Hans,

I was wondering if you could tell me where the patent you got this graphic from is.


Did you think on this patent?
http://www.veljkomilkovic.com/Images/Patenti/Patent17.jpg
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: rlortie on February 26, 2009, 05:34:25 PM
Hans wrote on Keelynet:


Quote
From bitter experience in almost 50 years as an engineer I am painfully aware how easy it is to overlook the obvious, especially when one is working with a device that almost does the job and "needs only a few adjustments".

Either I am going cross-eyed or the linkage on the above posted 'Patent.jpg  is backwards! The pulse lever will be raising when to pulse it must be dropping.

Anyone wish to correct me?

Ralph
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: Bessler007 on February 26, 2009, 08:06:35 PM
Quote
The timing Hans has seems to make sense.

I'm sorry, I was looking at the wrong drawing.

The swing of the pendulum is fairly constant in the results of the simulation I posted.  The blue line on the first graph is the rotational kinetic energy of the heavy lever.  The red line on that graph is the energy of the heavy lever after the energy of the pendulum is subtracted from it.

The area under the red curve represents the excess energy of the system after the energy of the pendulum is supplied; this is with 100% efficiency and is rotational.  That's an ideal no one can ever achieve yet none the less there's substantial net energy in this amplification.

This is without a doubt the most significant gravity powered device I've ever seen published.




Bessler007
Cmdr, MIB
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: Bessler007 on February 26, 2009, 08:14:29 PM
Thank you Merg; that answered my question.




Bessler007
Cmdr, MIB
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: Bessler007 on February 27, 2009, 07:12:52 AM
I was looking at a variation of this mechanical oscillator with wm2d to see what the factor of rotational energy of the pendulum was to that of the heavy lever arm and it does seem peak at 15x.

That isn't the most significant thing I noticed.  A mere 2645 pound heavy lever peaks at a surplus of 365 kWh in a little over 4.5 seconds.  It's not a constant energy but it sure is extreme.




Bessler007
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: utilitarian on February 27, 2009, 07:41:11 AM
I was looking at a variation of this mechanical oscillator with wm2d to see what the factor of rotational energy of the pendulum was to that of the heavy lever arm and it does seem peak at 15x.

That isn't the most significant thing I noticed.  A mere 2645 pound heavy lever peaks at a surplus of 365 kWh in a little over 4.5 seconds.  It's not a constant energy but it sure is extreme.

Bessler007

Are you sure you are not just observing an illusion similar to chaotic pendulums?  For example:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=foZHjI8Lydo (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=foZHjI8Lydo)
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: Bessler007 on February 27, 2009, 09:03:42 AM
Hello utilitarian,

No.  This concept is the most significant application of gravity power I've ever seen.  Anyone interested in free energy should attempt to get their minds around this.

There are some interesting ideas about this mechanical amplifier.

It answers a question I was asked years ago.  I wish he were here to see the answer.  We could ride his suicide shift Indians with helmets equipped with an rf link and cruise the back roads talking about it.  Hell has no angels.

This is a significant idea on two levels.

I plan on elaborating in my blog.




Bessler007
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: utilitarian on February 27, 2009, 03:45:09 PM
Hello utilitarian,

No.  This concept is the most significant application of gravity power I've ever seen.  Anyone interested in free energy should attempt to get their minds around this.

There are some interesting ideas about this mechanical amplifier.

It answers a question I was asked years ago.  I wish he were here to see the answer.  We could ride his suicide shift Indians with helmets equipped with an rf link and cruise the back roads talking about it.  Hell has no angels.

This is a significant idea on two levels.

I plan on elaborating in my blog.

Bessler007

But if there is excess energy being generated, why does the device stop over time and not go on forever?

I do not see how the Milkovic device is meaningfully different from a chaos pendulum.  Google "chaos pendulum" on youtube and you will see many more examples.

I am not sure exactly how you derive your graph, but is it possible you assign too much energy to the falling weight because you do not account for the counterweight?  I mean, you cannot simply take the mass of the hammer and calculate the energy based on that, because it is not free-falling.  It is partially balanced on the other side, so it is only able to impart a fraction of it's mass in kinetic energy.  Pardon if I have not used the correct terminology, but you get what I am saying I hope.
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: Bessler007 on February 27, 2009, 05:37:14 PM
utilitarian,

I have to admit I've let results of wm2d get the best of me before. 

The blue line on the graph is the kinetic energy of the massive lever.  The red line is what is left of that energy (instant by instant) after the expense of the pendulum is paid for.  The simulation calculated 2000 times/second.

The area under the red curve represents the excess energy of the system.  You can see the energy alternates above and below a zero reference.  What that means is an equal amount of energy above zero is needed to offset that below to arrive at the accurate amount of surplus energy.

As of yet I don't see why the excess energy can't drive the double pendulum.

This double pendulum operates within a constrained range; the motion isn't chaotically running where ever it will.  That's a key difference.

There are other differences.

This is a very significant device.  It's been termed "the invention of a simple machine".  That's not true; Milkovic didn't invent the double pendulum.  However he did notice a fascinating quality they exhibit.  He deserves credit for that.  He found a needle in the haystack.



Bessler007
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: neptune on February 27, 2009, 08:28:47 PM
I read an article a few weeks ago on the Milkovitch device, that does not seemed to have been mentioned here. The article was on Free Energy News from Wikipedia. The gist of said article was that the most efficient time to feed energy to the pendulum, was at the end of its stroke, when the bob is weightless. This was done by moving the pendulums pivot horizontally. But I dont remember in which direction, although it was in the same plane that the pendulum swings. You could easily test this with a weight on a string. this could be the key to the whole problem.
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: Merg on February 27, 2009, 10:43:20 PM
I read an article a few weeks ago on the Milkovitch device, that does not seemed to have been mentioned here. The article was on Free Energy News from Wikipedia. The gist of said article was that the most efficient time to feed energy to the pendulum, was at the end of its stroke, when the bob is weightless. This was done by moving the pendulums pivot horizontally. But I dont remember in which direction, although it was in the same plane that the pendulum swings. You could easily test this with a weight on a string. this could be the key to the whole problem.

Do you think on this article?
Jovan Marjanovic – Mechanical Feedback Loop Problems and Possible Solutions in the Two-Stage Oscillator of Veljko Milkovic
http://www.veljkomilkovic.com/Images/Jovan_Marjanovic_Mechanical_Feedback_Loop.pdf
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: Bessler007 on February 28, 2009, 02:56:14 AM


I am not sure exactly how you derive your graph, but is it possible you assign too much energy to the falling weight because you do not account for the counterweight?  I mean, you cannot simply take the mass of the hammer and calculate the energy based on that, because it is not free-falling.  It is partially balanced on the other side, so it is only able to impart a fraction of it's mass in kinetic energy.  Pardon if I have not used the correct terminology, but you get what I am saying I hope.


utilitarian,

I do understand what you're saying.  I totally neglected to look at that.  :)   opps.  It's a good thing I'm not a surgeon.  There'd be a lot of dead people out there.  I need to take a better look at this idea but I'm still persuaded it's an amazing use of a double pendulum.




Bessler007
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: Bessler007 on February 28, 2009, 05:08:06 AM
utilitarian,

The patient survived.  I set up a model of a double pendulum eliminating the mass that would counter-balance.  It also isn't the sort Milkovic has published.  It's just a little different.

I used smaller masses looking for what gain there might be.  The one point I calculated was an amplification little over 15.

I think if the pendulum is driven, much higher gains can be accomplished.  I also think the energy of the hammer can be used to drive the pendulum in a controlled fashion forcing the hammer to amazing extremes.




Bessler007
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: Elisha on March 01, 2009, 01:06:55 PM
There is a very effient way to convert a linear movement into a circular movement, the revetec.com trilobe crank.

With this crank we can recover the energy in the output if connected to an alternator.
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: Bessler007 on March 03, 2009, 04:19:52 AM
Hello Elisha,

That's a very neat cam arrangement.  I think an inductively coupled feedback to the pendulum would be the most efficient way to approach this.  No friction equates to higher efficiency.

I've been wearing this principle out in simulation.  This concept of mechanical energy amplification has got to be one of the most significant ideas I've ever come across in the area of gravity power generation.

The idea of mis-interpretation of results comparing input to output, I think, is a non issue in the simulation I just ran of another modification of the Milkovic double pendulum wrt a consideration of the amplification factor.  The factor can be computed at any moment in time along the curves.  The drastic difference between the level of the blue curve compared to the red one is visually evident.  Averaging the gains over the approximate 3.5 seconds this simulation ran would be some tedious math.  I just made copies of 2 points along the curves.

The large graph and the readings below the red curve are the same graph.  One is the numeric reading of the larger picture at the indicated moment in time.  The red line is the energy of the pendulum.  The blue is the heavy pendulum.  That's the case in both examples.  The inset graph titled "pendulum" is on a scale that's readable.

Although the title of the small numeric inset reads "12.5k frames/sec"  the simulation was ran at 10k frames/sec.  I didn't change the title of that graph.

This is a variation of Milkovic's double pendulum.  The underlying principle is very powerful in my opinion.  It's worth a serious study.




Bessler007

Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: hansvonlieven on March 03, 2009, 04:36:39 AM
Some ideas from Hans @ Kelly.net:

http://www.keelytech.com/news/milkovic.html

Hello Hans,

I was wondering if you could tell me where the patent you got this graphic from is.


Bessler007

edit:

Interesting site with double pendulums:

http://www.myphysicslab.com/dbl_pendulum.html

I got this drawing from Milkovic's site quite some time ago. I simply cleaned it up and coloured it in to show it more clearly.

Of course it cannot work as drawn.

Hans von Lieven
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: Merg on March 03, 2009, 08:07:03 PM
To all

the latest info just received - it seems we should consider these video links again.

Absolute (Ultimate) Proof of Overunity

"Analyzing the two-stage oscillator replica videos published by Raymond Head (Video 6 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gC6Qlj1Mbo8 and Video 7 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yCkVmv4zizM) it can be concluded that a weight on the left side completely pass its weight to the ground because the wire is obviously loose. It can be easy seen on video 7 -  which leads to conclusion that because the movement of the weight upwards is the same as the movement of the hand pushing the pendulum, there is energy surplus in the oscillator, because the hand normally can not lift the weight up as easy as it can push the pendulum."
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: tagor on March 04, 2009, 08:14:33 AM
To all

the latest info just received - it seems we should consider these video links again.

Absolute (Ultimate) Proof of Overunity

"Analyzing the two-stage oscillator replica videos published by Raymond Head (Video 6 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gC6Qlj1Mbo8 and Video 7 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yCkVmv4zizM) it can be concluded that a weight on the left side completely pass its weight to the ground because the wire is obviously loose. It can be easy seen on video 7 -  which leads to conclusion that because the movement of the weight upwards is the same as the movement of the hand pushing the pendulum, there is energy surplus in the oscillator, because the hand normally can not lift the weight up as easy as it can push the pendulum."

this is false  , this video proof nothing
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: Merg on March 08, 2009, 02:18:39 AM
this is false  , this video proof nothing

I'd like to see the better proof, if you can find such one, please share with us since we are all waiting for it.

_____

I don't know if this news is adequate to be posted here (maybe it can be created a new topic) but it is related in some parts to this discussion:
 
Jovan Marjanovic - The Case in Electro-Magnetism Where Newton's Third Law is Not Valid and Getting an Energy Surplus in an Electro Generator

With simple formulas in electromagnetics it can be proven that Third Newton's law is not valid in all cases for electrical charges. Easy proof that electrical generator with high voltage achieved by high RPM have energy surplus in comparison with another generator with low voltage and high current.

http://www.veljkomilkovic.com/Images/Jovan_Marjanovic_The_Case_in_Magnetisam_Where_Newton_Law_is_Not_Valid.pdf

Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: Bessler007 on March 08, 2009, 06:14:06 AM
Thank you for your post, Merg.




Bessler007
Cmdr, MIB
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: mule on March 16, 2009, 02:41:41 PM
Hi everyone

It took me days to read this entire thread, and quite thrilling it was too!

I'm attaching my idea for closing the loop. I think that it will take some experimentation and tweaking, but if we could find the optimum ratio (ie size of monkey/caloric intake/output) we could probably run this thing on one banana per day  ;D
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: mule on March 16, 2009, 02:48:56 PM
On a more serious note: this concept fascinates me, and even if it's not OU, it's a great principle for which I'm sure there must be useful applications other than the water pump. I wish I had the time, the tools and the know-how to experiment with it. Thanks for everyone's time and input and experimentation, my head is really buzzing with the possibilties!
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: tagor on March 16, 2009, 03:04:44 PM
Hi everyone

It took me days to read this entire thread, and quite thrilling it was too!

I'm attaching my idea for closing the loop. I think that it will take some experimentation and tweaking, but if we could find the optimum ratio (ie size of monkey/caloric intake/output) we could probably run this thing on one banana per day  ;D

hi all

very  good pic
this one is OU
you need only bananas
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: sm0ky2 on March 16, 2009, 09:47:10 PM
i explained how to derrive the calculus energy equations for this entire system about 20 pages ago.

the entire system from input to output is slightly less than Unity.
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: Merg on March 22, 2009, 11:35:25 PM
Hi everyone

It took me days to read this entire thread, and quite thrilling it was too!

I'm attaching my idea for closing the loop. I think that it will take some experimentation and tweaking, but if we could find the optimum ratio (ie size of monkey/caloric intake/output) we could probably run this thing on one banana per day  ;D

I like this idea :)
________________

It seems we have another theoretical interpretation of two-stage mechanical oscillator:
http://www.veljkomilkovic.com/Images/Aleksandar_Slavkovic_Milkovic's_Two_Stage_Oscillator_As_a_Parametric_Oscillator.pdf
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: iacob alex on March 23, 2009, 02:28:08 AM


          Hi!

In a message from Veljko Milkovic,today,I have received an interesting parametric oscillator explanation from an authorized scientist...

So,you can read about it,if you take a look   http://www.veljkomilkovic.com/Images/Aleksandr_Slavkovic_Milkovic's_Two_Stage_Oscillator_As_a_Parametric_Oscillator.pdf

You can see this device,as a far-away picture,in a simple manner:plainly the "strange swinging " of a  weighting machine(balance)/a variable mass -constant mass pair.

If you like,a see-saw game with an "active"   player ,only.

     All the Bests!  /  Alex
Title: Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
Post by: Alexioco on March 23, 2009, 02:30:02 AM