# Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

## Antigravity => Other antigravity machines and devices => Topic started by: pinobot on February 03, 2011, 11:51:36 PM

Title: 2 of my inertial drive designs.
Post by: pinobot on February 03, 2011, 11:51:36 PM
Here are 2 of my designs.  ;D
btw they don't work but i just love them.
Title: Re: 2 of my inertial drive designs.
Post by: pinobot on February 04, 2011, 12:02:06 AM
Ok, both "work" by changing the radius or speed to increase centripetal force.
Check this calculator: http://pacer.calpoly.edu/tri/pacer/gforce.html (http://pacer.calpoly.edu/tri/pacer/gforce.html)

If you look at the first design then the thickness (and weight) of the top part of the rubber band is one quarter that of the bottom band but the speed is twice as high.
Calculation:
speed top 1000 rpm
G-force = 112 g

speed bottom 250 rpm
G-force 7 g

So the difference in centripetal force is 16x but the difference in weight (rubber band) is only 4x.

Title: Re: 2 of my inertial drive designs.
Post by: pinobot on February 04, 2011, 12:04:26 AM
A more worked out design.
Title: Re: 2 of my inertial drive designs.
Post by: pinobot on February 07, 2011, 03:07:57 AM
Ok, very quiet here, so i'll do all the talking.  ;D
This 'works' because the weight is shifted from right to left.
To be honest it's the only design i haven't been able to falsify, i just can't get my head around it .
Title: Re: 2 of my inertial drive designs.
Post by: broli on February 07, 2011, 01:01:27 PM
In your last design, why not just cut to the chase and have a pump circulating water in a tube.

However there's a flaw in that specific case.

The other concept can also be reduced to a tube with water. The interesting part about this is that velocity is linearly proportional to area and so is the mass in flow rate of liquids. But velocity and mass aren't linear in the force equation for centripetal motion.
Title: Re: 2 of my inertial drive designs.
Post by: pinobot on February 07, 2011, 09:04:43 PM
For the water design there is a patent. :)
US20090165594
The problem with fluids is that they are very difficult to move in an uniform manner.

Title: Re: 2 of my inertial drive designs.
Post by: broli on February 07, 2011, 09:24:15 PM
That's actually funny. So where are the flying cars?

Something this easy should have at least had a working prototype before the patent was granted. But then again if you look at other patents being granted...

With a decent circulating pump you could build this.
Title: Re: 2 of my inertial drive designs.
Post by: broli on February 08, 2011, 01:46:39 PM
Here's something you can double check.

The below illustration shows a setup with a single mass. The mass changes its radius during operation, it's important to note that this is done internally not externally to the rotating setup. So imagine someone pulling in and out the mass with a cord from the center of rotation. Just like pulling in and out your arms on a rotating chair.

Thus considering conservation of angular momentum we can say something about the change of velocity.

All in all what the analysis shows is that the average force due to the small radius is 8 times higher than the bigger radius. But what matters is force over time, this would give us a unit of gained moment due some force. When we use the arc lengths and velocities we find that the mass takes 4 times less time to complete the arc length of the smaller radius.

If we combine both force and time we get the gained momentum in some direction. In this case there's an asymmetric momentum gain over time. The contribution of momentum due to the smaller radius is twice as high.

I know that pulling in the mass requires you pushing the wheel towards the mass, but this can be canceled by adding a mirrored setup.

I know that this asymmetry all happens due velocity having a squared relationship but could you double check this.
Title: Re: 2 of my inertial drive designs.
Post by: gravityblock on February 13, 2011, 10:43:12 PM
For the water design there is a patent. :)
US20090165594
The problem with fluids is that they are very difficult to move in an uniform manner.

Not when done correctly.  Watch how the water immediately changes direction when the "wand" moving around the rim of the bowl changes direction.  The water is behaving similar to a superfluid, http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XUvbBK9fGrw

GB
Title: Re: 2 of my inertial drive designs.
Post by: exnihiloest on February 14, 2011, 09:40:54 AM
Ok, very quiet here, so i'll do all the talking.  ;D
This 'works' because the weight is shifted from right to left.
To be honest it's the only design i haven't been able to falsify, i just can't get my head around it .

Refering to: http://www.overunity.com/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=10326.0;attach=50752
In order the wheel to rotate clockwise, the right weight must be more than the left. This implies that the right mass that you shift left, must be at a lower height than the mid height of the wheel, at the moment you shift it. Therefore you have to exert a work to raise it a bit.

Title: Re: 2 of my inertial drive designs.
Post by: drspark on February 15, 2011, 10:53:24 PM
Hi Group,

The C-force concept does work!
Here is a sim of one that I worked on 15-20 years ago.
http://drspark.com/firstCup.php
When watching the sim try to imagine the C-force on the flyweights axles
Here is some of the debris from that era.
Solenoids and a dc motor comutator. shifting the brushes shifts the direction of net force.
Repelling Magnetic Solenoid would be much stronger

have fun, its easy just a few gears and a motor.
Or harder the commutative magnetic way

DrSpark
Title: Re: 2 of my inertial drive designs.
Post by: exnihiloest on February 18, 2011, 12:01:03 PM

You should modelize it with WM2D.
It is the best way to see where is the flaw.