Language:
To browser these website, it's necessary to store cookies on your computer.
The cookies contain no personal information, they are required for program control.
the storage of cookies while browsing this website, on Login and Register.
 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

Custom Search

Author Topic: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%  (Read 427956 times)

ARMCORTEX

• Hero Member
• Posts: 717
Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
« Reply #495 on: November 22, 2014, 03:31:52 AM »
From the midpoint, where else  ?

From what I see, there would be some strain on belts , speed is different for both at any time. This might be a thing for double motor double generator.

To know natural resonance of system, pull real strong on one side and add dead weights, then see natural frequency oscillation of system, then choose motor speed.

Things are gonna have to give (slip) somehow, because speed is constantly oscillating.

Whats interresting to me, is how to deconstruct the ''push''. On a perfect angle, the push is as strong as added centrifugal force of both weights, how to know
if this adds to rotation force is where I am stuck, I need somebody strong in physics and good with Mathlab to confirm workability.

Problem with these systems, as we know, loads kills the resonant causing motion.

I cant go further with Algodoo, as chain link seems to not wanna work the way I want it, somebody should try on wm2d.

• Jr. Member
• Posts: 71
Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
« Reply #496 on: November 22, 2014, 04:52:56 AM »
oh i see, i was having difficulty visualizing where the drive motor and generator would be located. Putting a load on a resonant system remains to be a big problem. If we can have the primary/input indirectly affect the output like the Milkovic machine, then it wouldn't be a problem.

noonespecial

• Sr. Member
• Posts: 278
Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
« Reply #497 on: November 22, 2014, 06:26:37 PM »

Take a look at this charlie, a spring device of my own design.

There's so much going on there its hard to tell what you are trying to show. Are the 2 offset weights rotating independent of each other? If so, do they fall into some type of synchronization? And I assume the single one is a control?

Thanks,
Charlie

ARMCORTEX

• Hero Member
• Posts: 717
Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
« Reply #498 on: November 23, 2014, 12:11:01 AM »
The milkovic pendulum cannot turn a generator, milkovic has tried, power is only small moments and cannot be harvested by a generating or provide constant torque.

There is a pic out there, of a milkovic wheel of humongous proportions, a fix that to fix that to fix that issue, in the end, a nightmare.

Charlie: theres 2 motors, antiphase, cw and ccw. very simple...

I messed around in algodoo with sixto ramos design and ucross design, to realise that these designs are total shit and frauds, Artoj has been perpetuating a fraud.

I looked around the whole YT , to never find a loaded sixto ramos, only a bunch of abandonned builds and ''it dont work'' in russian language in the comments below.

Never trust a blind man to build an OU generator, because it wont work. He will win a prize for being an ugly SOB then ask for 75000\$ US dollars.

Sixto Ramos, ucross, Skinner, do not WORK.

In mechanical realm, we are left with only a few remaining concepts,  Dimitriev (maybe), Bobby concepts(maybe) and pulse flywheels like Chas Campbell(the best), and perhaps Jim Murrays, universal engine.(maybe)
« Last Edit: November 23, 2014, 02:23:34 AM by ARMCORTEX »

akbill

• Newbie
• Posts: 3
Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
« Reply #499 on: December 22, 2014, 08:29:28 PM »
I think You have it 90 %, however I can't see why You are trying to reproduce skinner.
The basic concept is simple.  The Mann Prime mover is another example of a machine designed to hide the obvious, by using allot of extra and complicated parts.  But if You have a working tested, IE. energy in vs. OU energy out device.  I as well as many others would be delighted to see.  Your Diatribe secrets of the skinner device unveiled is funny.  Maybe You ment it that way?

poplianil

• Newbie
• Posts: 14
Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
« Reply #500 on: January 02, 2015, 06:30:44 AM »
1939 Skinner was very smart, he is trying to use the centrifugal force generated by the swinging of the two weights, 2 X 2 times each revolution. See the attached diagram which shows how he changes the direction of CF to use it as input power. Too many replication have deviated from this and are are just focussing on  driving a flywheel.
The faster the operation , the more the output

ARMCORTEX

• Hero Member
• Posts: 717
Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
« Reply #501 on: January 02, 2015, 09:31:39 AM »
But your confidence means nothing to us.

No matter what you say.

What exactly are you bringing to the table here, you speak as if you know this was gonna work.

poplianil

• Newbie
• Posts: 14
Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
« Reply #502 on: January 02, 2015, 09:52:59 AM »
I am just demonstarting how he uses the CF generated to reduce input energy, go and see the various videios on you tube which are moving in wrong direction

justcurious

• Newbie
• Posts: 2
Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
« Reply #503 on: March 13, 2015, 03:45:54 PM »

William Skinner Machine
Hi everyone

First of all I am no mathematition, engineer, electrical or mechanical but I felt the need to try and simplify what skinner tried to achieve by showing the basic principles involved, that said, I am truly fascinated by the discovery of William Skinners machine I believe he was a true visionary it seems he took two basic laws of physics (gravity and leverage) and put them together to produce what I believe is an answer to all future global energy problems.  In fig 1 you will see that with a 12-1 lever ratio and a double beam set up you can achieve 144 X energy input, the measurements of the set up for the single beam is,  beam length 72” from 10lb wieght to fulcrum. fulcrum to 120lb wieght 6”.   these calculations although not precise do show that the double beam set up can achieve this phenominal increase in power, as you can see this double beam set up keeps all the wieghts in balance and I wonder if skinner tried to keep this balance thru his system so there was no mechanical advantage or disadvantage in the wieghts, I think only trial and error will test this.  I used this website for the calculations.  http://www.engineersedge.com/calculators/levers/page_levers_1.htm
I believe in my own mind that skinner took the concept of the double beam and turned it thru 180deg  using a gimbal for the fulcrum (fig2). I think the clever part is the translation plate that Aaron quite eloquently points out in great detail on his website 'energetic forum', I haven't put this in as there has been enough explained and demonstrated about this item. As far as elipse v circle for the motion I feel that both are utilised that is to say that the force on the translation plate is circular but an elipse is naturally created within the circle anyone who has played with a spirograph as a kid will see and understand this. Here is a link for those who have not used or seen a spirograph.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=empkBYhWEZQ .  I think that Skinner kept all the driving forces circular with the exception of the natural elipse in the translation plate to simplify the mechanics. I am sorry if I seem to have over simplified this but I hope it will give people an insite into the principles. Cheers!

Low-Q

• Hero Member
• Posts: 2847
Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
« Reply #504 on: March 14, 2015, 10:20:06 PM »
William Skinner Machine
Hi everyone

First of all I am no mathematition, engineer, electrical or mechanical but I felt the need to try and simplify what skinner tried to achieve by showing the basic principles involved, that said, I am truly fascinated by the discovery of William Skinners machine I believe he was a true visionary it seems he took two basic laws of physics (gravity and leverage) and put them together to produce what I believe is an answer to all future global energy problems.  In fig 1 you will see that with a 12-1 lever ratio and a double beam set up you can achieve 144 X energy input, the measurements of the set up for the single beam is,  beam length 72” from 10lb wieght to fulcrum. fulcrum to 120lb wieght 6”.   these calculations although not precise do show that the double beam set up can achieve this phenominal increase in power, as you can see this double beam set up keeps all the wieghts in balance and I wonder if skinner tried to keep this balance thru his system so there was no mechanical advantage or disadvantage in the wieghts, I think only trial and error will test this.  I used this website for the calculations.  http://www.engineersedge.com/calculators/levers/page_levers_1.htm
I believe in my own mind that skinner took the concept of the double beam and turned it thru 180deg  using a gimbal for the fulcrum (fig2). I think the clever part is the translation plate that Aaron quite eloquently points out in great detail on his website 'energetic forum', I haven't put this in as there has been enough explained and demonstrated about this item. As far as elipse v circle for the motion I feel that both are utilised that is to say that the force on the translation plate is circular but an elipse is naturally created within the circle anyone who has played with a spirograph as a kid will see and understand this. Here is a link for those who have not used or seen a spirograph.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=empkBYhWEZQ .  I think that Skinner kept all the driving forces circular with the exception of the natural elipse in the translation plate to simplify the mechanics. I am sorry if I seem to have over simplified this but I hope it will give people an insite into the principles. Cheers!
You're right about saying you're not an engineer. Don't confuse energy with force.

Vidar

justcurious

• Newbie
• Posts: 2
Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
« Reply #505 on: March 15, 2015, 04:08:44 AM »
phew thanks low-Q at least I got something right.

Artoj

• Newbie
• Posts: 40
Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
« Reply #506 on: March 16, 2015, 10:33:15 PM »
I messed around in algodoo with sixto ramos design and ucross design, to realise that these designs are total shit and frauds, Artoj has been perpetuating a fraud.

Sixto Ramos, ucross, Skinner, do not WORK.

In mechanical realm, we are left with only a few remaining concepts,  Dimitriev (maybe), Bobby concepts(maybe) and pulse flywheels like Chas Campbell(the best), and perhaps Jim Murrays, universal engine.(maybe)

As I am a researcher of unique mechanical devices and I am not looking for any magic free energy device, I wouldn't wast my time on those fruitless concepts. I get very excited about the developments of mechanical advantage and torque converters and other interesting geometric arrangement of gears, pulleys, pivots and levers. Where the Sixto device was very interesting and would show an imbalance of forces and vibratory possibilities, which nobody has even come close to replicating, free energy would never come from a device such as this, pure conjecture, a possible unique storage and conversion of rotating to non linear actions would be interesting. This also is the same for both the Ucros and Skinner device, where the coupling of gravity has been attempted and partially successful, whether it produces excess energy is again pure conjecture and fanciful. As to the unique assemblages of both reciprocating and rotating elements these machines are great examples to explore and discover interesting new ways to implement torque conversions and gravitational coupling events.

So Mr ARMCORTEX, I take offense to your implications of me perpetuating a fraud, what is the fraud you are implying? My interest in these devices and the revelations of anything I have found within their working has NEVER implied a fraudulent premise, I come to this forum and act with altruistic intent and help define difficult concepts and help those researchers draw their own conclusions. You sir are the one who continuously deride efforts by those posting as to the learning process required to understand these unique assemblages.

From my blog in 2013 - "Here are some of the files I have released in the Energetic Forum recently. In them I am dealing with a geometry that has been used in many types of machines for thousands of years ranging from Archimedes all the way to Da Vinci, Huygens,  Bessler,  Keely, Russel, Constantinesco and to all the late 19th century mechanical inventions and now to the whole free energy fraternity that seem to think these things have not been discovered before or even understood by previous generations. I am a wittiness to a unique renaissance in this type of research as seen by a multitude of patents, designs and inventions  in torque conversions and unique mechanical advantage systems.These reveal the simple but hidden aspects of geometry, as I have seen by perusing hundreds of patents and engineering catalogs,  still I find nothing historically new but a creatively variant and diverse  application of a multitude of designs, utilizing a hidden pallet that engineers need to know about and define as a branch of dynamic geometry"

As to those machines they work, not as you want them to and they certainly do not provide the so called free energy that you claim they are trying to make. These machines work as you see them, the mystery is not what you think they do, it is the ideas behind them that is interesting. To my way of thinking I would rather see something uniquely tried and built even if it doesn't do anything more than act as a temporary extended lever or such, than hear endless banter about how to try something new is a waste of time. Our engineers and inventors are making unique devices every day, and they will for a long time to come, it is in the doing and discovery that can build our future, the physics in not etched in stone yet, we must stay alert and use our creativity with an open mind if we are to have a future for our current civilization.

Yours cordially Arto.

MoRo

• Jr. Member
• Posts: 80
Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
« Reply #507 on: May 31, 2015, 04:42:22 AM »
Bellow, for the sake of the open source community, I have taken the time to use 20 consecutive frames of the original video and reassembled them into a continuously looped animated .gif image. This allows us to have the best currently available view of the overall machine in action. I have used GIMP to assemble the animation.

Motion picture film was subject to image positioning inconsistencies. So, for stabilization purposes, I have ONLY and as-best-I-could, adjusted the positioning and scaling of the frames to allow for inconsistencies in the original filming.

May all interested study it well and enjoy!
MagnaMoRo

https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/19888528/energy/GRAVPOWER.gif

Pirate88179

• elite_member
• Hero Member
• Posts: 8366
Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
« Reply #508 on: May 31, 2015, 06:14:13 AM »
Bellow, for the sake of the open source community, I have taken the time to use 20 consecutive frames of the original video and reassembled them into a continuously looped animated .gif image. This allows us to have the best currently available view of the overall machine in action. I have used GIMP to assemble the animation.

Motion picture film was subject to image positioning inconsistencies. So, for stabilization purposes, I have ONLY and as-best-I-could, adjusted the positioning and scaling of the frames to allow for inconsistencies in the original filming.

May all interested study it well and enjoy!
MagnaMoRo

https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/19888528/energy/GRAVPOWER.gif

Nice job on the gif.

Bill

FreeEnergy

• Hero Member
• Posts: 2014
Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
« Reply #509 on: January 21, 2016, 07:19:30 AM »