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

User Menu

Custom Search

Author Topic: Gravity Powered Generator With Gyroscope 'Sails'  (Read 25085 times)

conradelektro

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1842
Re: Gravity Powered Generator With Gyroscope 'Sails'
« Reply #15 on: December 13, 2013, 01:04:06 PM »
Hi Conrad,
  I'm confused... You say you understood the design, and then you went on a polemic about breaking the known laws of physics...

Which laws of physics do you think the design breaks? The design is totally within the rules of physics - as far as I'm aware.

I'm certainly not claiming to know better than the physicists - so I must ask you again - are you getting your threads confused? You seem to think this is related to the M Drive thread. Please review.

Regards
Tim

I wanted first to clarify the gyroscope because many people are not aware of the basics I tried to establish. Since your design involves gyroscopes I felt that this was on topic. (But may be you knew these basics, sorry.)

The rant about physical laws was a bit far off, but many people also do not understand that physical laws summarize observations. (May be you knew that, sorry.)

I wanted to go into precession later, but TinselKoala has saved me the work.

Precession is even more about these "support points" I was talking about. These intentional or unintentional fixed or at least friction points are the cornerstones of all misunderstandings in connection with gyroscopes and precession. Get this into your thinking and the gyroscope-precession muddle gets clearer, that is why I started there.

The way to understanding gyroscopes and precession is a long one and I wanted to start at the beginning, at the basics. But who wants to start at the beginning, that is so very boring. The hours one spends over textbooks to learn the basic facts of nature have to be avoided, who has the time for such nonsense. (Sorry, again a rant.)

Greetings, Conrad

tim123

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 509
Re: Gravity Powered Generator With Gyroscope 'Sails'
« Reply #16 on: December 13, 2013, 01:44:58 PM »
Hi Conrad :)
  no problem... I've tried to set out the question as clearly as I can. I don't think there's any controversy that the generator would turn - gravity would act on the gyros - they're free to move down as hinged - so they would precess.

There are equations giving precession speed, but I couldn't find anything about torque.

The question remains - would there be a significant torque on the generator?

It's apparently conventional science that gyros convert the force of gravity into precession, so that would suggest they could be used to harvest gravitational energy...

conradelektro

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1842
Re: Gravity Powered Generator With Gyroscope 'Sails'
« Reply #17 on: December 13, 2013, 09:54:16 PM »
It's apparently conventional science that gyros convert the force of gravity into precession, so that would suggest they could be used to harvest gravitational energy...

I might find the time to consult my books about that, it sounds interesting because it would not violate the "support points", one even would want a support point to lean against. The support point would be the means to harvest gravity. I am of course very sceptical but I have never heard that idea before (but I never went seriously into "precession").

But think, let's say it works: it would be a reactionless drive. One harvests the gravity of earth and then pushes against earth with that harvested force. I would not be concerned very much that earth will move out of her way, but let's say you do it on a small asteroid.

My hypothesis: if one can harvest gravity one has found a reactionless drive? It might not be very strong, because the gravity of a small asteroid is not high, but still. Gravity is a very weak force. I am getting a fright, suppose the Australians use 20 Million gravity harvesters and we in Europe do not, the earth will be pushed out of her bearings. Help! Help!

Greetings, Conrad

tim123

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 509
Re: Gravity Powered Generator With Gyroscope 'Sails'
« Reply #18 on: December 13, 2013, 10:32:28 PM »
Hi Conrad,
  I really don't think it could be a reactionless drive mechanism... You do seem a bit obsessed with them ATM... ;)

Gyros do change forces' direction - so action and reaction aren't necessarily opposite. And that in itself is pretty cool.

I wonder if there's an electrical analog to a gyro?

I currently think this design would probably work - but it would need a lot of engineering to make practical... Not as much engineering as a nuclear power plant though...

lumen

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1388
Re: Gravity Powered Generator With Gyroscope 'Sails'
« Reply #19 on: December 13, 2013, 11:12:58 PM »
I would think you would have better results with a device that uses two external independent forces to generate power.
 
 

tim123

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 509
Re: Gravity Powered Generator With Gyroscope 'Sails'
« Reply #20 on: December 14, 2013, 12:57:26 PM »
Hi Lumen,
  As I said - I'm pretty sure the back-force in your design does get transferred back to wheel 'A' - thru the bearings...

I think, by having to turn the thing yourself - you'll just end up with a UU device...

lumen

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1388
Re: Gravity Powered Generator With Gyroscope 'Sails'
« Reply #21 on: December 14, 2013, 04:34:06 PM »
This is a different concept!

There is NO way any force can be transferred back to the rotating drive because nothing is connected.
The gyro could be on the same shaft as the centrifugal weight. Nothing attached to the drive wheel but a single bearing!

You would be simply using a gyro to work against centrifugal force and generate power. The center wheel only sees rotating mass.

Using precession to power a generator is impossible, because if you stop the precession the gyro simply falls.



tim123

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 509
Re: Gravity Powered Generator With Gyroscope 'Sails'
« Reply #22 on: December 14, 2013, 06:07:24 PM »
Using precession to power a generator is impossible, because if you stop the precession the gyro simply falls.

Lol. You're right. I just tried it. Thanks, you answered my question. :)

Ok, perhaps you could explain your design... How are the bits connected to the drive disc? I'm not sure I get why you've added the gyros... I guess they'll try to keep their orientation - and work along with the weights?

:)
Tim

lumen

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1388
Re: Gravity Powered Generator With Gyroscope 'Sails'
« Reply #23 on: December 14, 2013, 10:16:39 PM »
If you think of the generator mounted on the other side of the disk attached to the gyro and the weight attached to the shaft of the generator, then the generator could provide power to the gyro and a motor to turn the disk.
 
There would be no load on the disk other than some bearing and air resistance. The gyro, generator and weight would only appear as mass on the disk and could not cause any additional drag but still generate power from the rotation of the disk.
 
It also seems possible that the gyro could be run directly from some gearing to the weight. It may be easier to do it electronically but the possibility is there.
 
This was the first concept to provide power from the centrifugal forces on a rotating disk but the other concepts have some advantages and achieve the same goal. (they are just harder to understand)
 
 
 

telecom

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 560
Re: Gravity Powered Generator With Gyroscope 'Sails'
« Reply #24 on: December 15, 2013, 02:07:39 AM »
Hi Lumen,

I think your concept may actually work!

Can you please expand on your other ideas, which you said are "more difficult to understand".

Thank you.

lumen

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1388
Re: Gravity Powered Generator With Gyroscope 'Sails'
« Reply #25 on: December 15, 2013, 03:31:26 AM »
telecom,
 
The basic idea is to provide a stationary platform (non rotating) near the edge of a larger rotating disk.
From the view of this platform, it would be like sitting still but gravity is rotating around you. While on this platform, you do not need to build a wheel and move the weights to make it rotate, you only need a wheel with a weight on one side and the weight will fall to the rotating gravity causing constant rotation.
Using a gyro makes it easy to understand this concept and you can see there is no load on the wheel generating the gravity(centrifugal force).
There are other ways to create the non rotating platform without using a gyro but appear to work against the disks rotation even when they do not.
 
A simple connecting rod like used on a steam engine can provide the stationary platform that does not hinder the wheel though it looks like it should. (takes some thought to see why)
 
Even roberval linkage can provide the stationary platform and is the hardest to grasp, but again, it does not work against the wheel driving it.
This is the last thread I will post this in. (already in 2 others)
 
This is the most advanced concept because it can transfer the work from the wheels centrifugal force to the stationary world to do work for free.

 

lumen

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1388
Re: Gravity Powered Generator With Gyroscope 'Sails'
« Reply #26 on: December 15, 2013, 04:44:30 AM »
Here is the final explanation of why disk "A" can drive sprocket "B" but "B" cannot drive "A".
 
"A" can generate very large centrifugal force in "C" which can turn "B" at the same rate as "A" but without any additional load on "A". If "B" could inversely drive "A" then this surly would not be true since this would indicate that "B" could apply torque to "A".
 
Why it cannot:
Suppose we rotate "A" to 1000 RPM and the weights on 'C" are fully extended and "B" is rotating with "A" as expected.
Now while rotating, we switch the drive from "A" to "B". At first everything appears to continue, but "B" is not driving "A" it is driving "C". 
 
"B" starts pulling on "C" and the weight pulls inward slightly and  "A" increases in RPM to match the new shorter path of the retracting weights. Now you cannot let the weight back out or "A" will slow back down. So as normal friction on "A" slows it further, the weight on "C" is further retracted to maintain the RPM. (you surly cannot let off now or "A" will slow even further!)
 
You continue to keep the torque on "B" to maintain the RPM of "A" but the only way to maintain the RPM is to continue pulling the weights on "C" inward. Eventually, the weights turn fully inward and there is no longer any way to maintain the RPM on "A". Of course this would have been much faster with any load on "A"
 
So the fact is, you cannot drive "A" with "B" but you can drive "B" with "A" and with increased torque.
 
 
 

lumen

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1388
Re: Gravity Powered Generator With Gyroscope 'Sails'
« Reply #27 on: December 15, 2013, 03:55:53 PM »
webby1
 
That's why 'C" is never connected to "A" in any way, to avoid the torque on "C" driving "A".
Even torque applied on the edge of disk "A" can make it rotate.
 
The only torque that "A" ever gets from "C" is bearing resistance and this is occurring at very low rpm since most of the time "C" is simply rotating with "A".
 

lumen

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1388
Re: Gravity Powered Generator With Gyroscope 'Sails'
« Reply #28 on: December 15, 2013, 05:45:59 PM »
Torque from "C" maybe, but not reactive force.

Use "B" to rotate "C", now try and stop "C" from rotating.

This reactive force is applied to "A", so not the torque of "C" but its resistance to rotation turns the axle for "C" into a fulcrum and "A" is what holds that fulcrum against motion allowing for an output from "C".  This then creates the torque that "A" sees, so not the "torque" of "C" but the resistance TO the torque on "C".

Lets completely stall "C" relative to "A", now use "B" to try and turn "C".

This can be done with a pencil, a string and a ruler.  Tie the string through a hole at one end of the ruler, put the pencil through a hole at the other end of the ruler, hold the pencil and pull on the string.  Which angle must you pull the string at to not move the ruler.  Any angle of the string will move the ruler, this angle will also correspond to any diameter given to "B", so no torque from the string but there is the reactive force from the string which moves the ruler and the ruler responds and transforms that into a torque.

You always want to tie "C" to "A", sure if you bolt "C" to "A", then "B" is simply the center of "A" as a rotational point and is directly tied to disk "A".
 
This is the common mistake that everyone makes!
That's why I said this is hard to understand. In fact "C" only appears to "A" as a single bearing with a weight on it.
All forces on the connecting chain are connected only to "B", that is also not connected to "A".
The connection from "C" to "B" in roberval and can apply no torque into "A".
 
Only a force at "C" appearing at some angle to "C" and "B" can be seen in "A". But all weights on "C" are applied only directly to the center of "A" because of the roberval connection to "B".
From visual experience your brain normally connects "C" to "A" and you think you see a problem, but that exact problem cannot exist as I explained earlier. Even if you continued to drive "B" after everything was already rotating which would have been the best condition for driving "A" from "B", disk "A" will still slow to a stop.
 

 
 
 
 
 
 

telecom

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 560
Re: Gravity Powered Generator With Gyroscope 'Sails'
« Reply #29 on: December 15, 2013, 06:44:17 PM »
Hi Lumen,
where is the the  output, since there are no generators in a new design.
Is it a sprocket B?
With the generators as before, I would make B stationary.In this case the chain would
rotate the stator around the rotor attached to the weight. Under the load the weight
would pull from the radial line until it reaches an equilibrium with the load, IMHO.
But what exactly happens in a new design w/o the generators?
Thank you, this is a very exciting design, btw.