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

## Gravity powered devices => Gravity powered devices => Topic started by: cipbranea on May 21, 2014, 07:38:08 AM

Title: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: cipbranea on May 21, 2014, 07:38:08 AM

http://youtu.be/rxIRaJlTD4Y (http://youtu.be/rxIRaJlTD4Y)

From description:
"Miami, Florida, United States of America.
Various shots of inventor William Skinner in his workshop as he demonstrates a model of his gravity power machine. It has weights that spin round and multiply the power of an 1/8 horsepower motor by 1200 % - enough energy to power a town of 3,500 at a cost of £1 a month. William uses the power of the model to work a 12 foot lathe that cuts ribbons of steel."
Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: hartiberlin on May 21, 2014, 03:39:02 PM
Amazing !
What came out of this invention ?

Why was it not looked further into ?

Seems he is using centrifugal forces in a tricky way to get the energy gain !

Regards, Stefan.﻿
Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: hartiberlin on May 21, 2014, 03:43:57 PM
I still found this:

Miami, Florida, United States of America.

Various shots of inventor William Skinner in his workshop as he demonstrates a model of his gravity power machine.

It has weights that spin round and multiply the power of an 1/8 horsepower motor by 1200 % -
enough energy to power a town of 3,500 at a cost of £1 a month.

William uses the power of the model to work a 12 foot lathe that cuts ribbons of steel.

Hmm, did he file a patent for this machine ?

REgards, Stefan.
Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: hartiberlin on May 21, 2014, 03:58:16 PM
Here is a PDF File I just found, hard to read, as the scan is not good,
drive the shaft and the weights are always falling, without really falling...

Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: cipbranea on May 21, 2014, 04:12:54 PM
But the principle seems to be feasible.
Here's another video with another device using the same principle:

http://youtu.be/LCWupGlQjfQ (http://youtu.be/LCWupGlQjfQ)

Could this be a path to step into?

Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: hartiberlin on May 21, 2014, 05:05:10 PM
Here is also a different PDF File, unfortunately one needs to pay to get access:

http://www.newspapers.com/newspage/53831037/

I extracted this part from the OCR section there:

FBIDAY, MAECH31; 1939 THE DAILY NOTES, CANON8BUBO. PA.

GRAVITY FORCE USED TO RAISE MOTOR POWER  Miami Inventor Calls Principle

Enormous Energy Saver
MIAMI, Fla., March 31. 0i W. F. Skinner proudly displays hi; latest invention,

a device that multiplies power in a startling fashion. Skinner had great -hopes

for the principle he embodied in his deivice, which he calls "a gravity power

machine.
" He said, for example, I " v , fit ' Jb? V1I1' j l" , f IjijBSBSCL - , ,-u, ,

1 1 r T MmBmm he believed the machine's principle could be carried to a point

where a one-horsepower motor would produce electricity for a community of 3,500

people at a total cost of only \$5 a month. "Almost any engineer will tell you

that what this machine does is impossible," said Skinner, and then proceeded to

demonstrate in his   workshop here. His working model of the "gravity power

machine" was run by a one-eighth horsepower motor. The device, in turn,

operated a heavy duty, 12-foot lathe, a six-foot drill press and a hack saw

from the from several children's toys and special types of furniture he has

invented. Skinner said some skeptics were inclined to wonder whether his

"gravity power machine" was obtaining power from some other source than the

one-eighth horsepower motor because the shop was electrically operated. To make

the demonstration more convincing, he obtained a one-fifth horsepower gasoline

motor manufactured to run model airplanes, which he said he would install to

produce the power for the shop. same shaft at the same time.  "Almost any

engineer will tell you that to run even that heavy duty lathe and produce the

quar inch shaving on a steel "bar that it does would take a two-horsepower

motor," Skinner said. \$2-95 4.40 The "gravity power machine" stricKen about two

weeks ago KECKEATI0X CENTER HAS VARIED ACTIVITIES consists of a steel framework

con taining four shafts controlled by  on the eccentrics- On each shaft is an

off-balanced weight which Skinner said was "about the secret of the whole

thing." He explained that the shafts, turning in the eccentrics, moved the

weights in a circular motion at 60 revolutions a minute. Because the weights

are off-balance, he vaid, they are always "falling," producing the

multiplication of power. The "falling," Skinner said, is more correctly a

following of the weights to new centers of gravity caused by the changing

positions of the shafts. The weights do not actually fall. The one-eighth

horsepower electric motor. Skinner said, was used only for power to turn the

eccentrics and the "gravity power machine 'provided the power, in turn, to

operate the hop. U'OO Per Cent Step I'p Skinner estimated the "gravity power

machine" would increase the horsepower of a motor about 1,200 per cent. A one

horsepower motor, he believed, with a perfected "gravity power machine" to

multiply its output, could be made to drive a generator large enough to produce

electricity for 3,500 persons. And the operating cost would be only about \$5 a

month, he estimated. The machine Skinner exhibited was the fifth he has built

in the 14 years he has been "working up the idea." A number of engineers have

inspected his invention, he said. One of them was A. P. Michaels, a

Jacksonville, Fla., consulting engineer, who gave Skinner a letter describing

the machine as "a practical device and will have a definite .  field where it

is necessary to use power to drive equipment. It should result in a very large

saving of power used." One Engineer Silent George C- Estill, electrical

engineer and retired president of the Florida Power and Light company here, was

another who examined the device but he said his check was not complete enough

to allow him to form a conclusion. Skinner turned to inventing after the

collapse of the Florida real estate boom of 1926. He recently perfected a

device for recharging dry cell batteries.
Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: hartiberlin on May 21, 2014, 05:19:30 PM
Here is another Newspaper article about it,

http://texashistory.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metapth73611/m1/2/zoom/?zoom=5&lat=2690&lon=3903&layers=BT

Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: Paul-R on May 21, 2014, 06:03:35 PM
But the principle seems to be feasible.
Here's another video with another device using the same principle:

http://youtu.be/LCWupGlQjfQ (http://youtu.be/LCWupGlQjfQ)

Could this be a path to step into?
This is a red herring. The man injects energy into the system by rocking the equipment.
Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: AB Hammer on May 21, 2014, 06:05:35 PM
http://youtu.be/rxIRaJlTD4Y (http://youtu.be/rxIRaJlTD4Y)

From description:
"Miami, Florida, United States of America.
Various shots of inventor William Skinner in his workshop as he demonstrates a model of his gravity power machine. It has weights that spin round and multiply the power of an 1/8 horsepower motor by 1200 % - enough energy to power a town of 3,500 at a cost of £1 a month. William uses the power of the model to work a 12 foot lathe that cuts ribbons of steel."

Thanks and nice find. It is very interesting. Also thanks Stefan for the new paper finds.  There are several inventors in newspapers from many years with claims that are also interesting. I had not found this one yet.

Alan

Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: hartiberlin on May 21, 2014, 06:19:53 PM
Maybe someone from you who live near Miami, Florida can try to locate the descendants of this
inventor and ask them, if the machine still exists ?

Would be really great, if this machine would be still available to inspect and make measurements.

I guess this is a valid principle.

Can anyone draw up a sketch, how he things this is working ?

The machine is pretty high as you can see in the first few frames of the British Pathe video.
It seems the right drive motor is driving the left wheel which goes up via the ribbon band
to the topp of the machine and drives there some kind excenter and at the bottom these weights
then just rotate around this excenter and this lower axle then drives his equipment...

Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: DreamThinkBuild on May 21, 2014, 06:39:09 PM
Hi Cipbranea,

Welcome to the forum.

Thank you for sharing, haven't seen this one yet, really cool.

I like how he has the top and bottom separated makes it easier to take power off but requires more mechanics. This design could be optimized greatly. The  higher top with eccentric arms allows for more leverage to the bottom drive weights, but you could remove those by using a ring so the motor doesn't have to see the angular weight. Is the bottom takeoff a planetary gear?

I built a precessed cylinder test a while back, just by making small gyrations of the central axis you can get a weight to displace towards the offset of the axis. Remove the cylinder and attach a arm with a heavy mass to generate torque.

Hi Hartiberlin,

Thank you for those articles.

Here is text version of last article:

Quote
Breckenridge American (Breckenridge, Tex.), Vol. 19, No. 198, Ed. 1, Tuesday, April 4, 1939

New Machine Uses Gravity for Power
Principle will greatly increase horsepower speed

Miami, Fla (U.P.) -- W. F. Skinner proudly displays his latest invention, a device that multiplies power in a startling fashion.

Skinner had great hopes for the principle he embodied in his device, which he calls "a gravity power machine." He said, for example, he believed the machine's principle could be carried to a point where a one-horsepower motor would provide electricity for a community of 3,500 people at a total cost of only \$5 a month.

"Almost any engineer will tell you that what this machine does is impossible," said Skinner, and the proceeded to demonstrate in his workshop here.

His working model of the "gravity power machine" was run by a one-eighth horsepower motor. The device, in turn, operated a heavy duty, 12-foot lathe, a six foot drill press and a hack saw from the same shaft at the same time.

"Almost any engineer will tell you that to run even that heavy duty lathe and produce the quarter-inch shaving on a steel bar that it does would take a two-horsepower motor," Skinner said.

The "gravity power machine" consists of a steel framework containing four shafts controlled by eccentrics. On each shaft is an off-balance weight which Skinner said was "about the secret of the whole thing."

He explained that the shafts turning in the eccentrics, moved the weights in a circular motion at 60 revolutions a minute. Because the weights are off balance, he said, they are always "falling" producing the multiplication of power.

The "falling," Skinner said, is more correctly a following of the weights to new centers of gravity caused by the changing positions of the shafts. The weights do not actually fall. The one-eighth horsepower electric motor, Skinner said, was used only for power to turn the eccentrics and the "gravity power machine" provided the power, in turn to operate the shop.

1,200 Per Cent Step Up

Skinner estimated the "gravity power machine" would increase the horsepower of a motor about 1,200 per cent. A one horsepower motor, he believed, with a perfected "gravity power machine" to multiply its output, could be made to drive a generator large enough to produce electricity for 3,500 persons. And the operating cost would be only about \$5 a month, he estimated.

The machine Skinner exhibited was the fifth he has built in the 14 years he has been "working up the idea."

A number of engineers have inspected his invention, he said.

One of them was A. P. Michaels, a Jacksonville, Fla., consulting engineer, who gave Skinner a letter describing the machine as "a practical device and will have a definite field where it is necessary to use power to drive equipment. It should result in a very large saving of power used."
Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: cipbranea on May 21, 2014, 06:39:45 PM
This is a red herring. The man injects energy into the system by rocking the equipment.
Maybe if you put some weight on the bottom (could be the weight of the electrical generator itself) you turn it into a pendulum, then less energy is required to maintain the pendulum swing. Just a thought...
Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: cipbranea on May 21, 2014, 07:14:28 PM
Thank you, Stefan, for your research, DreamThinkBuild for your welcome, and you are right, the upper part of the device is providing high leverage to the second stage. On the second stage also, the shorter (upper) weight it seems to be "the first" which is starting to rotate, dragging after it the second one, heavier (0.30' on the movie).

Sorry for my English, it's not my native language. I just hope someone can understand what I'm trying to say  :)

Cheers all
Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: hartiberlin on May 21, 2014, 07:27:02 PM
Can somebody please locate the address of this William F. Skinner from Miami. Floria
in an old telephone book or address book ?

Maybe his children or descendants still live there and know what happened to this machine ?

I think Dan from Green Energy Power science is also living down there in Floria, maybe
he can have a look at it, if the machine still exists ?

Many thanks.

Regards, Stefan.
Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: hartiberlin on May 21, 2014, 07:43:39 PM

I built a precessed cylinder test a while back, just by making small gyrations of the central axis you can get a weight to displace towards the offset of the axis. Remove the cylinder and attach a arm with a heavy mass to generate torque.

Well done, yes, that could be the principle of the Skinner gravity power machine !
Can you use a gum ribbon on the black wheel to drive another small generator ?﻿
Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: TheCell on May 21, 2014, 07:55:39 PM
At 0:27 regarding one of the four columns :the big short mass is directly mounted on its driving plate, the axle of the longer mass can freely rotate within this plate, and rotates only because of its centrifugal force.
Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: gyulasun on May 21, 2014, 08:28:25 PM
Can somebody please locate the address of this William F. Skinner from Miami. Florida
in an old telephone book or address book ?

Maybe his children or descendants still live there and know what happened to this machine ?
....

Hi Stefan,

Some patent search revealed he got at least 2 granted patents of the era but the patents are not connected in any way to the gravity setup shown in the video. It also turns out from one of the patents that there existed the Skinner Manufacturing Co., Inc., Miami, Florida,  this may also help to locate him.

These are his patents I found:
US2199322 Method and means for reconditioning dry cell batteries, issued April 30, 1940
US2477210 Refrigerator drinking water cooler, issued July 26, 1949

I think member Chet here is also from Florida?

Gyula
Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: hartiberlin on May 21, 2014, 09:39:43 PM
Okay, from the patents he seems to have a company:

William F. Skinner Manufacturing Co. Inc. Miami Florida.

But I don´t find the address.

Does anyone from the USA know, how to find old addresses of companies
from the 1950s time frame ?
Many thanks.

Regards, Stefan.
Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: MarkE on May 21, 2014, 09:46:10 PM
Okay, from the patents he seems to have a company:

William F. Skinner Manufacturing Co. Inc. Miami Florida.

But I don´t find the address.

Does anyone from the USA know, how to find old addresses of companies
from the 1950s time frame ?
Many thanks.

Regards, Stefan.
If there are Thomas Registers that go back that far you might find it.
Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: hartiberlin on May 21, 2014, 10:26:08 PM
Thank you, Stefan, for your research, DreamThinkBuild for your welcome, and you are right, the upper part of the device is providing high leverage to the second stage. On the second stage also, the shorter (upper) weight it seems to be "the first" which is starting to rotate, dragging after it the second one, heavier (0.30' on the movie).

Yes, you are right, it is a 2 stage machine.
The upper part just makes only the leverage to tilt these rods back and forth
and the lower second stage then makes the tumbling of the weights.
At the bpttom of the machine is a gear that couples the rotation out

Very intersting machine.
I guess the upper part could somehow replaced by a Milkovic pendulum
device to further reduce the input power requirements.

Regards, Stefan.

this ? WOuld be great if this machine would be recovered still from an old shed or somewhere...
and could be made to rework !
Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: hartiberlin on May 21, 2014, 11:22:17 PM
in the highest available 480p resolution and placed it here.

I hope this is okay with British Pathe.

Usually ZippyShare is pretty good without too much ads..
Title: ~Gri to Hartiberlin~
Post by: gri on May 21, 2014, 11:53:04 PM
The file is infected.

Quote from: hartiberlin (http://www.overunity.com/index.php?msg=403445)
Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: gyulasun on May 22, 2014, 12:28:26 AM
The file is infected.

It is not the file which is infected but some site wants to force you to download an exe file with the same name this video file has but adds an  .exe extension to it. I found such at for instance SendMyWay if you click on the Free download: there the Win32/InstalleRex unwanted application would download first...  When you choose the Create a Download link instead of the Free download  then you have to wait for a certain time (I did not wait)
I did not find such at Zippyshare (did not go through all the places offered) .

Gyula
Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: hartiberlin on May 22, 2014, 12:47:25 AM

which try to install add bars or tool bars or something like this...

So avoid that by using ZippyShare with an Adblocker in your browser.
Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: iflewmyown on May 22, 2014, 02:40:25 AM
Check these out.
http://www.britishpathe.com/video/stills/gravity-power
Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: Staffman on May 22, 2014, 04:30:31 AM
This kind of looks like an application of something that I used to do as a kid. I would take a chair and spin it using my hand... imagine holding the top corner of the back and then balancing the chair on the leg (front leg, opposite side). I used to get it spinning by letting the weight of the chair 'fall'. It used to drive my mother nuts. You can get it spinning very quickly, by moving your hand in a circle. Just let it 'fall' and it 'seems' that there is very little energy being expended to do so. Anyway, I suspect that it's basically a flywheel effect... but I've never really thought about laying out the numbers.
Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: havuhung on May 22, 2014, 08:10:07 AM
Hi All,
Considering the video clip, the machine can really power efficient. 8)

Thank a lot.
Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: quartz on May 22, 2014, 09:18:54 AM
What strikes me in these images is the similarity with the movement of the planets.
we rotating masses on the non-aligned axes.
it looks like the planets and their satellites.
Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: havuhung on May 22, 2014, 09:53:44 AM
What strikes me in these images is the similarity with the movement of the planets.
we rotating masses on the non-aligned axes.
it looks like the planets and their satellites.
Hi quartz,
The bottom of the machine, the left side has a horizontal axis, the outer end of its rotation by transmission belt flat on a intermediate shaft mounted near the roof of the factory. The shaft has a gear system the bottom of the machine, its mechanical connection to the pair of dumbbells and rotate the shaft to tilt you see. . .           ;)
Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: havuhung on May 22, 2014, 10:14:58 AM
Hi All,
Those mechanical design and built a great machine!
Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: CuriousChris on May 22, 2014, 10:36:38 AM
That's the ugliest flywheel I have ever seen.
Title: ~Gri to Hartiberlin~
Post by: gri on May 22, 2014, 11:11:01 AM
if more than one global quote in a one post
could be displayed correctly on your forum:

ZippyShare helped. Thank you.

Quote from: hartiberlin (http://www.overunity.com/index.php?msg=403450)
So avoid that by using ZippyShare
Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: havuhung on May 22, 2014, 11:11:49 AM
That's the ugliest flywheel I have ever seen.
Hi CuriousChris,
The way it works is not the same as flywheel!.. and the effect that it is a pair of dumbbells achieve different than the cumulative force of the flywheel can be. . .  :D
Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: CANGAS on May 22, 2014, 11:24:38 AM

which try to install add bars or tool bars or something like this...

So avoid that by using ZippyShare with an Adblocker in your browser.

hartiberlin, I deeply appreciate what you are doing here. I am personally making a mighty effort to try to deliver Free Energy to the human civilization.

May I explain something to you?

Some of us, for one reason or another, do not happen to have fast computer rigs. Some of us are stuck with very, very SLOW rigs and internet connections which make it practically impossible to examine youtube videos or other materials other than the items which are the quickest and simplest to communicate with on the internet.

Some of us who are so computer-limited might be also among the set that might be the most able to actually deliver Free Energy to the human civilization.

When you distribute important information re 1939 power amplifier or whatever, it would serve your own best interest and ours, if you might distribute it also in the most accessible way assuming we have the slowest computer rig possible.

Many thanks to you!!

CANGAS 38
Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: CANGAS on May 22, 2014, 11:37:10 AM
I am having to guess about what is the working principle of this thing, since my computer rig is so slow that I have been unable to view any of the videos or such like that you all are talking about, but it sounds familiar.

I think I came across this thing a long time ago. I think it works.

I think that the most important thing is NOT whether it works, because it seems to work, but, how to remain un-murdered until it is effectively delivered into mass production and distribution to the global community.

CANGAS 39
Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: Artoj on May 22, 2014, 11:46:07 AM
Hi all
Thanks cipbranea and Stephan,  this is an interesting machine, I have quickly sketched the main elements. I might expand on this with more diagrams, I am in the middle of a few other tasks, I will try and squeeze a big effort on this if I can. Regards Arto.

Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: e2matrix on May 22, 2014, 06:43:30 PM
This kind of looks like an application of something that I used to do as a kid. I would take a chair and spin it using my hand... imagine holding the top corner of the back and then balancing the chair on the leg (front leg, opposite side). I used to get it spinning by letting the weight of the chair 'fall'. It used to drive my mother nuts. You can get it spinning very quickly, by moving your hand in a circle. Just let it 'fall' and it 'seems' that there is very little energy being expended to do so. Anyway, I suspect that it's basically a flywheel effect... but I've never really thought about laying out the numbers.
Thanks Staffman - I just totally got how this thing works after reading your post and it makes complete sense.   I've done similar things in the past and can relate to that type of action.
Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: hartiberlin on May 23, 2014, 12:22:49 AM
Hi Arto,
many thanks for the drawing,
but if you use Mediplayer Classic to go frame by frame through the downloaded video
I posted you see, that the upper rods just only go back an forth, like a pendulum.
So at the very top there must the a conversion from rotatry motion from
the drive motor belt drive to a disc that goes only back and forth for 180 degrees
and then reverses again.

So the upper 4 rods only go back and forth like a pendulum.

So it would be interesting to find out, how he the conversion from rotatry motion to
this back and forth motion is done at the very top of the machine.
Unfortunately the whole machine is only seen in the begi´nning in just a few broken frames
and unfortunately only filmed very a bright background, so it is all hard to see...

Did anybody find the address of the Skinner Manufacturing Co. Inc. in an old
Telefphone book from Miami,Fl  ?

Many thanks.

Regards, Stefan.
Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: Staffman on May 23, 2014, 12:52:01 AM
Stefan

I don't live in FL, but I have emailed the Miami-Dade Library to see if they have some old phone books that could help. If I receive a response, I'll let everyone know. I did search the Florida Secretary of State Corporations database. The Skinner Manufacturing Co. Inc. was dissolved by proclamation in 1945. The specifics are unknown, Skinner could have failed to file the proper forms; it could have been for any number of reasons. Also, Skinner's address was not listed either. I'll let you know if the library returns my email.

Staffman

Edit... (link to the business info... or should I say lack of info...)

Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: e2matrix on May 23, 2014, 02:02:47 AM
Stefan,   If you take a chair and do as Staffman described (at least his description was clear to me - probably because I had done that with a chair or similar object before) I think you can see the motion that is happening with Skinners device.    It seemed intuitive to me how this works in that you are leaning an object on an axis in a way that it wants to fall but being on an axis it will spin as long as you keep a slight pressure on the top point of the axis just keeping it ahead of where it wants to go.   With very little input it wants to spin and due to the weight and centrifugal force it may very well be a way of utilizing gravity as an energy source.   Or so that's my take on what Skinner was doing thanks to Staffman's description of this action.    Right after seeing his description I grabbed a small 4 leg chair and tried this again to get a clearer sense of this action.   On an intuitive level I'm not sure if this can create free energy but it seems it may be possible.
Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: hartiberlin on May 23, 2014, 04:17:37 AM
Thanks Staffman for the help to loacte him.

Well I might have found his death certificate in 1974:

County Recorder's Official Record Search CFN Details
CFN #1974 R 36396, Group ID #1

First Party (Code):   SKINNER, WILLIAM I S EST OF (D)   Second Party:   WHOM CONCERNED   Subdivision Name:
Legal Description:
Clerk's File No: 1974 R 36396 Rec Date:  02/13/1974 Doc Date:
Entry Date: 09/26/2007

Rec Book:  8595 \ 915
Second Party: SKINNER, WILLIAM I S EST OF

Clerk's File No: 1974 R 36396
Rec Date: 02/13/1974
Entry Date:  09/26/2007

Rec Book: 8595 \ 915

Is there any chance somebody could call such an office and

Here are more resources, but as I am from Germany, I don´t know about ancestor research in the
USA...

http://www.accessgenealogy.com/florida-genealogy/ (http://www.accessgenealogy.com/florida-genealogy/)
Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: Artoj on May 23, 2014, 06:01:56 AM
The movement of the top rod is vital as this is where it is driven, the gear on top of the rods move in a long elliptical path that touch the worm gear at about 15%(more or less) of the time, this constitutes a form of impulse drive, each arm getting an impulse when the worm gear engages, in a sequential fashion. There is enough information to build this device, the rest will be mere details. Regards Arto

Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: Staffman on May 23, 2014, 09:51:29 PM
Stefan,

I took a quick look at the genealogy web site you gave. I have found some information...

On the link below, I found where Skinner and family were listed on the 1935 census in Florida.
https://familysearch.org/pal:/MM9.3.1/TH-266-11762-126047-68?cc=1457856 (https://familysearch.org/pal:/MM9.3.1/TH-266-11762-126047-68?cc=1457856)

Skinner's youngest son William Burr Skinner (3 years old at the time, 1935) may still be alive.

A search for Skinner's son, turned up one entry for FL... Same name, same age, same city.... It lists the address and phone number.

Good luck!!!

-------
Edit for clarity.........
Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: hartiberlin on May 24, 2014, 05:23:44 AM
Many thanks Staffman.
machine of his father ? Does it still exit ? And if not, was it sold
or scraped and when ?
Many thanks.

Regards, Stefan.
Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: CuriousChris on May 24, 2014, 10:36:32 AM
Hi CuriousChris,
The way it works is not the same as flywheel!.. and the effect that it is a pair of dumbbells achieve different than the cumulative force of the flywheel can be. . .  :D

A flywheel is a store of kinetic energy. all those spinny things in the video store kinetic energy. a pendulum also stores kinetic energy.

That contraption does nothing more than store kinetic energy. so its essentially a clumsy flywheel.

And that's how he can use the lathe. The lathe uses power intermittently. thus draws it out of the "kinetic store" but I wouldn't be at all surprised if there was also another power source.

Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: CuriousChris on May 24, 2014, 10:37:52 AM

Where in this contraption is the gravity component?

Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: CANGAS on May 24, 2014, 11:17:07 AM
LOL!

What a carnival. The sketches dont at all relate to the image I imagined from the written description.  Most people, even professional technical writers, do a very poor job of communicating in words, a description of anything more complicated than a hammer.

In fact the sketches dont make any sense at all.

My previous comment about reminding me of something and how it seems to work, are out the window. Who knows what is going on with this enigmatic thing.

Restart.

CANGAS 40
Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: havuhung on May 24, 2014, 12:43:05 PM
A flywheel is a store of kinetic energy. all those spinny things in the video store kinetic energy. a pendulum also stores kinetic energy.

That contraption does nothing more than store kinetic energy. so its essentially a clumsy flywheel.

And that's how he can use the lathe. The lathe uses power intermittently. thus draws it out of the "kinetic store" but I wouldn't be at all surprised if there was also another power source.
Hi CuriousChris,
Perhaps more research should be the reason why: a machine designed to have multiple axis motion tilt swivel so complex!  Well, just the usual flywheel shaft with two bearings pillow firmly fastened on the chassis and mechanical connection to the electric motor is finished!. . much more easily and neatly. . .  ;D
Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: mscoffman on May 24, 2014, 03:05:59 PM
Hi,

I think I see how this machine is working but I am not a mechanical design expert.
I am more into computation and electronic design.

I see three functional constructions in this machine in three separate parts.
(One) transmits forces. The (Second) allows scripted movement allowing for synchronization
and averaging purposes of certain mechanical movements, the (Third) are joints allowing
for degrees of freedom so that forces can vest in terms of energy.

For example, if I had a gyroscope that had gained extra energy how would I couple
that extra energy out of a mechanism? One way would be to use a second gryoscope
underneath it that was syncronized with upper one, and a linkage to compare
the two and  couple out the extra energy that way. I'll bet that the middle linkage
is doing that fucntion.

I am becoming good at seeing that there are numerous mechanical analogs to the dual
pendulum systems. I believe that the manual rotating chair is such a system that uses
movement between two different centers of gravity of the chair to assert manual control.
I don't believe that that system is gaining much overunity energy from doing it, *but that it is
only a mechanical control mechanism* being used by Skinners machine.

In effect this Skinner system is a dual gyroscopic machine that is using precession of upper
and lower rotating gyroscopes. Note that the offsetting of small weights causes the "ice skater
moving their arms in and out to control centrifugal angular momentum velocity" to speed up
and slow down in a regular time sequence intervals the rotation rate of the upper gyroscope.
When a toy top slows down it begins to lean over under the affects of gravity, likewise when
it is sped-up it begins to straighten upright again. Note that precessional gyroscopic leaning is
not coupled to the gyroscopes rotational momentum. So I think the energy involved in leaning
over and straightening up again may not be coupled directly to the freewheeling flywheel input
energy and may be overunity. The machine is somehow recombining that the extra energy
acquired from the extra tilting energy back into the motor's rotational energy and outputting it.

I remember that there are mathematical problems associated in this area of analyzing the
operation of gyroscopes and the centripetal angular velocity changes of a spinning mechanism.

I'll bet a LEGO machine expert could rebuild a scale model of this machine using composite carbon
spindles and maybe a couple 3D printed parts.

So the fundamental operation *is* that of a flywheel but with extra gyroscopic provided goodies.

Thanks to Artoj for his excellent "remote viewing" and drawing expertise!

:S:MarkSCoffman
Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: havuhung on May 24, 2014, 05:29:26 PM
Hi mscoffman,
You have an analysis of how it's working, quite reasonable for this machine. 8)
Thanks

Havuhung
Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: Pirate88179 on May 25, 2014, 04:33:20 AM
Check these out.
http://www.britishpathe.com/video/stills/gravity-power (http://www.britishpathe.com/video/stills/gravity-power)

Wow, those stills are something else.  I can't really tell what is happening there except that this fellow, who obviously was a skilled machinist, created something that he thought was valuable.  Since he probably had a lot of knowledge on how machines work, my guess is that he might have really found some anomaly here.  Hopefully, we can find out more about this.

Has anyone searched the death records for next of kin yet?

Bill
Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: CuriousChris on May 25, 2014, 04:44:23 AM
Hi CuriousChris,
Perhaps more research should be the reason why: a machine designed to have multiple axis motion tilt swivel so complex!  Well, just the usual flywheel shaft with two bearings pillow firmly fastened on the chassis and mechanical connection to the electric motor is finished!. . much more easily and neatly. . .  ;D

Yeah Yeah I know. That's why I called it an ugly flywheel. Sheesh didnt you read that part.

Engineers must have never experimented with rotating forces operating on different axis. That's why they never discovered this before.

Anyway I am more excited about my mouse powered world saving device. it leaves this silly complex thing in the dust.

Ok gotta get back to designing the wheel. it has to be carefully fitted to the mouse or it may not work.

Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: CuriousChris on May 25, 2014, 04:51:18 AM
Hi mscoffman,
You have an analysis of how it's working, quite reasonable for this machine. 8)
Thanks

Havuhung

Aww havahung you are soo unkind.

I said it was a flywheel first and you told me I was wrong now you are saying Coffman is right because he added arms (presumably legs too as they have the skates on them)

I think my ugly flywheel accounts for skaters who aren't very pretty girls (or are blokes because I am not that way but its ok to be that way)

May the Force be with you.
Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: havuhung on May 25, 2014, 05:24:33 AM
Hi CuriousChris,
My point here is not to criticize anything about what you say. Just explain that you are not really clear to me that what is the beauty of the bad machine. I only care about the true effectiveness of this machine brings! . .
Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: havuhung on May 25, 2014, 02:05:09 PM
Hi All,
I have a comment about the effective capacity of the machine is achieved: four swinging bar at the top of the machine, see that we achieve efficient way of working (lever)! Combination of the second floor with four dumbbells and rotate the bottom with four rather large cylinder axis tilt, swivel all created powerful forces provide more power output than the input.
Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: mscoffman on May 25, 2014, 08:02:05 PM
I may be wrong but the item in the last previous post of Artoj is probably the
*output* power transmission mechanism as well as the stated input! See you want
to give the (virtual) gyrorotors a time to "evolve" their mechanical state while
freewheeling, only later to couple out the power generated after interacting with
the universe (which is what a gyroscope does) before outputting the extra power
and repeating the whole process sequence again. The input power from the motor
probably rotates the offset bar right at the very bottom which uses the drive chain
to force the bottom rotor to spin synchronously while it nutates. Note the conical
cable wires are there to help stiffen the bottom spindle reference shafts. This is so
a flexation of the upper spindle shafts feed power into the machine too. The four
upper spindle shafts come to central "point" at the very top of the machine where
the power transmission exits. Usually those factories fed the mechanical power
from above to client machines on the floor.

Someone wishing to work on a machine like this should probably have access to 3d
design software and a simulator.

:S:MarkSCoffman
Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: CuriousChris on May 26, 2014, 08:43:47 AM
I still haven't worked why its called gravity power. I think the inventor (obviously a genius amongst geniuses) is using a little diversion there.

I am still working on it and am sure I will crack it very soon.

mscoffman:

Your words are very thought provoking.

Allah be with you
Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: alfilmx on May 26, 2014, 09:50:34 AM

I may be wrong but I think that this design is similar to jhon device http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9-KVo4lxHgE
I thought that did not have the torque that jhon says
Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: Artoj on May 26, 2014, 12:37:55 PM
Great find alfilmx, this is exactly the principle of Skinners device.

Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: DreamThinkBuild on May 26, 2014, 05:43:21 PM
Hi Hartiberlin,

Quote
Can you use a gum ribbon on the black wheel to drive another small generator ??

I built a very quick model(pic) but I need to tear it apart and make it much bigger so I can get a larger weight and longer arm on it. The top is the drive motor it just pushes the shaft around with a bar, the shaft is allowed to turn freely as the axis shifts and the falling weight adds the torque. Which is transmitted through a universal joint to the (dc motor as)generator below which is hooked to a LED. I do notice some interesting effects with it but it's not at the point where I can make any definite conclusion whether pro or con.

Hi Arto,

Really nice drawings.

Hi MSCoffman,

I think you are right on the point of two gyroscopes. If we look at Skinners machine just as motion it is similar to a mechanized Larmor precession. It could be simplified to a one way pendulum by placing a spherical joint in the center as a pivot and having a offset magnetic weight driven on the top portion while the bottom acts a counterweight. It would be like a one way orbital lever, to take power off we would surround it with coils but Lenz law would introduce nutation to the orbit(Keplers law of areas). Through conservation of angular momentum it would force the lever back inward giving it a slingshot effect from the offset weight (spiral path) which may aid in output as it reaches the next coil. The challenge is driving the offset weight with a balanced system otherwise the orbit will be elliptical and the spherical bearings would suffer mechanical fatigue.

Another idea that came to mind while building the Lego model was finding a way to simplify the idea and remove a lot of the mechanical structure. The thought of building a plate with a shaft through it then just pulsing the coils in sequence to shift the axis. I attached a picture that shows the idea better.
Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: hartiberlin on May 27, 2014, 05:04:49 AM
Did anyone from the US yet call Skinner´s son and asked about the machine ?
Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: ARMCORTEX on May 27, 2014, 05:27:13 AM
Bobby Amrasingham drives an eccentric weight via flexible coupling and harvests this with a clever ''wobble translator''.

edit

This was posted by a knowledgeable and wise man.
Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: Marsing on May 27, 2014, 06:02:29 AM
Bobby Amrasingham drives an eccentric weight via flexible coupling and harvests this with a clever ''wobble translator''.

https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/51593515/bobby%20new.phz

This was posted by a knowledgeable and wise man.

What is phz file,  can you post jpeg  or png of that file?
Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: ARMCORTEX on May 27, 2014, 06:21:49 AM
Unwise be the profane.

Thou shall be initiated only when thou shall be wise.
Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: Marsing on May 27, 2014, 06:36:27 AM
Unwise be the profane.

Thou shall be initiated only when thou shall be wise.

well, there are not everyone have such sotfware to open that file, including me, old pc here  with limited internet connection, etc..  if you won't , never mind.
Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: ARMCORTEX on May 27, 2014, 06:42:07 AM
Phz files can only be opened by a special program developped by NASA.

No profane has access to this exclusive program, wich is reserved for the elite and initiated.

If you are lucky enough to be one of these , you put the file in scenes directory.
Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: Marsing on May 27, 2014, 07:47:58 AM

I guess (but sure) it is 3D animation with complex calculation, something like openGL or GLscene,  i will forget it. as my pc will reject before i start it.  no need to know  mystery further.
Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: Kator01 on May 27, 2014, 02:47:31 PM

I do not like this kind of mystery-behaviour. One even can not be sure if the file is infected. I get the impressionn that you yourself have not opened it and leaving this experiment to someone else
You challenge me, do not do it another time because you are wasting members time here. Do not forget : This is an open-source-forum.

Scroll down to the bottom of the page and drop the file in the blue frame for analysis

http://www.solvusoft.com/en/file-extensions/file-extension-phz/ (http://www.solvusoft.com/en/file-extensions/file-extension-phz/)

Regards

Kator01
Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: TechStuf on May 28, 2014, 01:46:23 AM
Quote
I am becoming good at seeing that there are numerous mechanical analogs to the dual
pendulum systems. I believe that the manual rotating chair is such a system that uses
movement between two different centers of gravity of the chair to assert manual control.
I don't believe that that system is gaining much overunity energy from doing it, *but that it is
only a mechanical control mechanism* being used by Skinners machine.

In effect this Skinner system is a dual gyroscopic machine that is using precession of upper
and lower rotating gyroscopes. Note that the offsetting of small weights causes the "ice skater
moving their arms in and out to control centrifugal angular momentum velocity" to speed up
and slow down in a regular time sequence intervals the rotation rate of the upper gyroscope.
When a toy top slows down it begins to lean over under the affects of gravity, likewise when
it is sped-up it begins to straighten upright again. Note that precessional gyroscopic leaning is
not coupled to the gyroscopes rotational momentum. So I think the energy involved in leaning
over and straightening up again may not be coupled directly to the freewheeling flywheel input
energy and may be overunity. The machine is somehow recombining that the extra energy
acquired from the extra tilting energy back into the motor's rotational energy and outputting it.

I remember that there are mathematical problems associated in this area of analyzing the
operation of gyroscopes and the centripetal angular velocity changes of a spinning mechanism.

I'll bet a LEGO machine expert could rebuild a scale model of this machine using composite carbon
spindles and maybe a couple 3D printed parts.

So the fundamental operation *is* that of a flywheel but with extra gyroscopic provided goodies.

Thanks to Artoj for his excellent "remote viewing" and drawing expertise!

:S:MarkSCoffman

Worthy observations, Mark!  Notice the peculiar similarity to Finsrud's machine, though inverted.  The longer cylinder weights are angled to the shorter heavy cylinders to provide a spring tensioned buffer for load changes, evening out performance, reducing stress and reducing the overall energy required to maintain momentum. (Newton's First "law")  The upper levers pointing skyward above the machine, drive the rocking of the multiple axes for the system, and are in turn, driven by the small motor, trading rotary speed for the prodigious leverage necessary to initiate and regulate the system.  What Skinner has done, essentially, is vastly multiply the leverage he first noticed perhaps by idly spinning a chair as have many lads through the years.  Intuitively, one may notice that much kinetic energy can be created and maintained very easily in this fashion.  Heavy weights such as those shown in the video would make effective use of the deceptively simple principles being exploited.

As one is able to balance gravitic and centripetal/centrifugal forces through such minor inputs at the axis, an aggregate flywheel is created which 'siphons' gravitic energy in a manner so simple, that it is easily overlooked.  Just playing with the "spinning chair effect" will quickly educate one in achieving enlightening balances between the forces involved.  One may be startled at how quickly the forces are multiplied, such that the strength required to keep the system stable and moving in an efficient arcuate motion, may be mistaken for force generated.  Imagine spinning the same chair in the same fashion, but with a metal ring to keep the axis eccentric with only an impetus to drive the system required.  That's when the bells begin to ring and the lights begin to flash.

1200% gains in the system as displayed?  Doubtful. But certainly a worthwhile step into the future past.

Zero doubt that Skinner's device converted gravitic energy to useful work.

TS
Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: not_a_mib on May 28, 2014, 06:20:10 AM
What is phz file,  can you post jpeg  or png of that file?

This appears to be an Algodoo mechanical model file set in zip format.
If you change file file suffix from phz to zip, it should unpack with any zip tool, revealing an Algodoo model file scene.phn which contains readable program text, and some image files.  The Algodoo physics modeler software is available at http://www.algodoo.com (http://www.algodoo.com) .

These physics programs use traditional pro-gravity under-unity mathematical models.  A mechanical simulation showing overunity or space-drive behavior can be caused by numerical badness such as underflow or divide-by-zero in the simulation code.
Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: Marsing on May 28, 2014, 07:30:22 AM

thank @ not_a_mib.   i see now a picture and this, "Algodoo scene created by Algodoo v2.1.0".

Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: turbogt16v on May 28, 2014, 01:44:45 PM
http://postimg.org/image/b1a15g7rx/

ok there is simplified draw of the device.

1 an 2 are generators

f1 is smaller than F2 so its overunity

but the key is how to transmit power over axis between 1 and 2 weight
Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: Artoj on May 28, 2014, 03:05:07 PM
Hi all, I am still drawing a complete picture(with measurements), it just takes time. Here are some more details that should help. Regards Arto

Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: noonespecial on May 28, 2014, 03:54:17 PM
This reminds me of this device which is allegedly attributed to Jim Murray. There may or may not be any precession in his design which would be the biggest difference:
Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: turbogt16v on May 29, 2014, 01:17:44 PM
http://s28.postimg.org/5yhmqdw3x/www.jpg

the devices have similar principal

I think that fiscal it would work ,having in mind that F1 generator  starts first and F2 generator starts after the spin of the weight

did get the needed speed to charge th F2 generator that works harder than F1 generator.

If anyone has some ideas on this please post..
Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: Kator01 on May 30, 2014, 01:33:14 AM
Hello noonespecial,

do you have a link to the Website you got these pictures from ?
Or can you please provide better quality ( bigger size, not compressed ) of these pictures.
This device is very interesting however I see a possible flaw therefore a better quality would be

Regards
Kator01
Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: ARMCORTEX on May 30, 2014, 07:24:17 AM
It's a mechanical amplifier ,by Jim Murray, in the 80's

I doubt you would see, with your small brain, a mistake by Jim Murray, who has a big big brain.
Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: qiman on May 30, 2014, 08:08:06 AM
Congratulations Arto, you mostly have it right. Looks like you've been photocopying my drawings!  ;)

Just kidding - you know I love your work.

That John device though is not the same mechanism and putting two weights opposite on the shaft defeats the asymmetry of the system. His attachment at the top is also going in a circle - not elliptical and if I grab the bottom weight on his device, it will stop the input because they are in lock-step with each other and the input and output MUST NOT BE directly proportional to each other.

If you grab the output, you should be able to do so and the input can still spin without locking up and visa versa - lock up the input and the bottom weight can still free spin around the axis. We're dealing with open dissipative systems that are out of equilibrium. If the input and output are directly related to each other, then forget about it - no gains.

I know this because I started to replicate the Skinner machine almost 2 years ago and have had a working model for about a year. After I had my conference last year, Jim Murray were at my home with Peter Lindemann when Peter interviewed Jim live on the internet here in my office - Jim saw my basic setup in my shop... I saw the references to Jim's mechanical device that someone posted. Jim is a master at both the electrical, math and mechanical devices.

I don't have a lot of time to get into this, but in my forum - http://www.energeticforum.com/renewable-energy/17195-william-f-skinner-1939-gravity-power.html I'll start a thread and will lay down the basics of how the Skinner machine works. It's not a mystery and like I said, I've done it.

One thing that would be helpful to me is if anyone can tell me a very simple way to rotate an iphone video 90 degrees - that is what I used to shoot some demonstrations of the priniciples back then...been using Android every since.

Anyway, I was going to demonstrate it at this year's conference but I had a lot of pressure from a lot of people to do a presentation on the Plasma Ignition so that is what I'm doing and was going to plan to release the Skinner replica at the 2015 conference. But since some of you seem genuinely interested in this, I'm open to sharing some...depends on how many people take what I share and actually apply it with some real builds. If I see that, I'll share more.

Stefan, feel free to copy and paste anything I put on my forum here for your readers.

So you know I'm not kidding - I just put this up: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jJDCgmtITRs

Aaron

Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: quartz on May 30, 2014, 10:48:53 AM
I think it lacks a degree of freedom in this model.  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jJDCgmtITRs
On the sequence that I selected https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=rxIRaJlTD4Y#t=29
in the link can be seen that the longer the long cylinder can rotate about its axis independently with respect to the smaller cylinder.
I think see the angle between the small cylinder and the long cylinder not fixed.﻿

Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: turbogt16v on May 30, 2014, 01:16:05 PM
And i just thought this tread has no trolls...

How can someone replicate  working device ,along that has his own forum for more spam,

and does not put any measurements, pictures, videos.. of the working device.

This site is good ,but you have to put a lot of effort just to learn something valuable among the sea of misinformation.

All the people that really intend to replicate or just try to understand this device or similar one,

i ask them  can they schem  a fizik forces that work on this device thank you
Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: noonespecial on May 30, 2014, 04:27:07 PM
Hello noonespecial,

do you have a link to the Website you got these pictures from ?
Or can you please provide better quality ( bigger size, not compressed ) of these pictures.
This device is very interesting however I see a possible flaw therefore a better quality would be

Regards
Kator01

These were borrowed from Jeff Otto's website:
http://bwt.jeffotto.com/bwt_catalogue/electricity.htm
Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: noonespecial on May 30, 2014, 05:23:12 PM

If you grab the output, you should be able to do so and the input can still spin without locking up and visa versa - lock up the input and the bottom weight can still free spin around the axis. We're dealing with open dissipative systems that are out of equilibrium. If the input and output are directly related to each other, then forget about it - no gains.

Aaron

Jim Murray agrees with you. This is taken from Jim Murray's Mechanical Amplifier video which I assume most here have seen and Jim makes the following observation:
"The reason why power is conserved in an ordinary transmission is because of where we choose to place the prime mover. If the prime mover is placed on the axis of symmetry, I don't care what arrangement you have, any power gained as part of the system will be destroyed when the output is brought back to the center."

Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: qiman on May 30, 2014, 09:05:09 PM
I think it lacks a degree of freedom in this model.  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jJDCgmtITRs (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jJDCgmtITRs)
in the link can be seen that the longer the long cylinder can rotate about its axis independently with respect to the smaller cylinder.
I think see the angle between the small cylinder and the long cylinder not fixed.﻿

What do you mean it lacks a degree of freedom?

The lower heavier weight rotates around a fixed axis at the bottom. At the top of that shaft connected to the lower weight, it moves in an oval shape. The graph paper diagrams at the end of my video show you 100% the mechanism to translate back and forth oscillating motion to circular motion that causes the top of the shaft to move in an elliptical orbit. The back and forth kicks the upper weight back and forth while the momentum of the upper weight moves in a general circular orbit. As the upper weight moves that "translation" plate (i find it funny someone used that same word here as I do) - that pulls the top of the upper shaft around to FOLLOW the path of the upper weight. The lower weight follows the upper weight.

Again, that diagram I show at the end is the sequence of the mechanism and you can replicate the entire thing by understanding that in addition to knowing how to keep the lower weight shaft moving independently and not in lock step with the input section. With those two thing, you can replicate the entire machine.
Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: qiman on May 30, 2014, 09:22:29 PM

Jim Murray agrees with you. This is taken from Jim Murray's Mechanical Amplifier video which I assume most here have seen and Jim makes the following observation:
"The reason why power is conserved in an ordinary transmission is because of where we choose to place the prime mover. If the prime mover is placed on the axis of symmetry, I don't care what arrangement you have, any power gained as part of the system will be destroyed when the output is brought back to the center."

Here is an excerpt we put out about mechanical amplifiers - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xNeLgqrXJiw that was filmed at some event put out by Greer - he mentions that in this recent interview: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YhaAxQjyeC0

Yes, that is the concept that many people have a hard time wrapping their heads around.

For example, another legitimate "ou" mechanical amplifier is the Veljko 2 State Oscillator:

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

(http://www.veljkomilkovic.com/Images/oscillator_animation.gif)

As it is rocking, if you hold the large hammer down on the "anvil" end and prevent it from moving - the input pendulum at the right side will continue to rock back and forth until it stops. It is not in lockstep with the output. They must be indirectly connected so the output is not proportional to the input. Otherwise, gravitational potential energy cannot enter the system and add to the work being done. But in the Veljko arrangement, it can as well as in the Skinner machine. Later, I'll show a clip showing how I separate them - it's pretty easy. The same principle applies to the Bedini SG, Jim Murray's SERPS device and every single legitimate Over 1.0 COP device - not just mechanical over 1.0 COP machines.

Otherwise, it is a closed loop system that will wind down to equilibrium (dead stop) and can't put external gravitational potential to use.

For example, some people look at Veljko's device and compare it to a grasshopper oil well pump because they refuse to acknowledge non-equilibrium principles.

(http://thumbs.dreamstime.com/thumblarge_556/12898243606o77f4.jpg)

If you stop the output pumping section and lock it up, it is directly connected to the input and will lock up the whole machine. The input will not be able to move at all. And likewise, if you lock up the input section, the output section will not continue to move until it dies down, it will simply instantly stop since it is in lockstep. This machine is a closed loop machine where there it cannot make use of free gravitational potential input. Huge difference from the open looped Vejlko machine and the Skinner machine.
Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: gotoluc on May 31, 2014, 04:24:23 AM
Hi everyone,

I find this invention very interesting. Thanks to all for sharing.

I made a clean looped video of the top of the device to better observe the top mechanical movement. I'm quite sure it moves in a circular motion.

Hope the video upload works. If you also select loop in your media player it will keep starting over.

Luc
Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: Artoj on May 31, 2014, 05:50:19 AM
Thanks Luc
I have drawn a mechanism which matches the top config in the loop video. No more mysteries now, only the principles of translations need to be clarified, so further improvements and understanding will result from our collected effort. Also thanks Aaron for expanding the ideas and clarity of these types of devices, we can all gain from revisiting ground uncovered by all these researchers. Regards Arto.

Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: havuhung on May 31, 2014, 05:57:03 AM
Hi everyone,

I find this invention very interesting. Thanks to all for sharing.

I made a clean looped video of the top of the device to better observe the top mechanical movement. I'm quite sure it moves in a circular motion.

Hope the video upload works. If you also select loop in your media player it will keep starting over.

Luc
Hi gotoluc,
Thank you.

Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: havuhung on May 31, 2014, 06:03:05 AM
Hi Artoj,
Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: ARMCORTEX on May 31, 2014, 09:02:00 AM
Too big, too expensive.

Better designs and higher COP can be made I have no doubt.

But I like those arms above  ;D
Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: gotoluc on May 31, 2014, 03:12:59 PM
Thanks Luc
I have drawn a mechanism which matches the top config in the loop video. No more mysteries now.
Regards Arto.

Hi Artoj,

I believe your top mechanical drawing is correct but what comes clear is the motor shaft could be mounted directly to the center gear which should cause less pulley and belt losses. So the question is, did the inventor go though all that trouble and waste just so the electric motor could be visible for demonstration purpose?

Luc
Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: ARMCORTEX on May 31, 2014, 04:58:29 PM
There is a high probality that skinner made a few designs.

Seek understanding of the mechanism of how the motion encourages increase of torque.

Qiman is wrong when he says these are open loop.

These are positive feedback, and I a, not just talking of relooping electricity to the prime mover.
Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: Artoj on May 31, 2014, 07:28:48 PM
Here are the guesstimates for the pulleys. Regards Arto.

Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: qiman on May 31, 2014, 08:23:52 PM
Qiman is wrong when he says these are open loop.

These are positive feedback, and I a, not just talking of relooping electricity to the prime mover.

It is open loop and it is also positive feedback. If you don't know how both are true, reread my post on how the input and output are disconnected.
Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: DreamThinkBuild on May 31, 2014, 08:29:03 PM
Hi Aaron,

Thank you for that information.

Hi Artoj,

Really clear drawings, thank you.

Hi Luc,

The only reason I see the top part is for leverage against the angular load applied to the shaft. I see this in the Lego model where even though the shaft isn't directly coupled to the prime mover the shafts weight will push to one side of the ring which adds a load to the prime mover. It could be redesigned where the motor just pushes a spherical bearing around a support ring reducing the angular load. The whole goal is to get the prime mover to just shift the axis, it's up to the falling weight to generate the actual torque in the shaft. I attached a picture of a simplified version.
Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: ARMCORTEX on May 31, 2014, 08:45:15 PM
Just because the drive is offsetted doesnt mean you will get infinite gain.

I think Chalkalis claimed something like 300 times OU , while others said 8-10.

Thats the maximum I heard about, so you are incorrect, and according to you Jim Murray would have infinite OU but his factor is only 2.
Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: AlanA on May 31, 2014, 09:07:21 PM
thanks to cipbranea who puts our attention to the Skinner invention.
But it seems to be a hard way to find out how it really works.

Someone in the Forum puts the attention to TheJohnDevice which is at YouTube since last year. It seems to me that this very clever and easy to understanding Invention is underappreciatet. I did some researches and found out that the patent was granted two weeks ago (which does not means very much): see: WO2014072966A2

Well I think TheJohnDevice is the best gravity engine I have ever seen. What Quiman #77 said makes me thinking.
He has written:
"That John device though is not the same mechanism and putting two weights opposite on the shaft defeats the asymmetry of the system. His attachment at the top is also going in a circle - not elliptical and if I grab the bottom weight on his device, it will stop the input because they are in lock-step with each other and the input and output MUST NOT BE directly proportional to each other.

If you grab the output, you should be able to do so and the input can still spin without locking up and visa versa - lock up the input and the bottom weight can still free spin around the axis. We're dealing with open dissipative systems that are out of equilibrium. If the input and output are directly related to each other, then forget about it - no gains."
I think he is right. But if the Input and the Output is a steady Output I would not matter (for example to load a battery). I think it would not work as an engine for a car or so on which accelerations and stops.

Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: qiman on June 01, 2014, 01:22:35 AM
Just because the drive is offsetted doesnt mean you will get infinite gain.

I think Chalkalis claimed something like 300 times OU , while others said 8-10.

Thats the maximum I heard about, so you are incorrect, and according to you Jim Murray would have infinite OU but his factor is only 2.

Not sure who you're responding to but someone's claims are irrelevant of 300 times OU. Where is a replication to verify at least some of it? Replicating the concept and getting positive results are all important and until that happens, it is just a claim. 8-10 is quite a bit different from 300 - so with that kind of variation, what can we really believe? Both cases sound good to me no matter how big or small.

With the Skinner machine, here is an old device with claims and I replicated the entire mechanism and verified with mechanical work measurements as well as electrical input (way lower than Skinner - but it is a crude build) - so you're only making assumptions without ever having built this mechanism. The amount of "OU" that I can measure is irrelevant - the fact that it is - is what counts. If you create 1hp for 745 watts instead of 746, you're overunity. My own build is quite crude and not optimized. Needs heavier weight instead of the aluminum, etc... but the improved and simplified input mechanism that I created could make it really easy but I already shared more than enough.
Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: qiman on June 01, 2014, 01:32:07 AM
Well I think TheJohnDevice is the best gravity engine I have ever seen. What Quiman #77 said makes me thinking.
He has written:
"That John device though is not the same mechanism and putting two weights opposite on the shaft defeats the asymmetry of the system. His attachment at the top is also going in a circle - not elliptical and if I grab the bottom weight on his device, it will stop the input because they are in lock-step with each other and the input and output MUST NOT BE directly proportional to each other.

If you grab the output, you should be able to do so and the input can still spin without locking up and visa versa - lock up the input and the bottom weight can still free spin around the axis. We're dealing with open dissipative systems that are out of equilibrium. If the input and output are directly related to each other, then forget about it - no gains."
I think he is right. But if the Input and the Output is a steady Output I would not matter (for example to load a battery). I think it would not work as an engine for a car or so on which accelerations and stops.

I saw these claims about that machine, but making a claim on that John device of x watts in to move y pounds doesn't mean anything. If there is an ice sled on a frozen lake with a hundred pounds in it, a little kid could push it and make it budge, but that doesn't mean overunity.

That machine needs to have a rotor on the shaft with a 1 foot circumference for example, put a leather strap around it and pull both ends against the pull with spring loaded scales to calculate the real mechanical work done. When that work is done, then see how many watts is being drawn from the power supply on the front end to do that work.

I just posted the video on my blog so you can see the "secrets" to the entire mechanism: http://emediapress.com/2014/05/31/revealed-gravity-power-secrets/

Also shows why the input and output have to be coupled together but are able to move independently of each other - otherwise, gravity is not contributing anything. I also show exactly what is mean by the lower weight "always falling" and how to accomplish it with this mechanism. It also shows how to translate the input lever action from a mostly back and forth motion to the translation coupler which causes it to move in a rotary fashion - yet, the center of axis that the upper weight and shaft for lower weight keeps moving so it causes the elliptical orbit.

That is now enough for anyone to replicate the entire machine so everyone can do their own measurements. I hope that helps. I'm putting this all out really quick to prevent it from going down the wrong track with disinformation, which happens all to often with too many legitimate "OU" machines.
Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: ARMCORTEX on June 01, 2014, 07:49:25 AM

I have seen many novelties, some are good, some are excellent. But I am on a quest for ''holy grail'' COP, my needs are more than 10 kW OU for such a  large device.

I know that your friend, Peter Lindemann, doesnt like this video, whats up with that ?

Whats up with his device too ? Such a shameful device, such a slow mover, sometimes I wonder ...

Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: qiman on June 01, 2014, 08:16:02 AM

I have seen many novelties, some are good, some are excellent. But I am on a quest for ''holy grail'' COP, my needs are more than 10 kW OU for such a  large device.

I know that your friend, Peter Lindemann, doesnt like this video, whats up with that ?

Whats up with his device too ? Such a shameful device, such a slow mover, sometimes I wonder ...

Peter is entitled to his own opinion and the website promoting what you are referencing is Peswiki, which is owned by Sterling, not Peter so take it up with Sterling.

Before judging anything Peter is doing - what contributions have you made? Can you post links to your developments? Surely you have posted your own builds so your criticism is justified of other people's work.

If you think the Chalkalis machine is valid, you will probably solve your energy needs. Seems that you already found the machine you should build - definitely much simpler than the Skinner machine.

Peter is one of the most prolific builders I have ever met and I value his opinion highly. If you disagree, that is your right. I saw this thread posted about the Skinner machine so I'm revealing what it is. Anyone is free to take it or leave it.
Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: ARMCORTEX on June 01, 2014, 08:19:23 AM
We should make Gravity powered battle robots.

I'll take both you and Lindemann on in a robots wars arena of the future, to prove our e-peen.

Lets give ourselves 10 years ok. Probably this will be after ww3, can we do this ?
Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: ARMCORTEX on June 01, 2014, 08:35:04 AM
Nuclear brinksmanship is going on.

I have already been as nice to you as I was to myself, but I will never respect the profane for their lack of ingenuity.

Its up to you, to decide whats good and bad.
Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: havuhung on June 01, 2014, 02:43:41 PM
Here are the guesstimates for the pulleys. Regards Arto.
Hi Artoj,
Maybe this should be reviewed: design of single phase electric motors on the machine Skinner, in the 1939 period can be kind of asynchronous electric motors with 1450 RPM  1/8 HP. . .
Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: ramset on June 01, 2014, 03:04:28 PM
Dear Armchair Cortex,

Perhaps your disingenuous behavior would be perceived as Profane by  those that actually build and share what they build.
It is all Too easy to throw stones from the armchair ,whilst making Profane claims.....

Chet
Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: Artoj on June 01, 2014, 05:33:25 PM
Thanks havuhung, I drew the 1st version so Luc could see why he had used many pulleys. I do have a lot of material on old motors, the one I found is approximate in design, and was very popular in the 30's. My working sizes are now much closer to the original Skinner machine. Regards Arto.

Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: iflewmyown on June 01, 2014, 06:09:32 PM
Thank you very much for all your drawings they are most helpful.
Garry
Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: ARMCORTEX on June 01, 2014, 06:42:15 PM
Ramset you rat, now I have an excuse to hate your guts.

I will remember this. 8)

Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: ramset on June 02, 2014, 01:41:39 AM
ArmChair

live long and prosper ......

Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: noonespecial on June 02, 2014, 04:31:31 AM
From description:
"Miami, Florida, United States of America.
Various shots of inventor William Skinner in his workshop as he demonstrates a model of his gravity power machine. It has weights that spin round and multiply the power of an 1/8 horsepower motor by 1200 % - enough energy to power a town of 3,500 at a cost of £1 a month. William uses the power of the model to work a 12 foot lathe that cuts ribbons of steel."

Well actually it says that if you use a 1 HP motor you could supply a town of 3500 with power.

I realize that the consumer electrical demand in 1939 was considerably less than today, however the numbers don't add up.
If you multiply a 1 HP motor by 1200% you get 12 HP. Do you really think 12 HP will provide enough electrical power for 3500 people?

Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: havuhung on June 02, 2014, 08:04:06 AM
Hi noonespecial,
Yeah, thought the same thing, right from the beginning I read it. I also have a little doubt and I was trying to calculate the electric power supply to a number of people in the ward, as the article refers to is not possible!!!  But my personal thought, there is a misunderstanding in the statement of the inventor, or the error due to who wrote the article, this causes an exaggerated too high for real power of this machine?. .   But if everyone thoroughly review the video, then this machine can be OU.
Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: qiman on June 02, 2014, 08:34:29 AM
Hi noonespecial,
Yeah, thought the same thing, right from the beginning I read it. I also have a little doubt and I was trying to calculate the electric power supply to a number of people in the ward, as the article refers to is not possible!!!  But my personal thought, there is a misunderstanding in the statement of the inventor, or the error due to who wrote the article, this causes an exaggerated too high for real power of this machine?. .   But if everyone thoroughly review the video, then this machine can be OU.

I pretty much agree with this that there is something being erroneously stated here.

However, 1/8 of a HP is 93.25 watts at 100% efficiency (being that 746 watts is 1 hp ideally).

93.25 x 12 times = 1119 watts output from the machine at 1200% if we're starting with 1/8 hp so with real losses, let's say that is 1000 watts worth of power he is producing, which is about 1.34 HP. Can he do all that work with the lathe, back and forth saw, etc... all for 1.34 hp of mechanical work or 1000 watts continuous?

That lathe is a lot beefier than my 9x19 lathe from Grizzly.  At fully loaded, it draws 1276 watts and I can't cut 1/4" ribbons of steel with that much power.

Because of the real work demonstration Skinner is showing, he may be grossly understating what his machine is really producing. It may be 5000% of COP 50.0 for example. By observing what he is doing with the output of the machine, it certainly would require much much more than 1200% of 1/8 HP input.

If his 1/8 hp input with losses gives him 1000 watts of work at 1200% but it is really 4.2 times that, that would be 4200 watts continuous and if we multiple that by 8 times, that is 33.33 hp worth of work, which is about 23k watts.

At 23k watts / 3500 people = 6.5 watts continuous for each person. Obviously not everyone will be using it at the same time but it still doesn't seem enough. What electrical loads would they have? A radio and some lights? Hot water would be steam plant heated for many places at that time, etc... it's a good question what someone in 1939 in America would be drawing on average.

In any case, I think he is actually producing much more than 1200% of 1/8 hp to do the work he is demonstrating.

Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: turbogt16v on June 02, 2014, 12:44:45 PM
I really don't know why you people argue how much amount of power does it bring,
it is overunity and that is it.
It will always give more power ,
If you want a few wats more yous wait a few sec more.

Its is not good to argue about meanles facts
Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: gotoluc on June 02, 2014, 07:49:58 PM
Thanks havuhung, I drew the 1st version so Luc could see why he had used many pulleys. I do have a lot of material on old motors, the one I found is approximate in design, and was very popular in the 30's. My working sizes are now much closer to the original Skinner machine. Regards Arto.

Great research work Arto!

Thank you for taking the time to work this out and share

Luc
Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: noonespecial on June 02, 2014, 10:28:39 PM
I pretty much agree with this that there is something being erroneously stated here.

However, 1/8 of a HP is 93.25 watts at 100% efficiency (being that 746 watts is 1 hp ideally).

93.25 x 12 times = 1119 watts output from the machine at 1200% if we're starting with 1/8 hp so with real losses, let's say that is 1000 watts worth of power he is producing, which is about 1.34 HP. Can he do all that work with the lathe, back and forth saw, etc... all for 1.34 hp of mechanical work or 1000 watts continuous?

That lathe is a lot beefier than my 9x19 lathe from Grizzly.  At fully loaded, it draws 1276 watts and I can't cut 1/4" ribbons of steel with that much power.

Because of the real work demonstration Skinner is showing, he may be grossly understating what his machine is really producing. It may be 5000% of COP 50.0 for example. By observing what he is doing with the output of the machine, it certainly would require much much more than 1200% of 1/8 HP input.

If his 1/8 hp input with losses gives him 1000 watts of work at 1200% but it is really 4.2 times that, that would be 4200 watts continuous and if we multiple that by 8 times, that is 33.33 hp worth of work, which is about 23k watts.

At 23k watts / 3500 people = 6.5 watts continuous for each person. Obviously not everyone will be using it at the same time but it still doesn't seem enough. What electrical loads would they have? A radio and some lights? Hot water would be steam plant heated for many places at that time, etc... it's a good question what someone in 1939 in America would be drawing on average.

In any case, I think he is actually producing much more than 1200% of 1/8 hp to do the work he is demonstrating.

There is a possible alternate explanation I think.

If we take the initial 1/8 HP motor and drop the motor speed (and consequently increase the applied torque) through the gearing of the pulleys down to the assumed 60 RPM being applied to the upper section with the long lever arms, then, multiply this by the leverage of the long arms through the pivot to the 'translation plate', the force being applied to each of the 4 rotating assemblies could be the equivalent of 1200% or 1.5 HP to each (not including transmission losses). Hmm sorry for the run-on sentence.  :)

If this were true, and we then had approximately 6 HP (before losses) that would seem to square with the power being demonstrated to run the lathe, drill press and industrial sized hack saw.

Just a thought.
Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: havuhung on June 04, 2014, 07:44:01 AM
Hi All,
Received from snapshot screen, there is an arc, can be as a steel cable that runs continuously reversal, synchronization with the top of the lever bar. I do not understand, they have contributed to the need for activities this place? . .
Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: Artoj on June 04, 2014, 03:21:13 PM
Here is an update on the top mechanism. Regards Arto.

Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: gotoluc on June 04, 2014, 04:12:43 PM
Hi All,
Received from snapshot screen, there is an arc, can be as a steel cable that runs continuously reversal, synchronization with the top of the lever bar. I do not understand, they have contributed to the need for activities this place? . .

At first I also thought there was an arc mechanism of some kind at that location. This is one of the reasons I made the looped video, to better observe it.
I finally concluded it's the same as the other 3 visible upper bars moving in a rotation but it's mostly not visible because the film is overexposed by the light from the window, so it's hiding most of that bars activity but movement is detectable when the bar edges line up with the frame posts and causing a visible arc because it's rotating in a circle.

Luc
Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: havuhung on June 04, 2014, 05:26:22 PM
Hi gotoluc,
Thanks
Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: rc4 on June 04, 2014, 10:32:37 PM
Hi all,

It's not a gravity machine, it uses gravity for change torque on axis. Gravity can be changed by anything else. Take 2 objects in rotation 2D (free is better or at least axis more free), if a torque is applied to one object other receive the same in other direction, but like moments of inertia are not the same, each torque don't move same angle. Energy from torque is torque by angle, angle depend of moment of inertia.
Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: gotoluc on June 04, 2014, 11:14:50 PM
Hi all,

It's not a gravity machine, it uses gravity for change torque on axis. Gravity can be changed by anything else. Take 2 objects in rotation 2D (free is better or at least axis more free), if a torque is applied to one object other receive the same in other direction, but like moments of inertia are not the same, each torque don't move same angle. Energy from torque is torque by angle, angle depend of moment of inertia.

So if gravity doesn't makes the weight turn then it should work in space right?... can you visualize it working because I can't

Luc
Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: rc4 on June 04, 2014, 11:48:47 PM
Weight is only there for create forces and inertia between 2 objects, like spring but with spring the distance in rotation is limited to oscillations. I can't imagine how this system works, lack of datas. Think only in 2D first, 2 objects in free rotation with friction, friction give torque to each object, but with different moment of inertia the work from each torque is not the same.

If I'm right, each "arm" produce a torque, this torque is transfert to main system, but moment of inertia is not the same so the work too.
Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: turbogt16v on June 05, 2014, 03:58:26 PM
the device is not powered by gravity,but it uses gravity to ad more power on lover axis so the device would practical take
gravity that act on weight and ad it to device forse on lower axis.
Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: seychelles on June 05, 2014, 04:27:27 PM
hi guys let us cut all the bullshit let us find somebody who can but build the machine and let all just finance it.. I am a gambler and I believe it did do what it says it did..so I will start with \$20...and let us not waste time lets just do it..
Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: rc4 on June 05, 2014, 04:39:06 PM
hi guys let us cut all the bullshit let us find somebody who can but build the machine and let all just finance it.. I am a gambler and I believe it did do what it says it did..so I will start with \$20...and let us not waste time lets just do it..

It's important to understand how the machine works, if not maybe you forget something and the machine don't give energy, and you think it's a bad idea. You have a brain, you can use it.

Maybe each centrifugal force give a torque to the central plate (where 3 objects are connected). The central plate turn around its center of gravity due to FC1p/FC2p, this torque is apply to the motor too but like it don't have same moment of inertia (it's logical if I'm looking at masses), the works return to the motor is not the same. The torque around the center of gravity of plate added a works for the system.

Note centrifugal forces don't add work and don't substract too. I speak about a torque, center of gravity, and moment of inertia.
Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: turbogt16v on June 06, 2014, 09:20:31 AM
nice to see some constructive ideas,apart from few Einstein that argue about meaningless facts...
to seychelles ,you can construct your own device in lover measurements and with only one rood to see if it works for 20 \$.but we need full working scheeme.
and to rc4 here is repost just to help http://texashistory.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metapth73611/m1/2/zoom/?zoom=5&lat=2690&lon=3903&layers=BT

Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: seychelles on June 06, 2014, 03:01:05 PM
ok maybe i came a little bit too strong. but I think this great gentleman spend a lot of money and effort and it is up to us to replicate it .to replicate one needs a mechanical  engineer who can watch this 1939 video and copy it and that cost money. yes there is an old French saying that goes drop by drop the water will wear away the hardest rock.. 20\$ and 5\$ there we will get there faster than just individually in our lunch time to come to an answer.. just for an other point of view it has the similar angle of idea as this utube ..    http://youtu.be/yg9QhEikrKk
Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: i_ron on June 06, 2014, 04:56:44 PM
snip
I finally concluded it's the same as the other 3 visible upper bars moving in a rotation but it's mostly not visible because the film is overexposed by the light from the window, so it's hiding most of that bars activity but movement is detectable when the bar edges line up with the frame posts and causing a visible arc because it's rotating in a circle.

Luc

Hi Luc,

Another, what I consider an anomaly, is the suggestion that the upper stage drive rod is moving back and forth... and at most an elliptical path, yet in studying your looped vid I note that the rod nearest the camera appears to move back and forth, except for the small rotary device at its top, but the rod away from the window, in the darkest spot, has the same back and forth motion.

Now this rod is nearly end on to us and so all we should see is a stationary view of the rod as it moved towards us and away from us yet the motion is nearly as great as the first mentioned rod. The logical explanation is that both rods are moving in nearly the same diameter circle. Have a close look and tell me what you see???

Thanks,

Ron

Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: gotoluc on June 06, 2014, 09:15:43 PM

Hi Luc,

Another, what I consider an anomaly, is the suggestion that the upper stage drive rod is moving back and forth... and at most an elliptical path, yet in studying your looped vid I note that the rod nearest the camera appears to move back and forth, except for the small rotary device at its top, but the rod away from the window, in the darkest spot, has the same back and forth motion.

Now this rod is nearly end on to us and so all we should see is a stationary view of the rod as it moved towards us and away from us yet the motion is nearly as great as the first mentioned rod. The logical explanation is that both rods are moving in nearly the same diameter circle. Have a close look and tell me what you see???

Thanks,

Ron

Hi Ron,

what I've been seeing and still seeing is all upper rods move in a circle. Notice the upper rod is also rotating as its top is being turned in a circle since its base is bolted in the mid turn plate with weight attached. The lower rod top turns in a bearing mounted in the mid turn plate. The lower rod base looks mounted directly in a bearing since the small the upper circle has next to no effect to the lower bearing because of the rod length and the rod has a little flex at it lowest part of the base which is also helped by the weight pulled outwards (below reinforcement). The inventor reinforced the rod where he does not want flex.
I see the system to be very simple and will start building a single rotor prototype as of Monday. I should have most of it done in a week.

I'm sure this will be no problem for you to build also.

Luc
Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: i_ron on June 07, 2014, 12:42:58 AM

Thanks Luc,

I have built so many things that didn't work because I didn't have all the information...LOL
that I am more cautious and would love to see a working rep before I start... besides I haven't
collected all the bits yet...

Ron

Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: gotoluc on June 07, 2014, 01:31:45 AM
No problem Ron, I know what you mean about building stuff without all the details. Anyways, it may be a good idea to wait and see the simple parts I'll be using for my proof of concept prototype.

Should have a video up in 10 days or so.

Luc
Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: turbogt16v on June 07, 2014, 10:22:50 AM
http://videobam.com/dYdlh   maybe it will help more
Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: i_ron on June 07, 2014, 10:00:10 PM
Hi Ron,

what I've been seeing and still seeing is all upper rods move in a circle. Notice the upper rod is also rotating as its top is being turned in a circle since its base is bolted in the mid turn plate with weight attached. The lower rod top turns in a bearing mounted in the mid turn plate. The lower rod base looks mounted directly in a bearing since the small the upper circle has next to no effect to the lower bearing because of the rod length and the rod has a little flex at it lowest part of the base which is also helped by the weight pulled outwards (below reinforcement). The inventor reinforced the rod where he does not want flex.
I see the system to be very simple and will start building a single rotor prototype as of Monday. I should have most of it done in a week.

I'm sure this will be no problem for you to build also.

Luc

Hi Luc,

I am a little concerned with the 'direct bearing and the flex', to my way of thinking the upper stage must
work  exactly as the lower stage. The upper stage therefore needs to be only strong enough to drive the lower stage.

Where the lower stage has a universal joint (CV joint), to allow the full rotation effect of the lower rod, so must the upper stage have the equivalent motion. This can be achieved by having the lower bearing of the upper stage in a ball joint type of bearing (self aligning) but very much prone to wear... a compass type mount (gimbal mount) would be the simplest and easiest to make. Thus the bearing has freedom to follow
the upper rotation friction free.

Ron

Title: Order of importance
Post by: Fernandez on June 08, 2014, 12:12:57 AM
What an excellent video. This video should be the basis for ALL o.u. devices. It clearly states the principle, you do not eat off the first or second generation. These effects materialize from the 3rd order on upward.

Waste no time in making an exact replication. Understand what is happening first:

- Small motor and drive pulley (generation 1) --- aka (primary coil) exciter coil
- Driven pulley (generation 2) --- aka (secondary coil) exciter coil also
- Transmission A (generation 3) --- aka (Tesla's third coil if you like) -> primary o.u. coil
- Transmission B (generation 4) --- Load coil (eats here)

You can keep increasing the order and generate different effects. There is no limit.

Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: gotoluc on June 08, 2014, 03:15:12 AM

Hi Luc,

I am a little concerned with the 'direct bearing and the flex', to my way of thinking the upper stage must
work  exactly as the lower stage. The upper stage therefore needs to be only strong enough to drive the lower stage.

Where the lower stage has a universal joint (CV joint), to allow the full rotation effect of the lower rod, so must the upper stage have the equivalent motion. This can be achieved by having the lower bearing of the upper stage in a ball joint type of bearing (self aligning) but very much prone to wear... a compass type mount (gimbal mount) would be the simplest and easiest to make. Thus the bearing has freedom to follow
the upper rotation friction free.

Ron

Hi Ron,

I thought that concern would come up ;D

I made a looped video for you so you can observe the base shafts turning. Make sure to view it in full screen.
Let me know what you think because I can't see much movement at the lowest part of the shaft (before first base bearing)
I also don't see a universal joint, just the transfer gear below the first bearing and that gear seems to be turning quite straight.
I think at most the first lower bearing could be a self aligning kind like you say and then a fixed bearing on the end of the shaft (after the transfer gear) to keep the gear turning straight.

Luc
Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: i_ron on June 08, 2014, 04:16:00 AM
Hi Ron,

I thought that concern would come up ;D

I made a looped video for you so you can observe the base shafts turning. Make sure to view it in full screen.
Let me know what you think because I can't see much movement at the lowest part of the shaft (before first base bearing)
I also don't see a universal joint, just the transfer gear below the first bearing and that gear seems to be turning quite straight.
I think at most the first lower bearing could be a self aligning kind like you say and then a fixed bearing on the end of the shaft (after the transfer gear) to keep the gear turning straight.

Luc

Hi Luc,

Thanks for the base vid... you are correct in not being able to see a universal joint... but really bad
engineering not to have something there! Any stiffness there is counter active, meaning the weight
is not going to fall down hill if the stress of the rod is trying to hold it vertically.

Don't forget we are dealing with a machinist of some talent here and even though the stub output shaft
is running true in two bearings, if the top is turning in a true circle
the angle will never change so the stub shaft could be either bent or machined to this constant required angle.

Incidentally, the "fatness" of the outer portion of the 'gear' would suggest chain drive to the
centre output bevel gears.

Ron

Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: gotoluc on June 08, 2014, 04:31:30 AM

Hi Luc,

Thanks for the base vid... you are correct in not being able to see a universal joint... but really bad
engineering not to have something there! Any stiffness there is counter active, meaning the weight
is not going to fall down hill if the stress of the rod is trying to hold it vertically.

Don't forget we are dealing with a machinist of some talent here and even though the stub output shaft
is running true in two bearings, if the top is turning in a true circle
the angle will never change so the stub shaft could be either bent or machined to this constant required angle.

Incidentally, the "fatness" of the outer portion of the 'gear' would suggest chain drive to the
centre output bevel gears.

Ron

I agree with everything you say Ron but somehow I don't think he's a bad engineer, so maybe it's like you say,  bent or machined to this constant required angle. A chain sprocket would also deal with a wobble.
I'll first try like I said with the self alining bearing up top then after the chain sprocket the fixed bearing.

I made another video from a different angle which reveals the center gear also.

Luc
Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: gotoluc on June 08, 2014, 04:51:06 AM

Hi Luc,

if the top is turning in a true circle
the angle will never change so the stub shaft could be bent

Ron

Come to re-think about it, I think you're right Ron

The top is turning in a true circle as far as I'm concern, so wouldn't small bends in opposite ways to each end of the shaft allow the top to swing and base to stay true?

Luc
Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: havuhung on June 08, 2014, 02:40:04 PM
Hi gotoluc,
In the upper part of the shaft bearings, still a bit unclear! From here it's the steel shaft has been bent or hide a cardan? . .
Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: i_ron on June 08, 2014, 07:33:48 PM
Come to re-think about it, I think you're right Ron

The top is turning in a true circle as far as I'm concern, so wouldn't small bends in opposite ways to each end of the shaft allow the top to swing and base to stay true?

Luc

Yes, Luc, that is correct. Looking at the last video seems to reinforce that the shaft is bent.

For it to work the plate that holds the weight must be above the bend.

If this is true then further confirmation that the upper end of the lever/rod is performing a true circle.

Thanks,

Ron

Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: Craigy on June 09, 2014, 12:05:32 PM
not been here for 5 years good job my password still works

i have started building a small model to undertand what is going on..I am more of a hands on person and that is the best way for me to learn and understand this mechinism.

I have a thought experiment..Imagine a child with effiel tower balanced on its peak, upside down. any input energy to move it off center is equal to the energy to return it to equilibrium..

Now while the device is chasing a continually moving center of gravity , how do we move the center of gravity without expelling the same amount of energy that is gained?

I believe that the secret lies in the centrifugal forces of the second weight. As it spins round and around, its centrifugal force is used to push the main shaft or axis back and forth in its slot..it is that "Extra Energy" that moves the axis, which allows a change in the position of the center of gravity..when you study the orbit of the smaller weight it is clear that it is creating a force vector in the direction of the slot, that vector reverses every 180 degrees..

the energy required by simply moving the center of gravity would cancel as per standard laws..but very little of the input energy is knocking the shaft off center , it is mostly centrifugal force doing the knocking..

I wonder if there are any springs on the sliding mechanism. since the centrifugal force could both compress springs and shift centers of gravity

my build to date

Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: turbogt16v on June 09, 2014, 02:16:04 PM
I have just notice that the top rood(lever) the only one that is balanced is moving in circles and not just linear left to right.
Don't know if you already notice that ,if you see video 36 to 38 sec ,you will see shadow of the bar like its twisting.
Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: Craigy on June 09, 2014, 02:28:57 PM
indeed ..the top plate with the smaller weight attached rotates around a central shaft,

The central shaft slides left and right...the centrifugal force developed by the smaller weight ensures that the shaft is pushed into each end of travel.
Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: TechStuf on June 09, 2014, 09:19:09 PM
Quote
not been here for 5 years good job my password still works

i have started building a small model to undertand what is going on..I am more of a hands on person and that is the best way for me to learn and understand this mechinism.

I have a thought experiment..Imagine a child with effiel tower balanced on its peak, upside down. any input energy to move it off center is equal to the energy to return it to equilibrium..

Now while the device is chasing a continually moving center of gravity , how do we move the center of gravity without expelling the same amount of energy that is gained?

I believe that the secret lies in the centrifugal forces of the second weight. As it spins round and around, its centrifugal force is used to push the main shaft or axis back and forth in its slot..it is that "Extra Energy" that moves the axis, which allows a change in the position of the center of gravity..when you study the orbit of the smaller weight it is clear that it is creating a force vector in the direction of the slot, that vector reverses every 180 degrees..

the energy required by simply moving the center of gravity would cancel as per standard laws..but very little of the input energy is knocking the shaft off center , it is mostly centrifugal force doing the knocking..

I wonder if there are any springs on the sliding mechanism. since the centrifugal force could both compress springs and shift centers of gravity

my build to date

You certainly said a mouthful, and it's clear that you're on the right track.  At the rate you're going, it won't be long before you realize what Skinner was talking about when he stated that "improvements can be made".  You'll have the whole thing turned over on it's side before it's over.

Which won't be such a bad idea when the time comes....

Happy Trails,

TS
Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: Craigy on June 09, 2014, 09:46:31 PM
http://youtu.be/n27XU9jXgxU (http://youtu.be/n27XU9jXgxU)

progress...ok i was only testing out my swash plate so don't go saying i got it wrong...lol need to power it up and then prony brake the output when the weght and its off center bearing thingy are added
Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: i_ron on June 10, 2014, 12:55:34 AM

The top is turning in a true circle as far as I'm concern, so wouldn't small bends in opposite ways to each end of the shaft allow the top to swing and base to stay true?

Luc

Hi Luc,

Couldn't resist a small demo myself... no output shaft but a bearing on the tilt plate to show that
there is no input from the shaft. Now I realise that W S's model has the weights fixed to the shaft
but this is more to keep all eight sections in sync, right?

Ron

Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: gotoluc on June 10, 2014, 03:33:05 AM
Thanks for making some tests and a demo video Ron.

As you can see it's easy to turn. Imagine when you both upper and lower stages are working, the bottom torque must be incredible.

Hopefully you'll be able to replicate how he does it without a joint.

Today I got my 8 foot high box built and I have most of the supplies ready.

Thanks for sharing

Luc

Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: havuhung on June 10, 2014, 04:42:30 AM

Today I got my 8 foot high box built and I have most of the supplies ready.

Hi gotoluc,
Your job to build a similar machine Skinner ?

Regards
Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: turbogt16v on June 10, 2014, 10:07:35 AM
To  Craigy,very nice to see progress,i think you did not understand me  so i will post image

http://s29.postimg.org/seiheyk87/eqeqw.jpg
Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: Craigy on June 10, 2014, 11:08:14 AM

Thansk for taking the effort to reply and draw your thoughts. But i disagree..I am following the drawings by Artoj which i agree with..

http://www.energeticforum.com/renewable-energy/17195-william-f-skinner-1939-gravity-power-3.html#post257130

the input is not circular , in the original 4 shaft version each shaft is being kocked to the left then to the right  and there is no rotary input..

The knocking or unbalancing is progresivly more and more efficient as the secondary weights centrifugal force pushes the shaft back and forth along the slot as a result of the centerpital force.. That is the gain mechanism..the spinning bits are just a distraction and follow standard thoughts on inertia
Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: turbogt16v on June 10, 2014, 11:19:33 AM
agreed to disagree...

I wont bug you any more ,if you have a second look at video at 36 to 37sec,
you will see that the square that hold rood in place does not move same as the bar

http://s9.postimg.org/qo0pivilr/image.jpg
Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: Craigy on June 10, 2014, 12:14:00 PM
sorry look at 36 seconds...you can see the side to side rocking of 3 of the 4 individual cams...and if you look closely where the 3 rivets are on the beam,  one can clearly see it is rocking side to side. I suspect you think that it is rotating as the old flim gives the impression that the shaft is rotating, but that cannot be so , as the other side of the fulcrum, or fixed point as you call it is wobbling side to side in a linear fashion

Indeed below the component that you say is locking the "rood" Rod? in place there is a gap........every so often you can see the end of the rod appear and disappear becuase it is oscillating back and forth..You say the rod is locked, but it just goes through a fulcrum to oscillate in the other direction..  ( why is the lenght of the rod so long? To provide a mechanical advange or lever effect to push the  shafts off center and start the the machine.... You don't think that rotary force is all being provided by that small motor do you?"

there is only a linear input.. infact if it were rotary it would be in the same frame of reference and would be entirely standard physics and not be anything special...It is the decoupling of systems that provide a possible route to success

this is a simple drawing i drew for my own reference,
Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: gotoluc on June 10, 2014, 02:36:39 PM
Hi gotoluc,
Your job to build a similar machine Skinner ?

Regards

Yes, same basic weight and mechanical system as Skimmer but a single rotor, total 8 feet high with no belts. Direct chain drive 12vdc PM motor at top and same direct chain drive 12vdcv PM motor as generator on bottom output shaft.

Luc
Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: havuhung on June 10, 2014, 02:47:02 PM
Hi gotoluc,

I wish you success as you wish.

Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: wopwops on June 10, 2014, 03:04:24 PM
In anyone in contact with CLaNZeR on this?
Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: i_ron on June 10, 2014, 05:20:12 PM
agreed to disagree...

I wont bug you any more ,if you have a second look at video at 36 to 37sec,
you will see that the square that hold rood in place does not move same as the bar

Yes, you are quite correct. This is called a gimbal mount. You can see the outer part of the gimbal move in unison with the angle of the rod. The inner part is hidden. Look at the gimbal to the left... see how wide the  space is?... much to wide for a mere slot action as has been proposed. Again, look at the left rod under the gimbal and you can see it moves in a circle.  The gimbal holds the bearing that holds the lever/rod up. The length of rod beneath the gimbal moves opposite to the turning mechanism at the top of the rod, it inverts the motion. Ron

Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: Craigy on June 10, 2014, 06:45:45 PM
some more progress

and after a bit of a tune up now like a sewing machine

Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: centraflow on June 10, 2014, 08:45:23 PM
This is how I see it

regards

Mike 8)
Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: Craigy on June 10, 2014, 09:00:07 PM
ok..the upper shaft may be rotating , but its primary purpose is as a lever. No rotary power is fed in from above. as i see it. Therefore my model achieves the same,. with my linear bearing taking the place of the gimbals..
Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: centraflow on June 11, 2014, 12:53:18 AM
As I have stated on the drawing, " rotates but not powered", this is important as it shows exactly how the off set is set up. Yes the primary movement is a lever action, but also important is the top and bottom weights can move independantly of one another, you see him move the top weight assembly while holding the bottom weight still with his other hand.

The bottom weight becomes a very unusual self powering fly wheel, powered by the ever changing center of gravity of the mass. Power comes from the mass and not the speed, speed can be increased by gearing up the output without a huge effect on the mass, therefore a huge amplification of the input and the input does not see any of the load.

In fact the output could be loaded untill it stops, but the input will just keep going as though nothing had happened. The output is only proportional to the bottom mass being moved in an ever changing center of gravity.

In electrical terms it is reactive power turned into real power without the input knowing, now thats food for thought on electrical circuits and how to turn reactive power into real power without the input seeing it!!!!

regards

Mike 8)
Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: Craigy on June 11, 2014, 01:11:19 AM
I agree, my model does all of that so far...will see if i get time to build the last part tomorrow...I thnk that the secondary weight is using centfugal forces to slap that shaft off balance once every 180 degrees.  Indeed i suspect that adding springs to the levers so that any displacement from center is returned to the system later would also help..

The input is totally decoupled from the output
Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: i_ron on June 11, 2014, 01:23:25 AM
ok..the upper shaft may be rotating , but its primary purpose is as a lever. No rotary power is fed in from above. as i see it. Therefore my model achieves the same,. with my linear bearing taking the place of the gimbals..

To be very clear, within the limits of English, the top of the top section rod is describing a circle.

One can see the little driving arm, going around in the rod closest to the camera in the full video.

There is no linear back and forth motion at either end of the top section rod

The gimbal is at the bottom end of this rod.

Now in the one instance, just after the weigh swinging example, one can see the rod passing through the gimbal. Watch the left hand rod in particular. The top of the rod is tracing out a circle and so does the bottom of the rod. The rod does not bend or distort, when the top of this rod is outboard, the lower end is inboard, the bottom portion of the rod is at all times lined up with the top portion.

It is only three seconds, watch the full video and see the circle that the bottom of this rod traces...

Here it is in a slow motion view...

I hope this helps

Ron

.
Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: i_ron on June 11, 2014, 03:51:24 AM

There is no linear back and forth motion at either end of the top section rod

The two opposite rods we see in the slow mo vid obviously move from side to side.

But the far left rod moves in and out

This establishes the four quadrants of a  circle.

The approximate frames are 8 and 20, the rod beneath the gimbal moves in and out, exactly
as it would do if following a circular path

Ron

Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: i_ron on June 11, 2014, 04:04:11 AM
This is how I see it

regards

Mike 8)

Mike,

I think the gimbal is drawn incorrectly and also the holes in the square plate.

Luc,

This is my 900th post... watch out, I'm catching up! LOL

I made many of those talking to our good friend Thane.

I do hope my little contribution here is not taken the wrong way but this linear
motion thing has bothered me from the beginning, anyway, no offence everyone.

Take Care

Ron

Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: turbogt16v on June 11, 2014, 09:35:52 AM
as it seams from video that the rod is making circle motion,
i am skeptic,because in newspaper article skinner said the key is
in off-balanced weights that move in elliptical orbit,
and if the upper rod is moving in circle,we don't get any elliptical motion.
i advice to do  both models

http://texashistory.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metapth73611/m1/2/zoom/?zoom=5&lat=2690&lon=3903&layers=BT
Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: Craigy on June 11, 2014, 11:42:34 AM
Iwill build both, since its quicker to build than argue the toss. Although my current model is showing  that it is decoupled from its input, When stalling the output  there is no effect on the input current and of course we have an elliptical orbit.

So right or not it, has some desirable atributes even before i add the second weight..

the same conversation is taling place over at energetic where there is a totally different opinion on all of this

http://www.energeticforum.com/renewable-energy/17195-william-f-skinner-1939-gravity-power-4.html#post257309
Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: gotoluc on June 11, 2014, 03:58:16 PM

Luc,

This is my 900th post... watch out, I'm catching up! LOL

I made many of those talking to our good friend Thane.

I do hope my little contribution here is not taken the wrong way but this linear
motion thing has bothered me from the beginning, anyway, no offence everyone.

Take Care

Ron

Congratulations on you 900th post Ron.

I think I've figured out why Mr. Skinner has reinforcements rods on the lower shaft. I think he arks the shaft and then welded the reinforcements rods so the shaft stays arked. Maybe the effect of gravity with the arked shaft keeps the weight in a more specific area and also no need for a universal joint at the bottom.

Food for thought

Luc
Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: centraflow on June 11, 2014, 04:17:13 PM
Congratulations on you 900th post Ron.

I think I've figured out why Mr. Skinner has reinforcements rods on the lower shaft. I think he arks the shaft and then welded the reinforcements rods so the shaft stays arked. Maybe the effect of gravity with the arked shaft keeps the weight in a more specific area and also no need for a universal joint at the bottom.

Food for thought

Luc

Luc that maybe possible, but also I think it maybe to keep out shaft whip, looking at the center disc!!! there is a lot of weight spining around and any whip just might be counter productive ;)

regards

Mike 8)
Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: gotoluc on June 11, 2014, 05:52:50 PM

Luc that maybe possible, but also I think it maybe to keep out shaft whip, looking at the center disc!!! there is a lot of weight spining around and any whip just might be counter productive ;)

regards

Mike 8)

Hi Mike, yes I agree and have previously written it was used for reinforcement but now think it's also be used for creating an ark.
The ark makes sense as it's quite clear the weight of the bottom shaft will always be falling on the outside throughout its rotation.

Luc
Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: Craigy on June 11, 2014, 06:35:01 PM

the smaller weght whips its larger counterpart into action, very interesting startup and recovery sync effects

http://youtu.be/VlI34A0uVxM (http://youtu.be/VlI34A0uVxM)
Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: i_ron on June 11, 2014, 08:39:30 PM
Congratulations on you 900th post Ron.

I think I've figured out why Mr. Skinner has reinforcements rods on the lower shaft. I think he arks the shaft and then welded the reinforcements rods so the shaft stays arked. Maybe the effect of gravity with the arked shaft keeps the weight in a more specific area and also no need for a universal joint at the bottom.

Food for thought

Luc

Thanks Luc,

Here is my take on the gimbal

I don't think the lower shaft need be arked... maybe a hinged type of joint,
then set and forget? (change the square to round)

Ron

Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: shylo on June 12, 2014, 12:30:23 AM
Hi Ron, that is exactly what is needed.
Luc, Looking forward to your build.
Craig, I like your work ,but that is only half the build, add the lever action to your connection points in the transition plate, then everything changes.
The lever does rotate , but is that because ...it is being driven,...or is just a result of centrifugal force?
Is the only input directed towards moving the levers' back and forth, or also rotating along with back and forth??
The lower shafts have truss kits on them , the same as , grain handeling systems down spouts, they act as a stiffener.
An offset center on the input shaft to the transition plate will create the elptical orbit , that is the key .
Just what I've seen so far...but I'm usually wrong ;D
artv
Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: Craigy on June 12, 2014, 01:50:04 AM
hi shylo..... i think there are various way of doing this , in my third video i use a linear motion, since i thought it was linear....that might not be how Mr Skinner did it but there was no direct drive, and the input was decoupled from the output. Unlike Mr Skinnner i was tilting the table at 0 degrees and 180 degrees instead of tilting the table for all 360 degrees ... :D

in the last video number 4 i directly drive the shaft with a belt drive....ok this is wrong in that there should not be a rotary transmission right down to the coupler with offset weight. Tis the tilting that would get this to spin normally ,....but many of the effects are displayed even when powered like this.... since the large weight is still decoupled from the system...I see no need to replicate the fancy trousers of the inventor but i do see a need to try all te configurations along the way.. The model is doing all that spinning on around a watt of input its an old tape deck motor.

I will have the gimbals made tomorrow with a bit of luck and will try and get a sony walkman motor to drive it..but this machine is getting too tall
Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: gotoluc on June 12, 2014, 02:36:01 AM

the smaller weght whips its larger counterpart into action, very interesting startup and recovery sync effects

http://youtu.be/VlI34A0uVxM (http://youtu.be/VlI34A0uVxM)

Hi Craigy,

this tests prototype is looking better

Thanks for sharing

Luc
Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: gotoluc on June 12, 2014, 02:38:35 AM

Thanks Luc,

Here is my take on the gimbal

I don't think the lower shaft need be arked... maybe a hinged type of joint,
then set and forget? (change the square to round)

Ron

Could be Ron... but if that's the case then the shaft could just be bent.

Luc
Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: i_ron on June 12, 2014, 03:16:44 AM

eltimple/craigy

I think it pretty scummy of you to re-post my posts to Energetic Forum without my permission!

Ron
Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: alfilmx on June 12, 2014, 06:54:40 AM
Thanks Ron I think it's exactly what Skineer use
Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: centraflow on June 12, 2014, 10:33:29 AM
Ron

I think the gimbal is exactly right, a really good demo there, from the side view you get the optical illusion.

regards

Mike 8)
Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: i_ron on June 12, 2014, 05:00:16 PM
Ron

I think the gimbal is exactly right, a really good demo there, from the side view you get the optical illusion.

regards

Mike 8)

Thanks Alfilmx and Mike,

Yes, if you look at the unit in the video you can see the four bolts in the end cap and if you look closely
you can see the little dimple in the middle for the axle.

But the proof of the pudding is the visual observation of it working. my slow motion vid and the three seconds where you can see the angles of the shafts and the position of the upper weight as it marches around in a circle. Now the same argument applies to the top driven end of the rod where the shaft
closest to the camera moves seemingly back and forth... then observe the one to the left and it has the same motion. This is only explained if the two are making circles.

Good to see that you are observing and understanding.

Ron

Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: centraflow on June 12, 2014, 05:40:12 PM
Ron

they seem to be moved in pairs 180 degrees to one another. You can see what looks like a beam moving too and frow driven by the motor of course

regards

Mike 8)
Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: shylo on June 12, 2014, 10:12:27 PM
Hi All, was test running today trying various scenarios' the rotating upper shaft in conjunction with the spinning weights below, cause the upper shaft to pitch to and fro.
I'm sure the motor only rotates the shafts ,  back and forth is just a result, and designed into the build.
I'll know better with more test runs.
artv

Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: i_ron on June 12, 2014, 11:26:27 PM
Ron

they seem to be moved in pairs 180 degrees to one another. You can see what looks like a beam moving too and frow driven by the motor of course

regards

Mike 8)

Hi Mike,

The beam is just an artifact, I think... but here is Luc's loop vid slowed down

I can see the eccentric arm driving the top of the rod in a neat circle, watch the pivot point
of the arm and it does not change position back and forth but is quite stationary regardless

Bit of a loss on youtube but clearer on my original

Luc,

kudos on that vid incidentally, what did you use?

Ron
Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: Craigy on June 12, 2014, 11:56:13 PM
Sorry ron , i was trying to get a concensus of opinion....I want to find the answer through experiment not through argument

so built that gimble thingy
Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: gotoluc on June 12, 2014, 11:58:49 PM

Luc,

kudos on that vid incidentally, what did you use?

Ron

Hi Ron,

the reason I used this site to host the looped video and not youtube is they loose quality when you upload them to youtube.

The reason I uploaded that first looped video is you can see a crank arm at the very top with a fixed central point turning the upper shaft in a circle. This was my first attempt to point out that the upper shaft is turned in a circle. Not many piked up on it. I guess we see what we chose to believe.

I have a question for you. Which of the two weights do you believe is the one Mr. Skinner refers to as falling?

Luc
Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: gotoluc on June 13, 2014, 12:03:09 AM
Sorry ron , i was trying to get a concensus of opinion....I want to find the answer through experiment not through argument

so built that gimble thingy

Hi Craigy,

can you please reduce the size of your pictures as it makes it difficult to read the posts with images of that size.

Thanks
Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: Craigy on June 13, 2014, 12:47:42 AM
been trying ever since i posted, but it won't let me in
Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: gotoluc on June 13, 2014, 12:58:59 AM
Looks fine now

Thanks

Luc
Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: gotoluc on June 13, 2014, 01:50:43 AM
What do you think of this?
Is it an optical illusion or do the lower shaft stubs have a smaller diameter then the shaft. Also, do you see the stub at a different angle?
The second picture the stub looks off center to left and third picture (frames later) it looks off to the right?
Forth looks like stub is also bent

Luc
Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: Craigy on June 13, 2014, 01:51:03 AM
gymbals are good.. It is possible to do either type of wobble quite easily with the gymbals. a left right wobble is easly done by locking one of the gymbal axis up..and a conical wobble by letting it free.. i think it best to discover by experimentation and not conjecture....
Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: i_ron on June 13, 2014, 03:07:38 AM
What do you think of this?
Is it an optical illusion or do the lower shaft stubs have a smaller diameter then the shaft. Also, do you see the stub at a different angle?
The second picture the stub looks off center to left and third picture (frames later) it looks off to the right?
Forth looks like stub is also bent

Luc

I don't see it bent or off set Luc, he did have a lathe so stub ends are sure to be turned down.

Did you notice that the weights are most likely pipe with end plates and through bolted?

Ron

Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: i_ron on June 13, 2014, 03:16:57 AM
Hi Ron, snip

I have a question for you. Which of the two weights do you believe is the one Mr. Skinner refers to as falling?

Luc

Neither, lol
"The “falling”, Skinner said, is more correctly a following of the weights to new centres of gravity."
Here is my take on this...

How it works
The small motor drives the top section, the top section is the engine that drives the lower section. The operating principle is therefore the same for both sections.
The input to the top section rod(s) is critical, in that this motion is carried down throughout the machine. In the '39 video we can see the motion is circular. Focus on the closest rod and you should be able to see the eccentric arm that drives it. It is visible shortly after the rod moves past 7:00 o'clock and is visible as the rod travels around behind the 12:00 o'clock position, then is hidden in the glare until covered by the rod itself until it re-emerges.
If this is still to blurry to be convincing, change your focus to the left most rod. Let logic be the rule, if the motion on the first rod is linear then the motion is  from side to side as viewed from the camera position. If this were true then the motion of the left rod, being at 90 degrees to the first rod, said motion would be towards and away from the camera and be hidden by the steel corner post.
But this is not the case... the second rod is very visible as it shows first outside the corner post, then on the inside of the corner post. Logic dictates that if two rods at 90 degrees to each other exhibit the same motion then the only explanation is the both rods are travelling in a circular path.
The path of the top of the top section rod is circular. It passes through the gimbal where it is provided with a bearing for constraint and weight support before emerging at the level of the so called square plate. It is located in the square plate by the setscrew on the side of the plate. The rod is straight at this point and thus the weight, being attached to the square plate is subject to the tilt angle of the rod. The off-set hole, in the square plate, transfers the circular motion to the lower rod, at an increased radius and at a lag angle of 90 degrees.

The lower rod carries the lower weight and connection to the output shaft.
Ron

Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: gotoluc on June 13, 2014, 03:54:03 AM

I don't see it bent or off set Luc, he did have a lathe so stub ends are sure to be turned down.

Did you notice that the weights are most likely pipe with end plates and through bolted?

Ron

Maybe you need to save the pic and enlarge then like I did below. Do you not see the end is not alined with the shaft?

Yes, I did noticed the weights have a hole in the center and are bolted on.

Luc
Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: gotoluc on June 13, 2014, 04:11:18 AM
In the '39 video we can see the motion is circular. Focus on the closest rod and you should be able to see the eccentric arm that drives it. It is visible shortly after the rod moves past 7:00 o'clock and is visible as the rod travels around behind the 12:00 o'clock position, then is hidden in the glare until covered by the rod itself until it re-emerges.

Yes Ron, this is exactly what I saw over a couple of weeks ago when I made the first looped video and why I concluded it was a circular motion.

If this is still to blurry to be convincing, change your focus to the left most rod. Let logic be the rule, if the motion on the first rod is linear then the motion is  from side to side as viewed from the camera position. If this were true then the motion of the left rod, being at 90 degrees to the first rod, said motion would be towards and away from the camera and be hidden by the steel corner post.
But this is not the case... the second rod is very visible as it shows first outside the corner post, then on the inside of the corner post. Logic dictates that if two rods at 90 degrees to each other exhibit the same motion then the only explanation is the both rods are travelling in a circular path.
The path of the top of the top section rod is circular. It passes through the gimbal where it is provided with a bearing for constraint and weight support before emerging at the level of the so called square plate. It is located in the square plate by the setscrew on the side of the plate. The rod is straight at this point and thus the weight, being attached to the square plate is subject to the tilt angle of the rod. The off-set hole, in the square plate, transfers the circular motion to the lower rod, at an increased radius and at a lag angle of 90 degrees.

The lower rod carries the lower weight and connection to the output shaft.
Ron

I also see it the way you described.

I guess you didn't quite understand my question. Let me try it this way. Which section transfers the force gravity in the device. The upper or lower section? or both?
If both, do you see any little differences between each section or do you see them as identical?

Thanks

Luc
Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: Artoj on June 13, 2014, 05:38:30 AM
Hi all, I have drawn most of the hidden bits, here is a sketch of the top part of the wobble axle. There is a spring within the hollow bar, it presses against a lubricated bearing surface that presses against the ball, this allows free motion in all directions with a tolerance that is adjustable by the pressure of contact. To stop the unit flying out the 4 rods are attached to the top and bottom metal disc, the adjustment and tightening is the center disc. The bottom is the same as the top. I have redrawn all the parts very carefully with complete measurements, I will post the whole lot on my blog as soon as it is completed. Regards Arto.

Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: i_ron on June 13, 2014, 05:41:54 AM

Yes Ron, this is exactly what I saw over a couple of weeks ago when I made the first looped video and why I concluded it was a circular motion.

I also see it the way you described.

I guess you didn't quite understand my question. Let me try it this way. Which section transfers the force gravity in the device. The upper or lower section? or both?
If both, do you see any little differences between each section or do you see them as identical?

Thanks

Luc

Not in any order...

That is when I saw the rotary motion, in your video... it was a game changer for sure, thank you!
I was just trying to re-enforce your observation by running the video again for those that had missed
the obvious implications. I can not understand anyone who could dismiss this as mere conjecture.

Luc the offset in the ends of the rods, if that is what they are, are not really critical to the operation of the machine.

I see the 'principle' as being the same. That is,  they both contribute in their own way. It is a matter of size.  The small one runs the big one. Without the small one the big one would need a bigger motor. One can take this to the next level and go to three sections the top two as per the present build the lower one
scaled up with an enormous weight.  So just a top unit might make 1/2 of a horse power... just the lower section run with a 1/2 horse motor might make 2  horse power... (fill in your own numbers.)

That's is why I said the small motor runs the top unit... the top unit runs the bottom unit, makes sense?
They both run on gravity.

Ron

Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: havuhung on June 13, 2014, 08:46:22 AM
Hi all, I have drawn most of the hidden bits, here is a sketch of the top part of the wobble axle. There is a spring within the hollow bar, it presses against a lubricated bearing surface that presses against the ball, this allows free motion in all directions with a tolerance that is adjustable by the pressure of contact. To stop the unit flying out the 4 rods are attached to the top and bottom metal disc, the adjustment and tightening is the center disc. The bottom is the same as the top. I have redrawn all the parts very carefully with complete measurements, I will post the whole lot on my blog as soon as it is completed. Regards Arto.

Hi Artoj,
Thanks for the drawing.

havuhung
PS you can share the detailed design drawings (Skinner machine) high resolution?
Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: CANGAS on June 13, 2014, 10:26:13 AM
Quote
Quote from: Artoj on Today at 05:38:30 AM

Hi all, I have drawn most of the hidden bits, here is a sketch of the top part of the wobble axle. There is a spring within the hollow bar, it presses against a lubricated bearing surface that presses against the ball, this allows free motion in all directions with a tolerance that is adjustable by the pressure of contact. To stop the unit flying out the 4 rods are attached to the top and bottom metal disc, the adjustment and tightening is the center disc. The bottom is the same as the top. I have redrawn all the parts very carefully with complete measurements, I will post the whole lot on my blog as soon as it is completed. Regards Arto.

Many thanks to Arto for all the hard work and accurate work. Your work surely will be helpful to unravel this mystery.

CANGAS 45
Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: centraflow on June 13, 2014, 12:23:15 PM
Hi all, I have drawn most of the hidden bits, here is a sketch of the top part of the wobble axle. There is a spring within the hollow bar, it presses against a lubricated bearing surface that presses against the ball, this allows free motion in all directions with a tolerance that is adjustable by the pressure of contact. To stop the unit flying out the 4 rods are attached to the top and bottom metal disc, the adjustment and tightening is the center disc. The bottom is the same as the top. I have redrawn all the parts very carefully with complete measurements, I will post the whole lot on my blog as soon as it is completed. Regards Arto.

Would not the bottom drive slip? would it not be like the end of the drive shaft of some 4 wheel drive vehicles? just thinking allowed, I love your work.

regards

Mike 8)
Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: i_ron on June 13, 2014, 05:23:56 PM

Join the Consensus

Luc is Canada's foremost FE researcher, His keen sense of curiosity has led him into many fields.It is always a pleasure for me to work with him, he is a gentleman. His laid back demenor and willingness to share is a treat. Evidence of this willingness to share are his hundreds of videos on his youtube channel. Yet all with no axe to grind, show him compelling counter evidence and he is the first to accept it.

He is thus well qualified to lead the William Skinner discussion on this forum. As an aid to our understanding Luc made and posted a video showing the workings of the drive end of Skinner's machine. If you haven't already... go to page 6, post 84 and download this video.

Watch the video carefully. You should be able to see that the drive to the upper rod is circular. Now this is the game changer, no twitching back and forth, no linear, no ellipticals, just straight forward circular.

If you want to have a little fun with this put it into your video editor. I use NCH's Video Pad...(free version)

Don't click any of the additional software boxes and it will only install video pad.

Load Luc's video, go to video effects and click 'crop' drag the handles on the box to cover the area of interest... back up to video effects and click on 'change clip speed' select 50%. Go export and save, in high resolution, your vid to the desktop. Sit back and play it over and over, it is so compelling!

Next clip, load the full 1939 video (in as high a resolution that you saved it in) drag it down onto the timeline track 1, find the exact spot (just after the motor runs) 30 something and cursor over the start to find the double arrows and drag to the maker... find the spot where the video just starts to pan down and bring the tail end double arrows back to that spot... you should have the 3 second clip showing the rods, square plate and upper weights, up to video effects and clip speed to 50%, save and play.

You should be able to see the nice full circles of the weights, the majestic circular sweep of the rods.
Are you a believer now? All full circles!

Ron
Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: i_ron on June 13, 2014, 06:34:45 PM
Hi all, I have drawn most of the hidden bits, here is a sketch of the top part of the wobble axle. There is a spring within the hollow bar, it presses against a lubricated bearing surface that presses against the ball, this allows free motion in all directions with a tolerance that is adjustable by the pressure of contact. To stop the unit flying out the 4 rods are attached to the top and bottom metal disc, the adjustment and tightening is the center disc. The bottom is the same as the top. I have redrawn all the parts very carefully with complete measurements, I will post the whole lot on my blog as soon as it is completed. Regards Arto.

Excellent Arto, a great insight.
although this is at the top end of the bottom section rod only, where it connects to the square plate.

I hope you see the circular information presented on this forum and correct some of your drawings to reflect this?

Luc, does Arto's sketch answer your question on the turned down 'bent' rod ends?

Ron

Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: gotoluc on June 14, 2014, 12:20:05 AM
Hi all, I have drawn most of the hidden bits, here is a sketch of the top part of the wobble axle. There is a spring within the hollow bar, it presses against a lubricated bearing surface that presses against the ball, this allows free motion in all directions with a tolerance that is adjustable by the pressure of contact. To stop the unit flying out the 4 rods are attached to the top and bottom metal disc, the adjustment and tightening is the center disc. The bottom is the same as the top. I have redrawn all the parts very carefully with complete measurements, I will post the whole lot on my blog as soon as it is completed. Regards Arto.

That ball joint bearing is an interesting idea Artoj!... Mr. Skinner could of incorporated it in his shaft ends and used the reinforcements harness to hold it.
This may explain the pictures I posted in the previous page with the shaft stub out of alignment with the shafts. Also notice the stubs are black, so he could of adapted a car ball joint or tie rod end.

I'm still not convinced of the bottom lower shaft. I'll have to see how my replication works without any joints on the bottom.
Should have a video in a few days.

I would like to point out something that I noticed some weeks back and did not mention it.  Look at the picture below of the mid plate. Notice the upper and lower shaft do not alined on the mid plate like Aaron had drawn and you have. Not a big problem but it may make a difference.

Thanks for sharing Arto

Luc
Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: gotoluc on June 14, 2014, 12:31:00 AM

Not in any order...

That is when I saw the rotary motion, in your video... it was a game changer for sure, thank you!
I was just trying to re-enforce your observation by running the video again for those that had missed
the obvious implications. I can not understand anyone who could dismiss this as mere conjecture.

Luc the offset in the ends of the rods, if that is what they are, are not really critical to the operation of the machine.

I see the 'principle' as being the same. That is,  they both contribute in their own way. It is a matter of size.  The small one runs the big one. Without the small one the big one would need a bigger motor. One can take this to the next level and go to three sections the top two as per the present build the lower one
scaled up with an enormous weight.  So just a top unit might make 1/2 of a horse power... just the lower section run with a 1/2 horse motor might make 2  horse power... (fill in your own numbers.)

That's is why I said the small motor runs the top unit... the top unit runs the bottom unit, makes sense?
They both run on gravity.

Ron

Thanks for your view on this Ron.
I asked because I'm getting the feeling the upper is lever action and falling gravity action and the lower looks more like a centrifugal action.

Should have my first replication up in a few days.

Luc
Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: gotoluc on June 14, 2014, 12:36:41 AM

Luc, does Arto's sketch answer your question on the turned down 'bent' rod ends?

Ron

Could very well work for the top. See my reply (above) to Arto

Luc
Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: ARMCORTEX on June 14, 2014, 05:24:14 AM
Can the motion be emulated by interpolation software and diffenrential feedback drives. The rates are all different for each array , I think of it as a big cnc puzzle ?

Are the beams an intrinsic and necessary part, and can this concept be factorised into something else ?

It  does not fit into many houses , as is, would an 7 foot high be as good as an 9 foot high ?

Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: havuhung on June 14, 2014, 10:00:02 AM
That ball joint bearing is an interesting idea Artoj!... Mr. Skinner could of incorporated it in his shaft ends and used the reinforcements harness to hold it.
This may explain the pictures I posted in the previous page with the shaft stub out of alignment with the shafts. Also notice the stubs are black, so he could of adapted a car ball joint or tie rod end.
Luc
Hi All,
Similar accessory use spherical bearings.
Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: gotoluc on June 14, 2014, 02:12:07 PM
Hi All,
Similar accessory use spherical bearings.

Yes, that's a good bearing for this kind of thing!

Luc
Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: i_ron on June 14, 2014, 05:20:30 PM
Thanks for your view on this Ron.
I asked because I'm getting the feeling the upper is lever action and falling gravity action and the lower looks more like a centrifugal action.

Luc

My apologies Luc, you are quite right, the two stages operate on different principles.
Although I have it the other way around, lol

So to add too and correct my previous post... the following...

I posted the rod angles previously for the left rod but neglected to show the right (centre?) rod, the one
more face on to the camera.  This is important to show the circular motion but more importantly to show what I had missed. So here are the two previous pics and two new pics...

Note that the angle of the rods is nearly identical, indicating circular motion. If the upper drive was a narrow ellipse, as Arron says, then the left rod's movement would be considerably less than the video shows.

HOWEVER, what I had missed is the plate... look at the angle of the plate in the last two pictures, it remains nearly horizontal in each view. The only mechanism for this is that the lower rod has no ball
joints, rather it has a bend top and bottom. Thus the plate rides on top of the lower rod. The plate. not
following the angle of the rod, is therefore not subject to the 'falling weigh' theory.

The centrifugal weight vector is at all times straight out from the virtual centre, the bottom rod is thereby
lead around by this force, lagging behind the upper weight as can be seen in the video.

With the shaft bent top and bottom and the lower weight position above the lower bend it is subject to
the falling weight theory or more correctly a following of the weight to a new centre of gravity.

Luc, I hope this correction is not to late for your build?

Ron
Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: i_ron on June 14, 2014, 05:42:05 PM
Sorry ron , i was trying to get a concensus of opinion....I want to find the answer through experiment not through argument
snip

Kudos Craigy, your second build is on track.

May I suggest, as you noted, two bearings on the upper shaft, bend the lower shaft so as the rod tilt
angle starts right close to the bottom... with the weight non rotating and mounted above the bend and
modify the upper drive to more of configuration like this...see sketch

Then the lower shaft (and weight) will be led around by the centrifugal force of the upper weight.

Take care

Ron
Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: i_ron on June 14, 2014, 05:53:16 PM
Hi All,
Similar accessory use spherical bearings.

Perfect for the drive plate where the upper rod pokes through!!!

Thanks

Ron

Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: ARMCORTEX on June 14, 2014, 06:59:52 PM
Motor drive spindle !!!

I see an opportunity here...

The consumers MUST respect the IP of the skilled initiates, the inventive scientists, the talented builders, aka the master race.

This natural order must NEVER be broken if OU is to be marketed.
Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: Craigy on June 14, 2014, 07:34:36 PM
coaxial lever with bearings between rotating inner
Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: gotoluc on June 15, 2014, 03:06:35 AM

My apologies Luc, you are quite right, the two stages operate on different principles.
Although I have it the other way around, lol

So to add too and correct my previous post... the following...

I posted the rod angles previously for the left rod but neglected to show the right (centre?) rod, the one
more face on to the camera.  This is important to show the circular motion but more importantly to show what I had missed. So here are the two previous pics and two new pics...

Note that the angle of the rods is nearly identical, indicating circular motion. If the upper drive was a narrow ellipse, as Arron says, then the left rod's movement would be considerably less than the video shows.

HOWEVER, what I had missed is the plate... look at the angle of the plate in the last two pictures, it remains nearly horizontal in each view. The only mechanism for this is that the lower rod has no ball
joints, rather it has a bend top and bottom. Thus the plate rides on top of the lower rod. The plate. not
following the angle of the rod, is therefore not subject to the 'falling weigh' theory.

The centrifugal weight vector is at all times straight out from the virtual centre, the bottom rod is thereby
lead around by this force, lagging behind the upper weight as can be seen in the video.

With the shaft bent top and bottom and the lower weight position above the lower bend it is subject to
the falling weight theory or more correctly a following of the weight to a new centre of gravity.

Luc, I hope this correction is not to late for your build?

Ron

Hi Ron,

doesn't matter the order you see which rod does what,  I'm just glad you see each have a different function.

Interesting we're going back to the double bend idea we had at the beginning.

It's not too late for changes in my build as I'm using my lower rod tensioners idea of adjusting the tensioners to Ark the shaft back towards its weight and that seems to work well and for the top I'm using a self alining pillow block bearing, so I think this combination should work to about the same. What do you think? ... I kind of like this idea since it give a little room for testing before bending the rod to a permanent position.

I need one more full day (Sunday) to finish the build. So possibly Monday I'll test it and hopefully post the demo video before the end of the day.

Luc
Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: i_ron on June 15, 2014, 04:01:05 AM
Hi Ron,

doesn't matter the order you see which rod does what,  I'm just glad you see each have a different function.

Interesting we're going back to the double bend idea we had at the beginning.

It's not too late for changes in my build as I'm using my lower rod tensioners idea of adjusting the tensioners to Ark the shaft back towards its weight and that seems to work well and for the top I'm using a self alining pillow block bearing, so I think this combination should work to about the same. What do you think? ... I kind of like this idea since it give a little room for testing before bending the rod to a permanent position.

I need one more full day (Sunday) to finish the build. So possibly Monday I'll test it and hopefully post the demo video before the end of the day.

Luc

Sounds good Luc, just hope I explained it clearly  and understandably.

Once I see what you have done I can jump in and critique, LOL

Ron

Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: wopwops on June 15, 2014, 04:53:47 AM
This seems like the most promising one I can remember and there's very little activity on the threads about it. Maybe this is a good sign! If you guys know of any youtube channels of people posting replications, please mention. Thanks very much.
Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: wopwops on June 15, 2014, 05:43:34 AM
This was posted on Energetic Forum:

US 20130047754 A1
Abstract A mechanical advantage machine is provided. The mechanical advantage machine may comprise an elliptical track, a mobile weight, and a fulcrum point disposed at a vertex of the elliptical track. The mechanical advantage machine may further include at least one actuation rod coupled to at least one cam, wherein the traversal of the mobile weight about the circumference of the elliptical track causes the track to move causing the actuation rod to move which in turn causes the cam to rotate. A method for generating power may also be provided. The method may include mobilizing a weight about a circumference of an elliptical track comprising a fulcrum point disposed at a vertex of the circumference of the elliptical track, the mobilization pivoting the elliptical track in response to the weight traversing the elliptical track while at least one actuation rod causes the rotation of at least one cam.
Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: qiman on June 15, 2014, 06:34:40 AM
This seems like the most promising one I can remember and there's very little activity on the threads about it. Maybe this is a good sign! If you guys know of any youtube channels of people posting replications, please mention. Thanks very much.

1-2 years ago, I already had a working prototype of Skinner's machine. The first video has details of how this machine really operates - the second shows my method for an elliptical drive that I already tested at a very small tilt angle and want to do on a bigger scale to rotate the input lever in an elliptical orbit.
Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: ARMCORTEX on June 15, 2014, 08:21:17 AM
Prepare to be trolled man.

I will now use your videos to learn the skinner device and build a skinner device so cool you will get jealous.

My skinner machine will kick your skinner machine in the ass.

Scumbag !
Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: shylo on June 15, 2014, 01:16:27 PM
just trying to load a quick video my first attempt
Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: shylo on June 15, 2014, 01:27:27 PM
I guess it worked , you can see the action of the drill back and forth and circular by itself.
The generator isn't hooked up yet ,it has 3 postes on it F G and the third isn't marked . I'm not sure how to hook it F- go to pos battery, G -ground  and unmarked is pos out?
Also the drill seems to move up and down , but not sure if that is just because of poor workmanship?
I don't want to damage gen so would appreciate some help.
Thanks artv
Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: turbogt16v on June 15, 2014, 01:46:35 PM
you really should put some more effort in making the device,

the weight are a little to far of the center,and also to light,
the first and the second weight  "must" move freely ,
and  to lever moves in elliptical orbit,
Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: Craigy on June 15, 2014, 09:34:25 PM
Progress

http://youtu.be/1UybDRVxNK0 (http://youtu.be/1UybDRVxNK0)

now working on the drive train
Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: gotoluc on June 16, 2014, 04:21:58 AM
Starting to see some building action. Thanks for sharing Shylo and Craigy.

Today I was able to connect the upper shaft to the lower and found that the offset between upper and lower shaft I pointed out and incorporated in my build does not work if both shafts are centered.
That will delay the test by one day as I now have to go back to the welder to make a modification.
If I can get it welded tomorrow then I should be able to do the test and do a video by Tuesday.

Stay tuned

Luc
Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: shylo on June 18, 2014, 12:21:26 AM
Hi All, was trying different weights ,turbo your right the build needs work, the bottom bearing blew apart, but only after I added a load.
The drive that enters the translation plate, needs to be fixed but offset, the lower needs to rotate in a fixed position. ( Artoj drawing is pretty much bang on , the early ones)
My build is just for trying to figure out how everything works, not to put into mass production.
By adding extra weight the pressure on the lower bearing increased dramatically , This may be part of the reasons for having 4 offset weights , to distribute it evenly?
Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: gotoluc on June 18, 2014, 02:22:36 AM
Seems kind of quiet around here?

Got one video done but where I'm living at this time the internet bandwidth is very limited, so video uploading is very slow and can cut off at any time, then you got to start all over again. To help get it done I divided the video demo in two parts.

Here is the first part: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=00xIxEQqRsk&feature=youtu.be

The next part may be in two hours or more. Also, this video is unlisted, so you need the link to watch it.

Luc
Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: AB Hammer on June 18, 2014, 02:34:23 AM
gotoluc

Grease your pillow block around the edge. Otherwise nice construction. Looking forward to your test.

Alan
Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: gotoluc on June 18, 2014, 02:43:33 AM
gotoluc

Grease your pillow block around the edge. Otherwise nice construction. Looking forward to your test.

Alan

Do you think grease will work better than oil?

Luc
Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: i_ron on June 18, 2014, 02:52:55 AM
Seems kind of quiet around here?

Got one video done but where I'm living at this time the internet bandwidth is very limited, so video uploading is very slow and can cut off at any time, then you got to start all over again. To help get it done I divided the video demo in two parts.

The next part may be in two hours or more. Also, this video is unlisted, so you need the link to watch it.

Luc

Nice innovative build Luc, edge of chair until the second vid

Ron

Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: AB Hammer on June 18, 2014, 03:14:17 AM
Do you think grease will work better than oil?

Luc

I said grease due to most pillow blocks I've seen have grease fittings but if you use oil? Use a synthetic for it sticks to the parts better.  Grease heats up as in the bearings themselves due to friction and become fluid like to the parts and would do the same in the pillow. That is the main reason I said grease.

Alan
Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: gotoluc on June 18, 2014, 03:16:18 AM

Nice innovative build Luc, edge of chair until the second vid

Ron

Well Ron, I won't keep you in suspense. There's no detectable gain at this time and I had a feeling there wasn't going to be with the first try. Still many things we need to try.

Did you ever noticed the change in angle of the upper weight when Mr. Skinners device is operating compared to when it's stopped?... I've been thinking that's important and why I started to think the Gravity transfer is coming from the upper weight.

If you think about the way I have my lower shaft bent, its weight does not change, it just goes around much like a flywheel. If this is truly the way Mr. Skinner has his, then you have to consider the influence gravity must be coming from the top weigh and pressing down on the angled bottom shaft. So if that top weight is super heavy and is easy to turn because it shaft turning it is using leaver action but also being pushed back up a little because the bottom shaft is under load, so the weight doesn't fall as long as it's turning and have enough load to keep it up a little.  Would that not transfer gravity in the lower shaft?

Luc
Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: havuhung on June 18, 2014, 04:35:40 AM
Hi gotoluc,
Thank you.
Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: i_ron on June 18, 2014, 04:47:25 AM
Well Ron, I won't keep you in suspense. There's no detectable gain at this time and I had a feeling there wasn't going to be with the first try. Still many things we need to try.

Did you ever noticed the change in angle of the upper weight when Mr. Skinners device is operating compared to when it's stopped?... I've been thinking that's important and why I started to think the Gravity transfer is coming from the upper weight.

If you think about the way I have my lower shaft bent, its weight does not change, it just goes around much like a flywheel. If this is truly the way Mr. Skinner has his, then you have to consider the influence gravity must be coming from the top weigh and pressing down on the angled bottom shaft. So if that top weight is super heavy and is easy to turn because it shaft turning it is using leaver action but also being pushed back up a little because the bottom shaft is under load, so the weight doesn't fall as long as it's turning and have enough load to keep it up a little.  Would that not transfer gravity in the lower shaft?

Luc

Nope, lol

OK, not too surprising.

I did notice that the drive plate does not follow the angle of the upper shaft in WS's design, but remains
horizontal or close to it at all times.

One other thing is, it is not carved in stone that the upper drive be perpendicular to the lower unit, if you were to offset them then you have an elliptical drive.

Ron
Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: gotoluc on June 18, 2014, 05:34:25 AM
Here is the second part of the video demo

Luc

Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: i_ron on June 18, 2014, 06:21:10 AM
Here is the second part of the video demo

Luc

Well you gave it a good shot Luc, can't think of any improvements at this point...

Ron
Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: havuhung on June 18, 2014, 09:23:21 AM
Here is the second part of the video demo

Luc
Hi gotoluc,
I have a comment as follows: lower shaft of your test device, the shaft is bent so the vertical concentric compared with lever shaft is not exactly! this comes to is this: I've heard a metallic sound (hiss) by rubbing each shaft impact upon the bottom of the device, while watching your video clip!. . . When you adjust the gain consensus best will no longer emit cries, while the shaft is rotating in a smooth manner, I believe that it will also have the momentum to spin a little bit more when you stop supplying power to the electric motors. . .

Thanks for the video and your work.
Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: Craigy on June 18, 2014, 10:33:42 AM
Great work Luc.... the only observaton i will throw in is that on my model, the connection between the long lower shaft and the crank plate where the smaller weight is, is very loose.... that means that the small weight can be moved up and down, and as a result the plate moves up and down the main shaft.

An example of that movement is that when the machine is at rest the plate is pushed down  ( by the small weight ) one side , and up the mainshaft on the other.....when spinning the small weight rises, which means the other side of the plate moves down the shaft .

The large weight also needs to be able to spin freely about its own axis  regardless of the position of the smaller weight

I wonder if the bearing in the pillow block is restricting the system too much, try removing the bearing from the pillow block and see if that frees it up...maybe it needs an oversize bearing...to allow a bit of slack
Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: turbogt16v on June 18, 2014, 10:34:54 AM
to luc

nice work so far,but i see some mistakes,the upper lever that is driving the plate i not welded to plate
it only change the center of gravity it does not force it to spin,the joint on the upper chain is not needed if it is circle orbit.
The cement weights are to heavy, and do not lay along tho whole bar ,use less weights along whole bar,

dont mean to argue just to help,i am working on my setup and pic or video soon
Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: centraflow on June 18, 2014, 01:34:39 PM
Hi Luc

I have posted this on your second video

Hi Luc, I think you have basicly told yourself what is wrong. The top and bottom weights are totally independant and have to be or the load is reflected back to the source. Below the bottom weight has to be a universal joint, the bottom weight is your power source more than the top weight, they are not just a fly wheel. The whole idea is the continually falling weight, this you do not have, and you have them fighting each other. I believe that bottom shaft is straight and not bent, the tie rods are to keep it straight and not flex from the amount of weight at the bottom, what he has done is made the shaft feel as though it is twice it's thickness and so not flex. This is common engineering practice when a shaft is subject to an oliptical centrafugal force, which this is, what ever shape happens at the top will happen at the bottom but in a reduced ratio (compounding force,maybe 6:1) so with an input at the top of 1f you get 6f at the bottom. You see there becomes a multiplication of force in the length of the shaft (same speed but greater power factor) that power factor comes from that falling bottom weight, not from the top, the top is not seeing what the bottom is doing.﻿

I have gone through most of the Skinner system and it is very clever, he must have been a great engineer, keep at it Luc.

regards

Mike 8)
Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: gotoluc on June 18, 2014, 03:38:05 PM
Hi Luc

Below the bottom weight has to be a universal joint, the bottom weight is your power source more than the top weight, they are not just a fly wheel. The whole idea is the continually falling weight, this you do not have, and you have them fighting each other. I believe that bottom shaft is straight and not bent

regards

Mike 8)

Well, after reading the above five posts I can see everyone has a different version as to why it doesn't work.

My next test was going to be like Mike is saying.  Before I do that, I would like to hear Mike's thoughts on the below.

Since the lower weight support bar on Mr. Skinner's device turns perfectly horizontal with the frame (see attached video), this would suggest if the shaft does have a universal joint it would be above the support bar, no?... however, we don't see a universal joint there. So how do you explain this?
Let's suppose the universal joint is below the weight support bar, then the only way it would turn horizontal to the frame is if he had welded it at an angle of less then 90 degrees, which would also mean the weight support rod would have to be welded to the bar at more than a 90 degree angle.
Do you think this was done?  as it would be the only explanation as to why the bar is turning horizontal to the frame.

Please explain how this can work with the evidence I've presented.

Luc
Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: AB Hammer on June 18, 2014, 03:45:14 PM
Hay gotoluc

Your problems with your pillow block bearing can be solved with a universal joint mount like a multi axis. This should reduce the friction for a better test.

Alan
Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: centraflow on June 18, 2014, 03:54:42 PM
Hi Luc

I have to go out but on my return I will write a pdf and a drawing of how I see it (still may not be right), all I can do is put my engineering skills into how it can be done.

The principle is simple, it all works on moving the relation of mass to center of gravity, to move the mass takes too much power, but moving the relation of the center of gravity takes very little and gives you a big gain.

regards

Mike 8)
Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: gotoluc on June 18, 2014, 03:58:32 PM
Hay gotoluc

Your problems with your pillow block bearing can be solved with a universal joint mount like a multi axis. This should reduce the friction for a better test.

Alan

Thanks Alan
However, at this time the pillow block is good enough for proof of concept, this is not what is preventing the transfer of Gravity to the bottom shaft.
Once the basic principal can be proven to work then I'll invest in the ideal components.

Luc
Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: gotoluc on June 18, 2014, 04:03:29 PM
Hi Luc

I have to go out but on my return I will write a pdf and a drawing of how I see it (still may not be right), all I can do is put my engineering skills into how it can be done.

The principle is simple, it all works on moving the relation of mass to center of gravity, to move the mass takes too much power, but moving the relation of the center of gravity takes very little and gives you a big gain.

regards

Mike 8)

Okay Mike, but don't put too much time in a pdf presentation. I would be happy with just answers to the questions (when you have time) after seeing the attached video.

Luc
Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: i_ron on June 18, 2014, 04:50:28 PM
Here is the second part of the video demo

Luc

Hi Luc,

Because the gimbal mounted top shaft works backward to the lower shaft it is somewhat speed related.
At rest the top weight collapses down and in and only above a certain speed will the upper weight fly out
with sufficient force to balance the combined weight of the lower. When at the correct speed and correct weight for both upper and lower will the two forces balance. Your speed is too low at this time.

Ron

Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: gotoluc on June 18, 2014, 05:09:54 PM

Hi Luc,

Because the gimbal mounted top shaft works backward to the lower shaft it is somewhat speed related.
At rest the top weight collapses down and in and only above a certain speed will the upper weight fly out
with sufficient force to balance the combined weight of the lower. When at the correct speed and correct weight for both upper and lower will the two forces balance. Your speed is too low at this time.

Ron

Hi Ron,

the drive motor is 24vdc and by using my variac I can feed it any voltage I want to the point I could destruct the device.  Feeding around 14vdc makes the device turn around 60 RPM. I've tried it up to 18vdc and no change. Anything over that voltage you can see it is a much faster speed then what Mr. Skinner was using.

Luc
Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: centraflow on June 18, 2014, 06:01:59 PM
Well, after reading the above five posts I can see everyone has a different version as to why it doesn't work.

My next test was going to be like Mike is saying.  Before I do that, I would like to hear Mike's thoughts on the below.

Since the lower weight support bar on Mr. Skinner's device turns perfectly horizontal with the frame (see attached video), this would suggest if the shaft does have a universal joint it would be above the support bar, no?... however, we don't see a universal joint there. So how do you explain this?
Let's suppose the universal joint is below the weight support bar, then the only way it would turn horizontal to the frame is if he had welded it at an angle of less then 90 degrees, which would also mean the weight support rod would have to be welded to the bar at more than a 90 degree angle.
Do you think this was done?  as it would be the only explanation as to why the bar is turning horizontal to the frame.

Please explain how this can work with the evidence I've presented.

Luc

Hi Luc, just got back home

If you think about the lower rod connected by a CV just below the weight holding bar (could be and probably is a thrust bearing with circular movement, all in one) the movement angle at that point is very small in relation to the other end of the rod. Camera angles can be very deceptive when looking at fixed beams to a moving beam.

The bottom weight is high or long for a reason, that is the angle at the bottom is small in relation to the top end of that weight, think of it in a full turn as a cone upside down, the top has a long way to move to create a full circle, the bottom not so much.

The drive to the centre 90 degree gog assembly I expect is a belt (seems he liked belts, will have a look again at that video), the reason I say that is there are 4 units all driving one output, it will self align, a chain would have to have exact timing one with the other, that said at the moment does not matter.

The gimbal mount and transition plate assembly are I think as I have drawn in the attached, this completly detaches the input from the output and the top weight acts like a sling shot. If you think about it the top weight puts in power as well ;D

Great work Luc, I would be doing this as well, but at the moment I have taken on more than I can chew

regards

Mike 8)
Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: centraflow on June 18, 2014, 06:09:54 PM
PS.  the lever drive is eliptical and not circular

regards

Mike 8)
Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: centraflow on June 18, 2014, 06:17:47 PM
PSS.  the center of gravity that moves in relation to the bottom weight is where the rod connects to the transition plate, from here it is to the top of the bottom weight and from there to the CV joint, it is triangular and moving infinitum in one revolution.

regards

Mike 8)
Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: centraflow on June 18, 2014, 06:33:07 PM
I should have written that pdf Luc ::)

Note that the top of the bottom weight is exactly at the same level as the bottom of the top weight, I think this is important

regards

Mike 8)
Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: centraflow on June 18, 2014, 06:55:04 PM
Luc you can skype me if you want, maybe easier.

regards

Mike 8)
Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: gotoluc on June 18, 2014, 07:05:48 PM
PS.  the lever drive is eliptical and not circular

regards

Mike 8)

Have you seen this video loop: http://www.overunity.com/14655/1939-gravity-power-multiply-power-by-1200/dlattach/attach/138942/ (http://www.overunity.com/14655/1939-gravity-power-multiply-power-by-1200/dlattach/attach/138942/)

I posted back on page 6. If you look at it on full screen you can clearly see a fixed point arm rotating the upper lever in a circular motion.

Luc
Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: centraflow on June 18, 2014, 07:21:57 PM
Yes I have, but that is a long lever, pivoting bar, with a cam on each end, this is because the rod has a circular movement, free movement, as I have shown in my diagram.

I will draw that top part and then you will see it, it is what gives the eliptical shape to the gimbal

regards

Mike 8)
Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: centraflow on June 18, 2014, 07:26:01 PM
The top two sections are like sling shots (i'm using the term loosly), all to change that lower center of gravity with nearly no force at all.

regards

Mike 8)
Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: centraflow on June 18, 2014, 07:38:22 PM
Bad drawing in a hurry, but I think you will get the idea, this is the final stop to the drive seeing the output

regards

Mike 8)
Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: centraflow on June 18, 2014, 07:41:53 PM

regards

Mike 8)
Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: centraflow on June 18, 2014, 07:48:20 PM
once the top weight is moving, the only drive power is used in moving that beam back and forth, and no more, it is that simple

regards

Mike 8)
Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: gotoluc on June 18, 2014, 08:24:43 PM
Hi Mike,

I'm quite positive there is no bearing in the mid plate for the upper lever. you can see he has a set screw where the lever enters it.  Have a look at the attached video. You can see the lever is turning exactly with the mid plate, so why have a bearing there when one is at the top of the lever and obviously one in the gimbal?
While you're viewing the video, notice the left lever is swinging in and out as much as the front lever is swinging side to side. I my view this strongly suggest the leave motion is circular.

I'm not trying to contradict you, just bringing to your attention what I have been observing for quite some time.

Luc
Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: centraflow on June 18, 2014, 08:34:14 PM
Hi Mike,

I'm quite positive there is no bearing in the mid plate for the upper lever. you can see he has a set screw where the lever enters it.  Have a look at the attached video. You can see the lever is turning exactly with the mid plate, so why have a bearing there when one is at the top of the lever and obviously one in the gimbal?
While you're viewing the video, notice the left lever is swinging in and out as much as the front lever is swinging side to side. I my view his strongly suggest the leave motion is circular.

I'm not trying to contradict you, just bringing to your attention what I have been observing for quite some time.

Luc

could be Luc, I don't think it will make much difference, I originally had it welded there so try it that way to start with. Maybe the set screw was just holding a brass bush as a bearing is not really needed, as I have said it is not powered as such.

Speak tomorrow, late here

regards

Mike 8)
Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: shylo on June 19, 2014, 12:06:58 AM
I can't tell from the video , but is it possible that it is not a set screw , but a grease fitting?
The input drive  ,I think is quite obvious, rotating while moving in an orbit.
The lower shaft  has to be able to rotate in the plate, but also moves in an orbital pattern not opposite of the upper but offset by ~ 90 degrees.

Centraflow, your drawing is right on.

I don't know why everything is being underlined.

Luc  Nice build That's some serious weight ,I noticed that with added weight ,for the same input the speed of the output increased.
Did you try different weights?
artv
Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: gotoluc on June 19, 2014, 12:43:18 AM

Luc  Nice build That's some serious weight ,I noticed that with added weight ,for the same input the speed of the output increased.
Did you try different weights?
artv

Yes, I tried different weights and it does change things but did not study it long enough to confirm anything.

I'm presently modifying the lower shaft and incorporating a universal joint to see if it makes a difference. Should have results of that change tomorrow.

Luc
Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: gotoluc on June 19, 2014, 03:48:18 AM
Update

the universal joint is installed and it makes a big different. It operates much like we see in the film. However, it's too late at night to test it because of the noise. Plus I have to anchor it to the garage cement floor.

Tomorrow I'll do many tests and post the results.

Stay tuned

Luc
Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: havuhung on June 19, 2014, 04:01:06 AM
Hi gotoluc,
signs of better results of the test on your device.
congratulations
Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: Craigy on June 19, 2014, 09:39:27 AM
didn't realise you had no universal joint, no wonder. Should be a whole lot better with it.
Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: turbogt16v on June 19, 2014, 12:54:27 PM
to luc

i think there is bearing on mid plate,lever is not fixed to plate,but in video you see the result of sincronisation
and the force needed to pull the plate is bigger if there is no bearing
Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: i_ron on June 19, 2014, 05:49:01 PM
I can't tell from the video , but is it possible that it is not a set screw , but a grease fitting?
The input drive  ,I think is quite obvious, rotating while moving in an orbit.
The lower shaft  has to be able to rotate in the plate, but also moves in an orbital pattern not opposite of the upper but offset by ~ 90 degrees.

snip
artv

The inclination of the upper shaft is approximately 7.5 degrees, whereas the drive plate is horizontal.
The upper shaft therefore passes through the plate at this angle, The rod is fixed, set screw or weld,
what ever, as the weight hangs from this connection so must be firm.

Quote
Centraflow, your drawing is right on.

Should show circular motion, not back and forth

No self align bearing

Weight shown on wrong side of plate

No CV joint in William's machine

Ron

Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: centraflow on June 19, 2014, 08:08:50 PM

The inclination of the upper shaft is approximately 7.5 degrees, whereas the drive plate is horizontal.
The upper shaft therefore passes through the plate at this angle, The rod is fixed, set screw or weld,
what ever, as the weight hangs from this connection so must be firm.

Should show circular motion, not back and forth

No self align bearing

Weight shown on wrong side of plate

No CV joint in William's machine

Ron

The motion is eliptical, you are probably right on the self align bearing, probably only a greased bush, the weight I would think would be opposite to the lever rod and does seem so in the video when he moves it by hand.

Not a CV joint as we know it, but I would recommend one now along with a thrust bearing to take that weight, things have improved a lot since 1939. What ever he used at the bottom, the casting is quite high, will have to look up what was available at that time.

regards

Mike 8)
Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: gotoluc on June 19, 2014, 08:12:50 PM
Here is the update with the device using the universal joint on the bottom shaft.

The device performs more like seen in the film but the load is still reflected back to the prime mover. I tried everything I could think of and finally decided to take the upper lever out of the circular drive and turn it by hand while the bottom generator is under load (bulb).

By turning the lever in a circle motion I could feel an equal pressure throughout the 360 degrees and the bulb load would not light.

By turning the lever in an elliptical orbit the top weight would fall and cause a change in angle to the mid plate which would make the bottom weight swing around and the bulb would light for that moment. There is a pressure point at the turning points of the elliptical orbit but there is also an acceleration when the top weight falls, so it may come close to being neutral to the prime mover (other than friction losses) but this remains to be tested.

Now looking for recommendations on how I can easily convert my top gear so the lever is turned in an elliptical orbit to further test this possibility of being the right thing.

Luc
Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: centraflow on June 19, 2014, 08:18:46 PM
I am pretty shure now that the lever to the plate is a bush. The whole idea is to keep the weights from being directly powered by the motor, for example if you stopped the weights moving, the motor would carry on, the lever would just turn in the bush going through the plate.

I'm trying to put logic into the workings on the basis that the input does not really see the output.

regards

Mike 8)
Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: centraflow on June 19, 2014, 08:26:32 PM
Here is the update with the device using the universal joint on the bottom shaft.

The device performs more like seen in the film but the load is still reflected back to the prime mover. I tried everything I could think of and finally decided to take the upper lever out of the circular drive and turn it by hand while the bottom generator is under load (bulb).

By turning the lever in a circle motion I could feel an equal pressure throughout the 360 degrees and the bulb load would not light.

By turning the lever in an elliptical orbit the top weight would fall and cause a change in angle to the mid plate which would make the bottom weight swing around and the bulb would light for that moment. There is a pressure point at the turning points of the elliptical orbit but there is also an acceleration when the top weight falls, so it may come close to being neutral to the prime mover (other than friction losses) but this remains to be tested.

Now looking for recommendations on how I can easily convert my top gear so the lever is turned in an elliptical orbit to further test this possibility of being the right thing.

Luc

Exactly luc, it is eliptical, logic tells us that because of the use of a gimbal.

Let me think about your setup, I will have to look at your vid again as to how you have it.

Remember just about all is free wheeling apart from that fulcrum with the cams on either end which is powered by the motor.

regards

Mike 8)
Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: mscoffman on June 19, 2014, 10:28:31 PM
See a gyroscope (see Wikipedia) is only 1/2 an energy producing device. That is; if the rotor is rotating, then if you
push on the top rotor bearing - only then does the gyroscope push back with limited energy. That's not good enough for an
energy producing device, because you have to put energy in before you get any back out. But let us attach a second
mirror image another gyroscope, this one wobbles under it's own tendency. Then we mechanically compare these two
gyroscopes. This allows us extract energy out of the two (gimbal) based on what the two are doing differently.

The thing is what drives the gyroscopes is a rigid rotating flywheel rotor. Pushing on a bearing should not affect the amount
of energy stored in the rotating rotor flywheel. So the universe is supplying the energy for it to push it's bearing back
upright. So the extra energy you extract should be independent of the rotor energy. That is what the pulsating drive mechanism
does it keeps the flywheel rotor rotating but then disconnects so it nothing affects that rotor energy any longer - until next time.

So rotor losses are minimal but you have extracted extra gain energy that you can integrate back into the turning output shaft.

---

But, you say; there are no gyroscopes...Yes there are, based on the solids-of-rotation of the rotating weights. He has 4 units
each one out-of-phase with one another by 90 degrees. These all cancel out error-forces of the each other. For example if
he had eight of these at 45 degrees out of phase each, then the total device would run even smoother. Like calculus-math
as these go to a limit, they approach the operation of a solid rotating rotor. In this case all errors forces would cancel. Virtual
then become real.

() It's as if; at any point in the device there are two different units interacting at that point, the virtual device and
the error device. The virtual device is like the perfect gyroscope, the error device has a bunch of wobbles and vibrations
due to synthesis that you want the mechanism to eat (damp) these before they build up and wreck the device or its cycle.

()Like a electrical wire, as in a mechanical link, forces can flow both ways on any linkage. They can flow all in one direction or they can
be comparators or averagers to force subsystems into synchronization in both directions. That makes it tricky to analyze.

()these devices are linked in a mechanical cycles so they are forced to repeat the same phase space time and time again. Make
some energy once, then don't self destruct, then make some again.

I'm not smart enough to see if all these mechanical laws are inevitably linked in a manner to conserve energy,
which is why experiments make sense.

One thing he needs to be careful with is his electric motor is also a bidirectional linkage as configured.

Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: i_ron on June 19, 2014, 11:26:46 PM
snip

Now looking for recommendations on how I can easily convert my top gear so the lever is turned in an elliptical orbit to further test this possibility of being the right thing.

Luc

Luc, just move the top drive off centre, and keep the circle drive... you will get it to speed up and slow down just like an ellipse would.

You will get one pulse per revolution... this is why William has gone to four units, not just for balance but
for a continuous chain of pulses.

Ron

Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: i_ron on June 20, 2014, 12:01:54 AM

Luc, just move the top drive off centre, and keep the circle drive... you will get it to speed up and slow down just like an ellipse would.

You will get one pulse per revolution... this is why William has gone to four units, not just for balance but
for a continuous chain of pulses.

Ron

Addendum:  With the centres offset and constant rotation of the red drive circle the top end of the drive
has a greater portion of the circumference to travel on the left side as versus the right side, hence giving
a speeding up and slowing down of the drive rod which is centred on "B"

It is a constantly changing radius, as the radius increases the top of the rod has to travel faster... as the
radius diminishes the rod connection slows down.

Sketch scale exaggerated of course

Ron

Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: gotoluc on June 20, 2014, 02:34:37 AM
@centraflow

Mike, thanks for looking in an elliptical mechanical solution!... doesn't look like an easy thing to do.
Also, have a look at the new attached test 3 video with universal joint. I stopped the weights for you, so you can see the lever drive continues on with no problem.

@mscoffman
Thanks for your analysis of the mechanical actions

@I_ron
That was my hope that it would work with the lower shaft off center but unfortunately it is not enough. See the test video.

Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: havuhung on June 20, 2014, 07:28:22 AM
Now looking for recommendations on how I can easily convert my top gear so the lever is turned in an elliptical orbit to further test this possibility of being the right thing.

Luc
Hi gotoluc,
To create motion elliptical shape, structural mechanics have a following way: two coaxial discs rotate in the opposite direction with the arm length difference, probably easiest done.
Simulation video clip: http://youtu.be/Omsge0rQbe8

Regards
Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: turbogt16v on June 20, 2014, 10:42:45 AM
hy luc

I don't know if you would listen to me but i will still say my opinion,
1.you need to get rid of that lace on the 2 weight ,it is lowering the output power
2.the plate is straingt not bend on the 1 weight,don't know why you did that
3.looking from the top down ,the 1 weight is at 12 o clock ,and 2 weight is at 9 o clock,input lever is at center, see video
4.you need a bearing on 1 weight not because you can freely stop top , but because then it need less input power
5.fix lever at gimbal,it will cause less pressure on weights so they will move with less friction

Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: gotoluc on June 20, 2014, 02:52:37 PM
Hi gotoluc,
To create motion elliptical shape, structural mechanics have a following way: two coaxial discs rotate in the opposite direction with the arm length difference, probably easiest done.
Simulation video clip: http://youtu.be/Omsge0rQbe8 (http://youtu.be/Omsge0rQbe8)

Regards

Good elliptical mechanism havuhung

Thanks for sharing

Luc
Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: gotoluc on June 20, 2014, 02:57:28 PM
hy luc

I don't know if you would listen to me but i will still say my opinion,
1.you need to get rid of that lace on the 2 weight ,it is lowering the output power
2.the plate is straingt not bend on the 1 weight,don't know why you did that
3.looking from the top down ,the 1 weight is at 12 o clock ,and 2 weight is at 9 o clock,input lever is at center, see video
4.you need a bearing on 1 weight not because you can freely stop top , but because then it need less input power
5.fix lever at gimbal,it will cause less pressure on weights so they will move with less friction

Luc
Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: centraflow on June 20, 2014, 04:38:58 PM
I have been going over the videos and have come to the conclusion that there is a lot going on in the bottom shaft. It was thinking about what he had done for the CV joint that brought it to my attention, that bottom shaft with the tie rods, first at the top connection to the plate and the lack of up and down movement of that plate, I believe it is a stub with a ball end that fits into the shaft which can move in and out "small movement but it is there", in the shaft (could be a tube) there is a socket which the ball end fits into. If you look hard the stub end is a smaller diameter than the shaft where it goes into the plate, those end circular plates with tie rods are retainers for that ball end. The same at the bottom, but I am looking at the moment how the bottom weight is connected and how that is connected to the output drive, though the bottom with a modern CV joint would be no problem for us.

This makes the possibility that, that bottom shaft is in fact a tube, or at least a shaft which has been machined in the end to accomodate a ball ended stub shaft held in there with a spring and that circular end plate, no drive is require at this point, only elliptical movement.

more to come

regards

Mike 8)
Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: i_ron on June 20, 2014, 07:36:23 PM

...though the bottom with a modern CV joint would be no problem for us.

Mike 8)

Except for the fact that CV joints are not built to carry an axial load

Ron

Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: centraflow on June 20, 2014, 09:01:14 PM
That would depend on the CV or swivel  or U being used,, as an example

http://www.toolbarn.com/grey-pneumatic-14006huj.html?gclid=CIzY5saBib8CFQqIfgodqagAgA (http://www.toolbarn.com/grey-pneumatic-14006huj.html?gclid=CIzY5saBib8CFQqIfgodqagAgA)

This is designed  to take a large load :)

Yes that would do nicely.

regards

Mike 8)
Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: gotoluc on June 21, 2014, 07:15:20 AM
Update

Spent all day making the elliptical mechanism (part).. still need to fine tune it tomorrow and then I'll give it a test run. Not an easy part to make!   much precision is needed. Parts need to be exact same centers or it jams up.

Luc
Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: havuhung on June 21, 2014, 10:04:52 AM
Hi All,
the mechanical parts need high precision, you will encounter difficulties in the absence of the machine tools needed! . . Things we desire in his garage a small mechanical workshop, as the video of William F Skinner. . .                  :D
Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: havuhung on June 21, 2014, 10:19:28 AM
Update

Spent all day making the elliptical mechanism (part).. still need to fine tune it tomorrow and then I'll give it a test run. Not an easy part to make!   much precision is needed. Parts need to be exact same centers or it jams up.

Luc
Hi gotoluc,
will soon succeed.
Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: netica on June 21, 2014, 01:37:43 PM
Hi everyone,

Don't want to bother you to much this is my first post here. I was interested in this project back on Energetic Forum, but for some reason my account has been banned I get the message -
The click here does nothing that allows me to contact them, so I am completely blocked out.
I know that some people use both forums and since I have no way of contacting them will someone be kind enough to ask Aaron Murakami to investigate what has happened to my account.
I can think of no reason that I should have been banned as I have done nothing wrong there.
I find it very frustrating that there is no way of contacting them.
It may be best to use the same topic forum as this one over on Energetic Forum as Aaron is quite active on it at the moment.
Thanks, and sorry to bother you.

Kind Regards
netica

Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: netica on June 21, 2014, 03:08:17 PM
Hi All,

I don't know what was happening but I am able to log in like normal on Energetic Forum now so thanks anyway.

netica
Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: gotoluc on June 21, 2014, 08:20:06 PM
Hi gotoluc,
will soon succeed.

Not with the mechanism you suggested!... did you know it needs 2 drive gears and going in opposite directions for it to work?... guess I trusted it would adapt to my single gear and didn't realize until 16 hours of building and after I installed it.

I'm going to be taking a break as I've been at this for 13 days straight 12 hours a day.

Luc
Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: Artoj on June 22, 2014, 12:34:35 AM
Hi Luc,

I can see you got into a jam. This design should work (no guarantees) it is a slight modification from my Hyperbolic Drive design, it will produce ellipses and many other interesting permutations from eggs to all form of hypercyclic shapes and patterns, the requirement would be a variable speed on the second sprocket/gear/pulley/directdrive. I have drawn it as a 1/2 speed form, which gives an ellipse, this would be easy to adapt using chains etc. The original Skinner design would be very similar to what I have here. The drawings are quick sketches, just adapt your materials to suite. I hope this helps with your build, regards Arto.

Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: shylo on June 22, 2014, 01:35:26 AM
Hi Luc , Wow that's alot of work! The drive I found has to be free to move. You have it locked .I wish I could express myself better.
I think the input only rotates upon its' axis ,while being driven back and forth, the eliptical movement is caused by the rotation of the lower masses which are independent of each other, but push force back at the input , when timed properly can add.
I did some testing today ,I ran a generator off the output for 5 mins, one with the drill connected to the output pulley, the other with the drill connected to my skinner attempt which was connected to the pulley.
They both consumed the same amount of battery life, and the both put out the same amount of watts.
Should the skinner device not use more power since it has those extra gears ,and levers ,and bearings to deal with??
My build is very poor quality ,just trying to see ,but it requires more effort to hold the drill without skinners' apparatus , than it does with it.
I can hold the input (drill) solid or let it follow its' own path , get rid of the sprocket and chains and hold the drive in your hands you'll see what I mean.
I believe there is something here ...artv
Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: gotoluc on June 22, 2014, 02:46:49 AM
Hi Luc,

Just as something to try real quick with that setup,, could you stop the outside short arm piece from rotating while you turn your gear?

If that pivot shaft was solidly connected to the arm and stopped from rotating that would hold that outside arm still and make the oval.

Think about it first,, I would not want you to take up to much time with it,, but it could be run with like a tiller in track maybe.

Hi webby1

I'm away from the workshop for a few days.
It would work a little if there was load on the shaft but don't think anything can be done with it for this device, unless I had a mirror gear.

Thank for trying to help

Luc
Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: gotoluc on June 22, 2014, 03:01:27 AM
Hi Luc,

I can see you got into a jam. This design should work (no guarantees) it is a slight modification from my Hyperbolic Drive design, it will produce ellipses and many other interesting permutations from eggs to all form of hypercyclic shapes and patterns, the requirement would be a variable speed on the second sprocket/gear/pulley/directdrive. I have drawn it as a 1/2 speed form, which gives an ellipse, this would be easy to adapt using chains etc. The original Skinner design would be very similar to what I have here. The drawings are quick sketches, just adapt your materials to suite. I hope this helps with your build, regards Arto.

Wow!...thank you Artoj for doing all this work

Quite an interesting mechanism. I will study it and see if I can build it with the stuff I have.

Thanks for sharing and taking the time to do all this

Luc
Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: gotoluc on June 22, 2014, 03:08:21 AM
Hi Luc , Wow that's alot of work! The drive I found has to be free to move. You have it locked .I wish I could express myself better.
I think the input only rotates upon its' axis ,while being driven back and forth, the eliptical movement is caused by the rotation of the lower masses which are independent of each other, but push force back at the input , when timed properly can add.
I did some testing today ,I ran a generator off the output for 5 mins, one with the drill connected to the output pulley, the other with the drill connected to my skinner attempt which was connected to the pulley.
They both consumed the same amount of battery life, and the both put out the same amount of watts.
Should the skinner device not use more power since it has those extra gears ,and levers ,and bearings to deal with??
My build is very poor quality ,just trying to see ,but it requires more effort to hold the drill without skinners' apparatus , than it does with it.
I can hold the input (drill) solid or let it follow its' own path , get rid of the sprocket and chains and hold the drive in your hands you'll see what I mean.
I believe there is something here ...artv

Interesting results you're getting

I've already posted a few days back that I disconnected the upper lever drive sprocket and turned it by hand. That's how I concluded elliptical may be the way.

Luc
Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: ARMCORTEX on June 22, 2014, 05:39:44 AM
Altho not quite as good as Arto's idea above, if you have zero tools it could be simpler.

Bare bones idea, estimate what you need and adjust with screws to measurements.

Take a tap drill and make a top plate out of some aluminium, that way you can screw in some common sprocket shaft from below, take another and make one underneath.

Screw and add nut and bold adjust. You may need to machine another set of slots for those bolts so that all becomes easily adjustable ( forgot about that )

Print a stencil and drill some plexiglass or w/e material you can get.

I think you can make this pretty low profile and with minimal tools, I think you can make this cheap if you go chinese

If you take small 1/20 hp motor or even smaller, the goal will be to eliminate any useless weight, that way we can approach ideal situation.

What will next step be Gotoluc, this is but a fraction of the whole remember, Skinner aint the type to waste money...

http://www.ebay.com/itm/Dayton-DC-Motor-4Z145-1-20-1-9-HP-12-24-Volts-RPM-1750-4200-Qty-2-/321166536581
Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: havuhung on June 22, 2014, 07:55:32 AM
Not with the mechanism you suggested!... did you know it needs 2 drive gears and going in opposite directions for it to work?... guess I trusted it would adapt to my single gear and didn't realize until 16 hours of building and after I installed it.

I'm going to be taking a break as I've been at this for 13 days straight 12 hours a day.

Luc
Hi gotoluc,
video clip I found: two disks to provide power should rotate in opposite directions, you have reduced the need for complex gear, now you give (part of the disk) is used to keep the lever arm and also is helping to reverse, and it will still work as required..
Well done!
Yes, somehow all available materials to carry out the work it is a top priority because it helps us shorten the time for test machine.
Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: ARMCORTEX on June 22, 2014, 08:09:37 AM
Hi gotoluc,
Well done!
Yes, somehow all available materials to carry out the work it is a top priority because it helps us shorten the time for test machine.

No apology ?

Silence you cretin! As an armchair engineer you are fired!

You wasted master Gotoluc's time.

Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: havuhung on June 22, 2014, 08:12:12 AM
Hi Luc,

I can see you got into a jam. This design should work (no guarantees) it is a slight modification from my Hyperbolic Drive design, it will produce ellipses and many other interesting permutations from eggs to all form of hypercyclic shapes and patterns, the requirement would be a variable speed on the second sprocket/gear/pulley/directdrive. I have drawn it as a 1/2 speed form, which gives an ellipse, this would be easy to adapt using chains etc. The original Skinner design would be very similar to what I have here. The drawings are quick sketches, just adapt your materials to suite. I hope this helps with your build, regards Arto.
Hi Artoj,
there are plenty of clips for creating simulated the elliptical motion on youtube and (google) many of them are textured with gears!
Of the mechanical structure in your drawings are very good, there is stability, avoid swinging the arms while working.
Thank you
Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: havuhung on June 22, 2014, 08:57:48 AM
No apology ?

Silence you cretin! As an armchair engineer you are fired!

You wasted master Gotoluc's time.
Hi ARMCORTEX,
Not true as you think!!!
like myself, do not have conditions to test device! . . A friend of us a lot of effort to do the job too! I think all of us should have the support, albeit spiritual encouragement!. . Step in to test for any device, we will spend a lot of money and effort, it is not easy for everyone to be able to do that! . . From these results bring to a failure or not as desired; we gradually achieve success! . .
I never jealous of anyone!
Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: Artoj on June 22, 2014, 09:47:14 PM
Mistake
Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: alfilmx on June 22, 2014, 10:27:15 PM
Hi luc, maybe this works
Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: Artoj on June 23, 2014, 12:13:59 AM
Hi Luc

I posted the incorrect picture, so I deleted the post , here is the corrected version and another type that maybe even easier to build. The first picture still requires the stationary center shaft, but the second picture shows that the centrifugal action will throw the smaller wheel(pulley/gear/sprocket) around, to ensure that it does, load up some weights on it. Also to stop the vibration you could add a secound wheel on the other side just to balance it. The important ratio is 2:1 of the wheels and 2.666:1 of the pitch center on the smaller wheel to the lower shaft center attachment, I have a few more versions, but I think these should be simple to implement. My Hyperbolic Drive design maybe a little too complex for the type of build you are doing at present, it would be very close to Skinners design, as this has taken me years of work to simplify to this basic outline, which can be used for all sorts of non-linear rotary actions, never underestimate the complexity hidden is some simple arrangements. I hope this helps, regards Arto.
Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: Artoj on June 23, 2014, 12:33:31 AM
In the pictures it does look like the a belt is around both wheels, this is not a belt, just a doodle showing my ideas and that they are connected , if you did use a belt or chain you would have clearance and use the arm that is above to guide the smaller wheel, or if it was a chain this would be ok as long as there is clearance and maybe wouldn't even need the arm guide, as it is being thrown out clearing the other sprocket. If they were gears then this would be perfect to connect together, as the ratios and smoothness would be superior. Anyway I did this to help out, It isn't the best way to implement the types of gentle actions required to move a rotating lever arm. But as they say let the FORCE be with you, as for me force is not required.  Regards Arto.
Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: noonespecial on June 23, 2014, 12:40:45 AM
Actually if you want a 2:1 ratio, the two gears C1 and C2 will need to be the same size.
Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: Artoj on June 23, 2014, 01:09:54 AM
Ratio of Diameters
Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: Artoj on June 23, 2014, 03:20:47 AM
Hi Luc

Just one more for the road, this should the the easiest to implement, the spring is vital as it keeps the  5" arm going in a small arc of about 43.43 degrees, this device would be the best way to make an ellipse from a few pivots, this could even be the system used by Skinner., regards Arto.

Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: havuhung on June 23, 2014, 06:57:20 AM
Not with the mechanism you suggested!... did you know it needs 2 drive gears and going in opposite directions for it to work?... guess I trusted it would adapt to my single gear and didn't realize until 16 hours of building and after I installed it.

I'm going to be taking a break as I've been at this for 13 days straight 12 hours a day.

Luc
Hi gotoluc,
Sorry, as I have proposed to you how to create mechanical motion ellipse, but the omission is I have no specific interpretation of the extra textures to make it work! for example: in the previous clip illustrates the lack of actuators required!                  :(

Here is a clip that can illustrate more understandable, but I'm not sure what because it needs to have structure in the planetary gear unit. . . require precise mechanical processing!
http://youtu.be/epe2NegB_lQ

Regards
Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: havuhung on June 23, 2014, 03:02:33 PM
Hi gotoluc,
need to add an intermediate shaft to the drive bearings fixed to the walls of your box, upper shaft sprocket wheel has pressed from the outer surface of the leash near the electric motor; the lower end of the structure is a trapezoidal transmission pulley to pulley arm on disk.  The figure below:
Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: gotoluc on June 23, 2014, 03:10:20 PM
Hi everyone,

thank you all for your input and new ideas. I appreciate all the help.
I'm away for most of the day but tonight I'll review it all.

Thanks again

Luc
Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: gotoluc on June 23, 2014, 09:13:31 PM
Okay, I had the time to review all the ideas and have decided to go with havuhung (above post) idea since it can salvage the work I've already done. Good recovery on your part havuhung, thanks.

I wish to thank Artoj for all his ideas and drawings. I'm sure others who haven't built the elliptical assembly could consider the drawings and the above as a simple option.

I would also like to thank ARMCORTEX for a good idea which is not complicated to build: http://www.overunity.com/14655/1939-gravity-power-multiply-power-by-1200/msg407464/#msg407464 (http://www.overunity.com/14655/1939-gravity-power-multiply-power-by-1200/msg407464/#msg407464)

and thank you to alfilmx for the simplest of solution: http://www.overunity.com/14655/1939-gravity-power-multiply-power-by-1200/msg407524/#msg407524 (http://www.overunity.com/14655/1939-gravity-power-multiply-power-by-1200/msg407524/#msg407524)
Please note one would need the ellipse groove to be about 1 inch deep so the shaft does not hit bottom when it comes in the narrow area of the ellipse since the lever becomes higher. Also, this setup would have more friction losses but should be fine for simple proof of concept build. It could of been fine for me if I hadn't built havuhung's first suggestion.

Great job guys

Thanks for sharing

Luc
Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: ARMCORTEX on June 23, 2014, 11:44:40 PM
Havahung, you scumbag !

Now I have a reason to hate you.

I'll remember this !   8)
Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: ARMCORTEX on June 24, 2014, 12:08:54 AM
My worry with this is that a single array wont allow us to tap into the energy without killing the inertia, same problem that chalkalis faced.

You should try a light load and see if by adjusting the speed of lever @ that exact moment you can re-energize it. I fear that this will be all or nothing, the whole machine, or it dont show any gain.

My theory is that we can make microcontroller unit, pwm feedback drive with encoder feedback, wich will basicly a very responsive subsystem that can control speed perfectly  given the speed order

And a main system that will detect change in lagging weight and send  commands to the subsystem, to  basicly emulate the Skinner upper part.
So a position feedback system detects when we are about to lose control and send new command to subsystem ( wich also has encoder system).
Motor drives can also use current feedback but that always needs to be modeled motor to motor and not as rock solid and universal. Always engineer for wors case when you dont know what you're doing...

If good logic framework is done, it can become basicly extremely flexible system, simply changing a few variables we become equivalent to skinner
machining a new piece.

I would be ready to make this if I see that this is not another joke by Aaron.

Nothing motivates me more than overunity and bragging rights. It wouldnt be really for the money since a bunch of  chinese chip crackers would undercut me.

Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: gotoluc on June 24, 2014, 03:36:58 AM
An original picture of the Skinner device was sold on ebay today: http://cgi.ebay.ca/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=161346614497 (http://cgi.ebay.ca/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=161346614497)

Here is the largest I could make the image before you start seeing pixels

Luc
Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: ARMCORTEX on June 24, 2014, 04:00:28 AM
Hmm can anybody guess ??

From my research there is a moment where energy can be harvested, if I see the chalkalis video.

This about the concept, chalkalis taps the wheel and chalkalis assistant puts wood exactly @ the right place, chalkalis cut wood all day with tap of his hands, or tiny motor.

Now, take bruce lee or conventionnal machine, to cut wood, he is sweating like a mad man. Get it ?? Tac tac with his pinky... but... dont interfere with swing

My best guess is that this is a synchronizer, wich exacts working is not really important, think ''multiphase'', think about overlapping the swings @ all costs

He overlapping the ''OU'' time period of multiple phase shift arrays.

With his asymetric orbit, he overlaps those moments in time, just as rectifier would with tip of phases. All array are out of phase by some degree.

Now comes in ''what orbit'' question... circular, elliptical, square or triangle ?... This is the real question .éé :)

Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: havuhung on June 24, 2014, 11:19:39 AM
Havahung, you scumbag !

Now I have a reason to hate you.

I'll remember this !   8)
Hi ARMCORTEX,
Let's wait and see, people will be happy to  Mr. gotoluc  declared  success test of Skinner machine principle . "Oh! Gravity Power machine Skinner 1939, machine back to life with the energy it creates is real."

Regards
Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: centraflow on June 25, 2014, 07:42:44 PM
Nice pictures Luc

If you look at the second one you can see quite plainly how the top of the botton shaft is made, it is a stub end into the bottom shaft, it has to turn and slightly move in and out of it, not much but it moves, the overall length changes as it moves through the ellipse. I have said this before we knew about this photo, if it doesn't do this it will lock to the input power at its stress point in the ellips.

Pitty we don't have more good quality photos at different angles, especially the top drive of the levers, but I'm sure I have it right.

regards

Mike 8)

PS. I have also worked out that the system controls itself, I have posted this on the EF topic thread, this man was totally brilliant.

regards

Mike 8)
Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: ARMCORTEX on June 25, 2014, 08:41:24 PM
If you have it right, then plz make the sketch so that we understand the top synchronizer.

If you are a true craftsman, you would know how to make it.

After much deliberation, using logic and elimination, I have concluded that the top part is but a synchroniser, so that one motor can move many different orbits, and that the size and height has nothing to do with needed leverage but by geometrical constraints. And it probably was a pain in the ass to adjust so that it worked well.

Knowing this,its up for debate wich is better, 4 seperate smaller motors that are electronically controlled for an emilation of phase shift, or the top part, with the synchronizer.

To synchronize the proper out of phasing of all ellipse orbits. Because with these gravity devices, only a small window is open for us to tap energy, now  where  that is I dont know, the thin part of ellipse, big part, is there 2 of these windows per orbit each thin part ? 8 small windows of oportuniy.

But if you arrange the phasing right so that the ''window is always open'' on the main shaft, ahhh....

Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: not_a_mib on June 26, 2014, 05:51:58 AM
The weight motion and base bearing operation resembles that in the bottom cone of the David Hamel 3-cone device.
Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: gotoluc on June 27, 2014, 12:09:32 AM
Update,

Elliptical mechanism in operation without lever connected: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kn_gI1Ae6d8

Elliptical mechanism failed to operate correctly with lever connected: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T4wvNRO4_MU

This mechanism needs too much precision for experiments.

I'm also starting to think 2 gravity units 180 degrees out of phase may be required to balance out the motor (prime mover) input.
Also we don't understand how the primary input mechanism is made, so we're working in the dark.
I'm now starting to think the input mechanism is connected to the lever shaft rotation. You can see when Mr. Skinner turns the lever by hand and the input pulley turns. I've noticed this for a while but it didn't connect till now.

Luc

Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: sterlinga on June 27, 2014, 03:50:17 AM
Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: rice on June 27, 2014, 04:37:28 AM
Just thinking out loud here....  Everyone is excited about this machine and the reason is because we could potentially take a strip off a bar on a laithe with a 1/8 horse motor.  And this must be overunity!  This is the only reason that we are excited about the video right?

Has anyone tried to peel a strip off of a mild bar with a 1/8 horse motor?

With a sharp tool,  the right gearing, and the right bar,  a 1/8 horse motor will do the job long enough to make this film.......   No?
Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: havuhung on June 27, 2014, 05:04:41 AM
Update,

This mechanism needs too much precision for experiments.

I'm also starting to think 2 gravity units 180 degrees out of phase may be required to balance out the motor (prime mover) input.
Also we don't understand how the primary input mechanism is made, so we're working in the dark.
I'm now starting to think the input mechanism is connected to the lever shaft rotation. You can see when Mr. Skinner turns the lever by hand and the input pulley turns. I've noticed this for a while but it didn't connect till now.

Luc
Hi gotoluc,
In this picture detail (focus), I do not know the exact name for it! Its mission might help smooth shaft lever movement in any direction. . . In the middle of the box you do not see clearly similar details! . .
Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: ARMCORTEX on June 27, 2014, 05:24:04 AM
I agree that the video is garbage and this had the smell of familiarity.

We are in the dark totally, like you say, you are already hinting.

Gotoluc I recommend you look more into the teachings of Dimitriev..

And for those video lovers, he made alot of videos.

Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: Artoj on June 27, 2014, 01:55:02 PM
Hi Luc,

I treated this like a major breakdown at a local factory, where I have been sought out many times by engineers when the S**t hits the fan, even at 1am. Well here it is, and the most likely the method used by Skinner.  The simplest, cheapest and the most elegant, a design solution an engineer in 1939 would have used. The exact materials and parts William possibly used, I still have on the drawing board.

Regards Arto
Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: gotoluc on June 27, 2014, 04:16:29 PM
Just thinking out loud here....  Everyone is excited about this machine and the reason is because we could potentially take a strip off a bar on a laithe with a 1/8 horse motor.  And this must be overunity!  This is the only reason that we are excited about the video right?

Has anyone tried to peel a strip off of a mild bar with a 1/8 horse motor?

With a sharp tool,  the right gearing, and the right bar,  a 1/8 horse motor will do the job long enough to make this film.......   No?

If you look closely the device turns a large belt that turns a large shaft attached to the ceiling which has other belts attached to drill press, cut off saw and lathe.  The losses on all these belts would be greater than 1/8 HP. Notice he uses a string to couple the 1/8 hp electric motor to the first pulley. To me this would indicate that he is not even using all the motors available torque.

Luc
Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: gotoluc on June 27, 2014, 04:20:40 PM
Hi gotoluc,
In this picture detail (focus), I do not know the exact name for it! Its mission might help smooth shaft lever movement in any direction. . . In the middle of the box you do not see clearly similar details! . .

It's called a gimbal

Other than that I don't understand what you are trying to say.

Luc
Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: centraflow on June 27, 2014, 04:41:07 PM
Luc

The top drive is important, but not complicated, I need to draw it well for you to see but I will try to explain.

There is a steel circular plate which has a 90 degree cross of steel bar attacked at the center of the cross to a bearing on that plate off set by an amount so as the plate turns in a circule and that center of the cross moves around like a cam. This makes the ends of those bars move in and out at 180 degrees to one another.

On the ends of those bares are a bent cam, one end to the bar and the other end to the top of the rod which goes to the gimal, these connections are free moving in a circule.

If you look at the 33sec part of the main video you will notice that the motor is running and those rods do not move, it will have that effect until you move the top weight to start the overall movement "very clever". It works on the same principle as pushing someone on a swing just to keep the movement and nothing else. The rest of the system works on those weights "falling" and nothing else. The amount of energy needed is so little to keep it going "like the swing".

regards

Mike 8)

All will become clear when I can get all the drawings and pdf done ;)

Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: centraflow on June 27, 2014, 05:09:18 PM
Hope this helps

regards

Mike 8)
Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: gotoluc on June 27, 2014, 05:13:08 PM
Hi Luc,

I treated this like a major breakdown at a local factory, where I have been sought out many times by engineers when the S**t hits the fan, even at 1am. Well here it is, and the most likely the method used by Skinner.  The simplest, cheapest and the most elegant, a design solution an engineer in 1939 would have used. The exact materials and parts William possibly used, I still have on the drawing board.

Regards Arto

Hi Arto,

I must say I like this idea the most of all that has been presented. Thank you for pushing it further. You are very talented in mechanics.

I'm still wondering if we could be missing something. Look at the Movement 1 looped videos attached and the Hand movement 2 video attached to the next post.

The problem I still have is, if we say the upper lever shaft  is free to TURN on its own axis and that turning movement is not attached to the upper elliptical mechanism, then why does the upper lever shaft turn when Mr. Skinner removes the tread which causes a slight turn of the first pulley (after motor) see first video loop.

And why does the same pulley turn when he turns the lever by hand by 1/4 turn? see second video.

Could this not be a clue?  or do you think this is 100% explainable?

Luc
Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: gotoluc on June 27, 2014, 05:16:16 PM
Second video attached
Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: centraflow on June 27, 2014, 05:17:34 PM
At the beginning of the main video you can see these cams on the end of the bar moving, look hard, not good quality, but they are there moving and you can just see that cross bar as well moving, but the angle is bad, but that is how he did it ;)

regards

Mike 8)
Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: centraflow on June 27, 2014, 05:27:00 PM
First video is just his arm pushing on the plate/bar to weight

Second video he has the relation of those cams at the drive just at that point of push. It's as I have said, there is a point where a little energy goes in to keep it going.

If you think about how I have drawn it, there is going to be a point (change of direction of cams) where some drive coinsides with the weight movement (that little push)

regards

Mike 8)
Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: havuhung on June 27, 2014, 05:45:35 PM
It's called a gimbal

Other than that I don't understand what you are trying to say.

Luc
Hi gotoluc,
I guess that the inside of the gimbal structure, at both ends of it could be two springs, for the purpose of calming force from shock caused bar lever shaft. . .

Regards
Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: gotoluc on June 27, 2014, 05:47:35 PM
Luc

The top drive is important, but not complicated, I need to draw it well for you to see but I will try to explain.

There is a steel circular plate which has a 90 degree cross of steel bar attacked at the center of the cross to a bearing on that plate off set by an amount so as the plate turns in a circule and that center of the cross moves around like a cam. This makes the ends of those bars move in and out at 180 degrees to one another.

On the ends of those bares are a bent cam, one end to the bar and the other end to the top of the rod which goes to the gimal, these connections are free moving in a circule.

If you look at the 33sec part of the main video you will notice that the motor is running and those rods do not move, it will have that effect until you move the top weight to start the overall movement "very clever". It works on the same principle as pushing someone on a swing just to keep the movement and nothing else. The rest of the system works on those weights "falling" and nothing else. The amount of energy needed is so little to keep it going "like the swing".

regards

Mike 8)

All will become clear when I can get all the drawings and pdf done ;)

Thanks Mike,

that could very well be the way he did it. What ever he did, one thing is quite clear to me now is, the actions of the two 180 degrees out of phase lever sets would return a push on the other set. Only mechanical friction losses should be the input losses.

This Mr. Skinner was smart!... If we can get this to work we should honor him with Doctor of mechanics and gravity.

Now, the problem I have is I would need a second build to prove this 180 degree out of phase push pull action is what's needed but I don't think I can afford to make another set :-[

Thanks for sharing

Luc
Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: centraflow on June 27, 2014, 08:17:17 PM
Here is the center section B

regards

Mike 8)
Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: i_ron on June 27, 2014, 08:29:40 PM
Second video attached

Good observations as usual Luc, I like where the 'stationary' weight rises when he turns the top weight

Ron
Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: gotoluc on June 27, 2014, 09:44:39 PM

I like where the 'stationary' weight rises when he turns the top weight

Ron

I actually didn't notice that. I guess it's not really rising but more coming forward with the mid plate angle changing.

Luc
Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: ramset on June 27, 2014, 11:00:36 PM
Luc
Quote
but I don't think I can afford to make another set :-[
-----------------------------------------

Perhaps setup a Paypal for this ?
While it will not be a fortune I can send some funds .

Thx
Chet
Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: Just..Sayin.. on June 28, 2014, 12:18:00 AM
Where in this contraption is the gravity component?

There is no gravity component, it is harnessing centrifugal force, not gravity.
Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: centraflow on June 28, 2014, 12:48:03 AM
There is no gravity component, it is harnessing centrifugal force not gravity.

If you take a circular track that a steel ball can run around, then create a wobble of that track, the steel ball will continualy go around until you stop that wobble, what is causing the ball to go around?

Answer, gravity, why? because the wobble changed the relation of the center of gravity with that mass. It does not matter how much that steel ball weighs, what matters is how much force is needed to create the wobble, vola.

regards

Mike 8)
Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: gotoluc on June 28, 2014, 12:58:50 AM
Luc
Quote
but I don't think I can afford to make another set :-[
-----------------------------------------

Perhaps setup a Paypal for this ?
While it will not be a fortune I can send some funds .

Thx
Chet

Thanks Chet, that's very kind of you to offer.

Let me think about it as I don't like to take other peoples money for something I no longer understand how it works.
It looked quite simple at first but the more I've been testing the effects the less I know what's going on ???
I'm sure I'm not the only one, there are many testing this.

After the weekend I'll get back to you if I think it's worth putting more into it.

Kind regards

Luc
Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: ARMCORTEX on June 28, 2014, 01:17:40 AM

This device would be better.

Easier and mor powerful.
Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: i_ron on June 28, 2014, 01:44:07 AM
I actually didn't notice that. I guess it's not really rising but more coming forward with the mid plate angle changing.

Luc

Only partially correct Luc, the bottom is not free to rotate as it is locked by the three other stationary weights. When he rotates the upper weight forward he is changing the angle of the bottom weight plate causing the visible rise of the weight.  Note when he releases the upper weight the bottom weigh pulls the upper weight back to its normal run position.

What this is showing is the 'rod' is free not only to tilt in and out but tilt ahead and back, so it does require a ball or Cardan joint at the bottom. Where this is, is hard to say as the rod has no bend but is straight all the way down to the top of the bottom support works  and pivots around this point the sprocket below this
remains horizontally stable with no tilt to match the rod.

Ron

Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: shylo on June 28, 2014, 03:01:08 AM
The long input arm that goes down to the  distribution plate , moves orbital, but is locked,It gives the illusion that it is rotating. It's locked around 90 degrees
Lock the input so it's 90 off  the bottom.
Still trying.....artv
Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: ARMCORTEX on June 28, 2014, 06:48:23 AM
They are like 4 big wobbling plates out of phase.

Synchronized wobbling plate.

Of course something on top, or bottom, has the play for the tilt, same effect.

The 4 gears meet into one and support eachother via that link, so that they can counteract the load killing the inertia.

Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: havuhung on June 28, 2014, 07:14:54 AM
Hi All,
on youtube there is a video clip of  Dave Q member  Energetic Forum share, explain the working principle of the  Skinner machine 1939...
Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: ARMCORTEX on June 28, 2014, 08:01:32 AM
That is just a glorious video, the way the stick is used as lever was hidden from us.

This is definitly not a hoax.

Glory to Skinner.

The theory of ellipse drive was debunked and i_ron was right ?

I was completly misled I admit, my ellipse drive was quite unfit and inferior to this, maybe with modifications.

Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: ARMCORTEX on June 28, 2014, 08:25:43 AM
Hey I proposed an overunity idea based on Mikhail Dimitriev's work.

With enough reverse engineering an ellipse drive would work...Never blame me.

Never point the finger @ me.

This is all redirected to the people who misled me and people who didnt make a good video.

You ask ellipse, I give it.

I never deny or accept anything I dont care, I accept anything logical, If I understand meaning of phrase or see a video.

Now it is 100% clear that the bottom part is as shown here is solved, new question why is top part overly complex.

Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: centraflow on June 28, 2014, 01:15:13 PM
This is the bottom drive C, please note that the weights are in sync.

regards

Mike 8)
Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: centraflow on June 28, 2014, 01:50:21 PM
For those that can't get their head around the shifting center of gravity relationship, here is a drawing

Regards

Mike 8)
Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: Just..Sayin.. on June 28, 2014, 07:11:25 PM

If you take a circular track that a steel ball can run around, then create a wobble of that track, the steel ball will continualy go around until you stop that wobble, what is causing the ball to go around?

Answer, gravity, why? because the wobble changed the relation of the center of gravity with that mass. It does not matter how much that steel ball weighs, what matters is how much force is needed to create the wobble, vola.

regards

Mike 8)

You are correct... just watched this video where the gravitational aspect of this device is explained with a small model replication....
Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: ARMCORTEX on June 28, 2014, 10:58:56 PM
Hmm that is also the idea I had in mind, the rolling track with the ball, this is definitely a wobble, reminiscent of godlike breakdancers, this could exlain how they get so much velocity .... (kidding)

But I could be wrong about them being all out of phase, it makes the frame shake a lot imagine 400 pounds... I think this problematic

maybe there is an ''anti-wobble'' opposite, just like many arms in unbalanced wheels. That counteracting makes a lot of sense.

But I definitly think the gimbal needs to be maximised for best rhythm, up and down was kind of glitch, it needs smooooth up and down perfect up and down.

Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: turbogt16v on June 29, 2014, 10:58:48 AM
http://videobam.com/vDxPm (http://videobam.com/vDxPm)

input 3v could work on 1.5 if made beater ,
will check output later,if less than 60% i give up

Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: havuhung on June 29, 2014, 11:11:33 AM
Hi turbogt16v,
Well, you keep testing power output.

Thanks
Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: gyulasun on June 29, 2014, 11:17:40 AM
http://videobam.com/vDxPm (http://videobam.com/vDxPm)

input 3v could work on 1.5 if made better ,
will check output later,if less than 60% i give up

You have to estimate pretty well the efficiency of your output convertion too, be it an alternator or generator, whatever.
Unless you do a Prony brake test..  So do not give up yet.

Gyula
Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: FreeEnergy on June 29, 2014, 10:51:29 PM
Hi All,
on youtube there is a video clip of  Dave Q member  Energetic Forum share, explain the working principle of the  Skinner machine 1939...

Outstanding..
Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: Just..Sayin.. on June 29, 2014, 10:58:29 PM
You are correct... just watched this video where the gravitational aspect of this device is explained with a small model replication....

I retract my statement, I could be wrong but I still believe centrifugal force is playing a major role in the output of this device.....
Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: gotoluc on June 29, 2014, 11:18:36 PM

Outstanding..

You think?... what is it that's so great?

Luc
Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: FreeEnergy on June 29, 2014, 11:28:39 PM
You think?... what is it that's so great?

Luc

Not in the mood to discuss at the moment.
Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: ARMCORTEX on June 29, 2014, 11:28:55 PM
Yeah not so good come to think of it, it might just be a fancy double storage unit.

1 kW output woohoo.

A lathe proves nothing, he never patented it, the story about his COP is sketchy.

Too much devices in mind not enough \$, dont need any money pits.

Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: vin onar on June 30, 2014, 05:00:29 PM
i have built an output stage of this device (Skinner's gravity power) for a test if this device is a feasible one for free energy. It has approx, 50 lbs  of weight with approx. 4 ft of lever (5'7" tall=total height) (all steel) with a flywheel from 2.5 l Subaru engine, the pivot is from a trucks drive shaft, the spinner on top is from Doge GC Idler pulley, the lever or the inline shaft is a natural gas pipe scrap. There is a noticeable difference: It is a little bit harder to turn it through the center shaft connected to the flywheel but is easier to turn through the input lever with a handle that turns 2.5" radius. The centrifugal force seems multiplies the gravitational force of the falling weight. Now I need to build the input stage to couple it with this stage. Right now I'm having fun with it. I'm Learning on how to use the lever, the gravity, centrifugal force and etc.. But one thing I initially observed it seems that it multiplies power to the output shaft through combination of these things. Pls. don't ask me about data. I don't have a way to fully test this contraption yet. The real test will be when I'm done with the input stage with a prime mover and connect a geared  windmill generator to the output. (In which I don't have the budget to buy these parts). All the parts were from scraps.
Also, one thing that I don't know yet is how to post pics and vids for this post.
Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: Cisco on June 30, 2014, 06:58:08 PM
You think?... what is it that's so great?

Luc

Luc,

The observations of the builder, Dave Quirey, are worthwhile pondering--from EU Forum,  http://www.energeticforum.com/renewable-energy/17195-william-f-skinner-1939-gravity-power-10.html (http://www.energeticforum.com/renewable-energy/17195-william-f-skinner-1939-gravity-power-10.html):

William F. Skinner - 1939 Gravity Power
There is no need to attempt to replicate Mr Skinner's device to the last detail.
All that's required is an understanding of the principles involved.
Personally, I believe that they are basically very simple, and I've tried to illustrate them in my schematic drawing.
It is very easy to make an off-centre pivoted weight revolve around its axis.
When the weight is mounted on an inclined shaft, the axis of the shaft only needs to be lifted from its "rest" position, and gravity will apply a turning moment, or torque, via the weight, to the shaft.
The weight can be kept in motion either by turning the upper end of the shaft in a circle (large or small) with an elliptical drive arrangement, or by
simply oscillating a vertical shaft from side to side in its vertical plane.
When I first watched the 1939 movie clip, I noticed both of these methods in
use.
The upper weight being driven by a simple reciprocating drive, and the lower
weight, driven elliptically by the now rotating upper weight.
I have replicated this arrangement very easily with various Meccano models.

An interesting feature of this mechanism is the fact that loading the output drive shaft results in a gravitational response. In other words, if the system is unloaded, the rotating mass is simply acting like a flywheel, storing kinetic energy. Unloaded, the upper weight is chasing the lower.
However, when a load is presented to the output, the upper driving weight starts to overtake the lower weight. This increases the angle of lift and gravity lends a hand. The greater the degree of lift, the greater the gravitational torque produced.
I believe that the combination of leverage and gravitational torque are the keys to extracting over unity power from this device.
I will upload another video to youtube, which I hope will make things abundantly clear :-)

Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: seychelles on July 01, 2014, 04:26:18 PM
HI ALL, HERE IS MY HUMBLE INPUT TO THIS QUEST .
Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: gotoluc on July 01, 2014, 05:53:48 PM
i have built an output stage of this device (Skinner's gravity power) for a test if this device is a feasible one for free energy. It has approx, 50 lbs  of weight with approx. 4 ft of lever (5'7" tall=total height) (all steel) with a flywheel from 2.5 l Subaru engine, the pivot is from a trucks drive shaft, the spinner on top is from Doge GC Idler pulley, the lever or the inline shaft is a natural gas pipe scrap. There is a noticeable difference: It is a little bit harder to turn it through the center shaft connected to the flywheel but is easier to turn through the input lever with a handle that turns 2.5" radius. The centrifugal force seems multiplies the gravitational force of the falling weight. Now I need to build the input stage to couple it with this stage. Right now I'm having fun with it. I'm Learning on how to use the lever, the gravity, centrifugal force and etc.. But one thing I initially observed it seems that it multiplies power to the output shaft through combination of these things. Pls. don't ask me about data. I don't have a way to fully test this contraption yet. The real test will be when I'm done with the input stage with a prime mover and connect a geared  windmill generator to the output. (In which I don't have the budget to buy these parts). All the parts were from scraps.
Also, one thing that I don't know yet is how to post pics and vids for this post.

Thanks for your post  vin onar

when you to the topic you will see under the text box there's an "Attach:"
when you click "Browse" you can select the picture or a video from your computer to upload it in your post.
Click (more attachments) for multiple pictures in one post. Keep in mind pics should be below 1024 x 768 to fit browser window. Video must be below 5MB or you have to use youtube to host them and just post the youtube web link in your post.
Allowed file types: txt, tif, xls, doc, odt, pdf, jpg, jpeg, gif, mp3, mpg, flv, mp4, mpeg, png, rm, ra, rmv, avi, zip, wmv, wma, rar, qt, mov, swf, asf, wm2d, 3gp, 3g2
Restrictions: 12 per post, maximum total size 6000KB, maximum individual size 5000KB

Thanks for sharing and looking forward to seeing your build

Luc
Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: gotoluc on July 01, 2014, 05:54:52 PM
HI ALL, HERE IS MY HUMBLE INPUT TO THIS QUEST .

Thanks for sharing

Luc
Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: d3x0r on July 04, 2014, 05:08:46 AM
There's this guy... Thejohndevice.com

(yes, I'm sure pages ago this was all mentioned but I just got here)

I can definitely see that as a viable gravity engine...  but it's lots of torque and not a lot of horsepower... kind of like a huge flywheel... or a static resonant tank... sure you can get get KW cycling, but if you try and pull from it, you kill the whole thing and have to start it spinning again....

but with a small continuous input, and NOT taking the whole energy... like only take a portion of the energy ... should be able to run some numbers.... I'd try and build it in space engineers but they don't have pivoting joints, only linear... and there's lots of CV or universal joints that can be used...

And sure it's low speed, but so are wind generators...
[http://www.windynation.com/jzv/p/257/Rover+Series+Permanent+Magnet+Alternator] \$239.98  Rover Series Permanent Magnet Alternator  11 pounds[/url]  not a very big alternator....  have to do more research for \$/W efficiency...

Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: d3x0r on July 04, 2014, 06:14:11 AM
So I've been considering this.  The only way something can fall is if it is higher than it started....
from equilibrium/stop condition, the first motion at the top actually raises the weight slightly.
gravity acts not on an entire body... but is really about the center of mass....

*thinks* ... need some better sketches and models...
-----
Edit:
I'll have to dig way back into memory and pull out some calculus I guess...
as the top moves (rotates is the simpler model), X degrees, then the center of mass is lifted, and then falls at an angle and creates a rotation as it falls back to its original height.   This path is always longer than the height it was raised, so it must take a longer time, therefore it's accelerated by gravity for a longer amount of time than the time which it took to raise the weight in the first place.

if the angle at the top of the shaft is very slight, then less work is applied to raise the weight, though it then has a much shorter distance to fall... but the angle of incline should resemble something like a cylinder rolling down a hill accelerated by gravity.  So it's forward motion will be sin(slope) * m * g...   But; that would only work if slope < 90 degrees... if it's vertical m has no bearing.... so then is it really a cylinder on a slope?  (feather and hammer drop on moon).
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_mCC-68LyZM  (okay force is not acceleration)  so a heavier object gets more force applied

(distraction; not applicable: hmm a long chain falling out of a beaker goes up first... like way up over the beaker
http://www.nature.com/news/physicists-explain-gravity-defying-chain-trick-1.14523
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QTC3bKea2Yo (longer chains from higher heights)
)

Hmm... well due to inertia, the mass falling vertically must have the same force being applied if it's non vertical, and something like the cos(angle) vertically and sin(angle) around axis or rotation... but then to get to the bottom it must apply that force for a longer time than it took to raise the object in the first place, resulting in a net acceleration of the object greater than the initial impulse....

search for "gravity acceleration tilted axis -accelerometer -digital -sensor" didn't reveal any useful math... so maybe again it's a case I don't know what physicists would call it?

or 'acceleration deflection gravity around tilted axis -accelerometer -sensor'

Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: d3x0r on July 04, 2014, 05:36:35 PM
Hmm; I didn't notice the first time that the drive on original Skinner was linear.
I guess as the eccentricity of the drive ellipse flattens, you require more work to raise the weight to a higher level, but you get a longer cycle where the weight's falling is... going to be ahead of the drive.  that may be an interesting path to a solution of acceleration.

Picture; Red is highest force applied to lift weight, pink is lower force, but still requires power, light blue is 0 to slight gain in drive, dark blue is positive feedback on the drive, where the forward acceleration will outrun the drive.

Looks like a sum of equal parts to me... or a continuous loss... Well it will be a lot of light pink and light blue segements so it will balance to zero... the first slight impulse will require power, but the weight will outrun the drive quickly being slightly blue, which in turn will slow, and the drive will catch up slightly and apply more force....

Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: turbogt16v on July 04, 2014, 09:10:37 PM
i just wanted to write something like that

the easy way to emagine john device is to emagine a huge weight that is rotating on a nail
starting easy,and picking up speed it would seem like the output is huge .like he claims,
but in reality he never counected output becouse it would only stop the device.
Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: havuhung on July 05, 2014, 07:47:14 AM
Hi All,
The conduct energy efficiency measurement, test on a small unit of the machine Skinner did not reach the expected results may be due to:
- The weight of the mass (rotating) is not large enough.
- The velocity of the mass (rotating) the kinetic energy generated is not high.
- Mechanical friction of the rotating parts is too much.
- Convert mechanical energy into electrical energy to achieve low performance. . .     :(

Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: noonespecial on July 05, 2014, 01:15:07 PM
Is there any information from Mr. Skinner that he used an elliptical path for either the upper drive system or the lower drive system?

In the video I only hear the announcer saying that the weights go round and round.

In a newspaper article about him and his device, he describes the weights as rotating 'in a circular motion'. I think some have mistakenly re-interpreted his comment regarding 'eccentrics' to mean elliptical. But eccentric simply means off-center. The circular rotation of the upper drive system is mirrored in the lower circular rotation of the unbalanced weights.
Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: d3x0r on July 05, 2014, 03:15:01 PM
I dunno about elliptical... the top is actually driven by flat levers that go back and forth, but then below their pivot is another pivot 90 degrees to that; looks like a offset conventional universal joint kinda...  (well no, a universal joint is a + so both joints at one level) I guess, since the bottom pivot is offset from the top, the result will be a ellipse with a wider throw from the top pivot.. but it doesn't HAVE to be, the throw side to side might be longer itself resulting in a circle...

was trying to track down how power was gotten... guess the bottom is sorta a knuckle joint that goes to gears that go to a common gear that drives a 90 degree offset shaft to that...

the path of the top of the long axis looks circular to me....

the oppositing sides are 180 degrees separated; so I guess each is 90 degree separation

(didn't have the bottom and top in one shot)
Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: noonespecial on July 05, 2014, 03:34:29 PM
Thanks,,

no ellipse then,, not to say that an ellipse could not be used,, just that it does not look like Mr. Skinner used one.

Agreed. Also interesting is the fact that he states that the weights don't actually fall (but are simply rotated to a new COG by the angle change).

If they don't fall, they don't rise. Based on this as well, there would be no reason to depart from a straight-forward simple rotary motion. Elliptical would seem to be an unnecessary complication.
Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: d3x0r on July 05, 2014, 03:37:00 PM

Agreed. Also interesting is the fact that he states that the weights don't actually fall (but are simply rotated to a new COG by the angle change).

If they don't fall, they don't rise. Based on this as well, there would be no reason to depart from a straight-forward simple rotary motion. Elliptical would seem to be an unnecessary complication.
they fall... if it's on a tilted axis, moving the axis raises the COG and allows it to fall again...

it may be (and probably is) inperceptable... as soon as you move the top, they start to move, so it doesn't raise very much....
Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: noonespecial on July 05, 2014, 03:46:22 PM
If you consider your first diagram, and even though B is not fixed to A, rotating A causes B to rotate in a horizontal circle. There could be some initial raising of the lower at startup, but once it is rotating, centripetal force will keep it rotating in a flat horizontal circle.
Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: d3x0r on July 05, 2014, 04:00:22 PM
If you consider your first diagram, and even though B is not fixed to A, rotating A causes B to rotate in a horizontal circle. There could be some initial raising of the lower at startup, but once it is rotating, centripetal force will keep it rotating in a flat horizontal circle.
In current considerations, B is attached to A... even though in skinner B is much shorter and A longer and the mass entirely differently shaped (and disregarding the top  floating mass)

centripetal force is an effect not a cause.  it's a result of a motion not a cause... The cause is the attempt to come back down...
Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: i_ron on July 05, 2014, 05:46:50 PM
I dunno about elliptical... the top is actually driven by flat levers that go back and forth,

Where is the evidence to back up this claim?

In Luc's video, link on page 6, post #84 I can clearly see the rotary motion of the driving arm. I see no side to side motion of the pivot point ether.

Confirmation that the top of the rod is circular motion is the obsevation, as shown in my video...

that the angle of view in two views 90 degrees to each other is the same. If the rod was moving in a flat plane then the rod would move back and forth in one view and towards and away in a view 90 degrees to the first. I show this clearly on page 14, post #205 where the angle is nearly identical in the two views that are at 90 degrees to each other. The only logical explanation is the the top of the rod is moving in a circle.

William shows us how the device works at the point where he stops the lower weight and advances the upper weight, When he does this the lower weight rises. When he releases the upper weight the lower weigh falls and pulls the upper weight back into its rest position. In other words, when the machine is in operation loading the lower weight lifts, retards its position in relation to the upper weight and the weight is now wanting to fall to its lower position, thus outputting drive to the load.
Ron

Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: i_ron on July 05, 2014, 08:14:41 PM

Here is a little sketch showing how the interaction of the two weights sets the lower rod inclination angle.

For example with no upper weight the lower weight would hold the drive plate out at a fixed position
in the circle at all times. However, with two weights, the automatic interaction sets the inclination angle
of the drive rod in direct proportion to the load, as it rotates in a circle.

Only at speed will centrifugal force cause this interaction, as at rest the natural inclination would be for the upper weight to collapse inward. So it is a balancing act to get the upper weight just right so that the resulting centrifugal force pulls the lower rod around. In Skinners build we see that the upper weight is a hollow piece of pipe to which can then be added varying amounts of lead shot or some other substance to achieve this goal.

The first sketch is thus with an inclination angle of zero.

EDIT: sorry I keep adding to this post, here is the latest...

I need to clarify "inclination angle", with the lower weight directly towards you. the rod is inclined 5.5 degrees towards you... but this is not what I was referring too. With the weigh held steady move the upper end of the rod either to the left or to the right in its circular path and the weight will rise, this is the inclination angle that I am referring too, Got it? so any angle that causes the weight to rise is the inclination angle.

So the second sketch is incorrect in that, that is the position of the upper end of the lower rod, the lower weight will be "some where else"

Ron

Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: turbogt16v on July 05, 2014, 08:19:39 PM
the weights are in circle orbit but the driving top rod has best results driven in elipse,
but even in elipse you got the problem of output power ,
when you gain output the input gains  by far,
the problem is in setting the weights wright
Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: d3x0r on July 05, 2014, 08:34:12 PM

Where is the evidence to back up this claim?

Ron
Ya I agree, but was only this morning that I noticed the secondary pivot point.
I see... the rod extends all the way from the rotating square plate to a circular path gear at the top even... so it's circular entirely.
Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: i_ron on July 05, 2014, 10:27:00 PM
Ya I agree, but was only this morning that I noticed the secondary pivot point.
I see... the rod extends all the way from the rotating square plate to a circular path gear at the top even... so it's circular entirely.

Well yes, that is what the video evidence seems to indicate.

Mind you it is not quite as simple as I present above... taking it from a standing start... if one moves the top of the rod say 10 degrees in a clockwise direction, inertia momentarily keeps the weigh in position, thus forming a small inclination angle. This allows gravity to allow the weight to reposition itself.

When running with no load this inclination angle will be very small. With a load the inclination angle will increase thus allowing gravity to do more work... but never more that the load!

Under load the drive plate will rotate CCW. This has the effect of making the drive radius smaller and making the weight rise to a higher position...fascinating...

Thanks for the positive comeback,

Ron

Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: i_ron on July 05, 2014, 10:39:37 PM

The output load is an input force to the system that makes the system respond and change the internal relationships.

A good observation!

Ron
Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: d3x0r on July 05, 2014, 10:40:35 PM
:) So this can all be done with rigid blocks... was trying to figure out how to model a pivot... I dunno it almost works... think my lower most pivot needs to be redone....
actually the bottom pivot is off center.

Was wondering where the give point was... so the top weight keeps the plate flat.
Added mass to it but... it's not right...
Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: ARMCORTEX on July 05, 2014, 11:44:12 PM
Ok then those who support the Skinner cultist claims should pool their ressources together and have built by somebody trained a large well made device rather than multiple shitty toy devices, so that we can stop the endless cycle of this.

Let the big boys make big toys, with the big machine tools.

Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: d3x0r on July 06, 2014, 12:25:57 AM
Ok then those who support the Skinner cultist claims should pool their ressources together and have built by somebody trained a large well made device rather than multiple shitty toy devices, so that we can stop the endless cycle of this.

Let the big boys make big toys, with the big machine tools.

several of the demos have a linear drive... could definatly advantage the gimbal

So probably should get a good plan together first...

I see viable arguments that the top weight compensates for the load to change the tilt of the lower shaft... but if it were to work 'the david device' simplifies it to a single rigid body with a wheel at the top within a circular drive track... although he goes through and adds more weight in balance, which reduces the actual amount that's accelerating (moving the COG more towards the center and up) and essentially ends up just adding flywheel mass... should be one mass on an arm... ( ya know, this guy... https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9-KVo4lxHgE )

Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: ARMCORTEX on July 06, 2014, 04:00:52 AM
No, there has been enough direction.

Simply a matter of planning well and anticipate modification and way to adapt mechanism to test many situation.

To see really if there is OU or not.

Now it is the realm of big boys to decide is its worth the risk, so I ask if the Skinner cultists will pool together or continue the non OU builds individually.
Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: d3x0r on July 06, 2014, 05:18:14 AM

This isn't entirely skinner, and may appear to be entirely off topic, but in my considerations I see one leading to the other a little

Ermola Andrei ... unfortunately he's ukrainian so there's some language issues...
http://www.overunity.com/14746/ermola-andrei/msg408658/#new (http://www.overunity.com/14746/ermola-andrei/msg408658/#new)  (summary thread I started)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0g0FcY-7Fw0 (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0g0FcY-7Fw0) (inventor himself demonstrating.  Just a vertical force ends up causing a perpetual rotation)

I somehow think these two ideas are linked, in that if I had something like TheJohnDevice(.com) (modern, simpler idea section) that if I attached the rotation of the shaft to a slip-ring at the top that had a spring that pulled the rotating axis offset, that it could be self-running... somehow there is probably an equilibrium that will end up with the weight just bound to a higher point instead of allowing it to fall continuously...

Actually got linked to skinner and john's device from recent posts on realstraanik thread about ermola andrei... so that might be part of my bias of linking them.

Translated page of Ermola describing the principle  (https://translate.google.com/translate?sl=auto&tl=en&js=y&prev=_t&hl=en&ie=UTF-8&u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.ermola.com.ua%2F&edit-text=&act=url)
Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: ARMCORTEX on July 06, 2014, 05:48:44 AM
I like Skinner more than that thing. And I like Dimitriev more than Skinner. Bigger smoother more durable=better.

It has super annoying durability issues that he is trying to diminish.

Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: d3x0r on July 06, 2014, 07:13:10 AM
I like Skinner more than that thing. And I like Dimitriev more than Skinner. Bigger smoother more durable=better.

It has super annoying durability issues that he is trying to diminish.
Dimitreiv is that big wheel in france right?  Problem with that is size to power ratio.... I tried a sim of that too... and maybe adding more arms will work.... just hard to do in a square grid.

The perpetual motion device noone disputes is that ball on a track in a circle with a pendulum...
http://youtu.be/Yqk283c5zBo?t=2m11s

I'll stop straying from topic.  (although this is less of a reach than Ermola)
Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: ARMCORTEX on July 06, 2014, 08:14:41 AM
Somebody named matze simmed it well.

All these devices give 4x OU.

So I see that ermola actually is making good papers, this is goood.

You can take design with grain of salt, whats important it overall principle.

Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: d3x0r on July 06, 2014, 09:53:19 AM
One more rough sim, then I'll do a better job...

http://youtu.be/GdlT35EZqd0 (http://youtu.be/GdlT35EZqd0)

Really sorry it's so long (5 minutes something)... was a lot of time thinking about where the faults were...
My original sims still had some of the rotor on, so they weren't going so well.
I had more of a skinner device with plate and lower rotors etc... but I captured it at 1 fps, and when I went to fix the framerate option it ate itself.

Need to adjust where the pivot on the arm is also, it ended up being a offset circle from the center of the drive too... but that also means the length between the drive and the gimbal changes, which requires much more force to overcome... the motors are somewhat forgiving and can be forced to torque the tops angular...
The forces are in kN and MN(newton)... because the mass blocks are like 55,000kg... the scale is really quite large in this...

But ya, still think there's merit.
Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: i_ron on July 06, 2014, 04:39:31 PM
One more rough sim, then I'll do a better job...

But ya, still think there's merit.

With the gimbal you are sim'ing the top drive rod... you have the weight on the wrong side.

Ron
Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: ARMCORTEX on July 06, 2014, 06:48:44 PM
There is strange things in the EF threads.

Incompetent people are arguing about a piece of metal again with accusations of ''misleading''...

Elliptical vs circular, make it so that its easily switched of driving mode and let that be that.

I'd start out with Dave Q, 2 big arrays. A good 500\$ build.

Thats why I say to the untalented fucks who claim to be, put your \$ in a hat and have it done right, kill the skinner right now.

Because people never learned to build shit with screwable modules thy think both cannot co exist ? Strange **** going on.

Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: d3x0r on July 06, 2014, 07:55:48 PM
Just adding image here so I can post it on EF....

they're no help.

Added more technical image of drive mechanism... (Valnor or is it Artoj to thank)
Edit: replaced picture with a more (in my opinion) accurate one...
Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: ARMCORTEX on July 06, 2014, 08:48:51 PM
Some may have built to make an easy transition between many modalities and many may have built that are reading and not posting.

A starting assumption must be made, then tested for and then the starting assumption must be changed to match the empirical results.

If YOU are so inclined, then why don't YOU fund a builder.. say like TK,, he has all the skills and knowledge needed to follow YOUR directions,, he is very talented.

Somehow I do not think that you will do that and I do not think TK would take your money unless you can convince him that there is something more than what is evident in the video.

Do you have an input as to the possible relationships that are in play?

I have mine and I am testing towards those,, I share with whom I choose and I can ignore those that I choose,, just like you can choose to ignore all of us "fill in the blank" but keep it in your own head.

my input is that your input is not proving anything, thus any input you make is worthless. And I dont share real input with non initiates.

There is no more input to give, its ''interresting'' and worth a real build.

I chip in 20\$, go ahead find the machinist, get a bunch of cultists, 50 of em, I am not popular like Aaron I cant do it.

Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: AB Hammer on July 06, 2014, 11:36:33 PM
Just adding image here so I can post it on EF....

they're no help.

Added more technical image of drive mechanism... (Valnor or is it Artoj to thank)
Edit: replaced picture with a more (in my opinion) accurate one...

Agreed,  A very nice and looks accurate diagram.
Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: ARMCORTEX on July 07, 2014, 12:20:08 AM
Not for you lol, you are not the project builder.

I am a machinist in training, I probably could be the project builder.

Yeah thats right, I'M the leader.

Go out there and organize me a fund raiser, then you will be useful.

Its gonna be made of metal and 6 foot high.
Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: i_ron on July 07, 2014, 01:38:17 AM
Not for you lol, you are not the project builder.

I am a machinist in training, I probably could be the project builder.

Yeah thats right, I'M the leader.

Go out there and organize me a fund raiser, then you will be useful.

Its gonna be made of metal and 6 foot high.

Lawrence..You told me, after being banned from the last group, that you were going to behave
and become Mr Nice Guy...when is this going to take place... ever?

Ron

Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: ARMCORTEX on July 07, 2014, 01:55:18 AM
What are you saying man, I'm nice guy, nice in my own special way, evil-nice.

I say, beware of the nice guy who is too nice.

I am the same alignement as Bessler.

Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: noonespecial on July 07, 2014, 02:08:39 AM
Wouldn't the rotation result in a flat horizontal rotation?
Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: d3x0r on July 07, 2014, 03:02:58 AM
Wouldn't the rotation result in a flat horizontal rotation?
Yes... other than from a stop, first the top is moved, which causes the weight to go up by roughly (sin(angle)*B*r/A) [only works for angles less than 90 degrees, if you were to move the top of A 180 degees the sin would be 0 again and the equation fail... but at that point the mass B would be highest if you didn't allow the axle to turn), and will turn the B shaft slightly, but now the mass is higher and can fall, the fall will be deflected by being on the rigid bar B and will turn A a greater distance than it was raised (assuming r is less than 1/2A or something...)... and continuing to move the top of A around the circle will keep it ahead, leaving B to continuously fall.... and it will be apparently a smooth circle, but really there will be a up/down bobbing of the mass.  The acceleration will cause the mass to ahead of the angle at the top of the shaft which will cause it to be higher and start to fall backward, which will end up self retarding until it is again lagged behind the angle of rotation of A around the circle.

Consider you're not applying the rotation to A at the same time, only a translation, the gravitity is pulling c (COM/COG center of mass/gravity) down to create the torque/turning of axle A.

Edit: Playing with my rough spreadsheet, as the angle of rotation goes down, the distance the mass travels around the axel goes up exponentially... like a 5 degree turn is 158x around the circle vs height raised 1 degree is 1780x and 0.1 degrees is
56286.97213 times the height raised.... what this means, is that although it goes up only a little ways, it has a very long time to fall back down since most of the acceleration will be translated to torque/motion around the circle... and longer at shorter angles.... and probably my math is way off somewhere... doesn't look like it...[/size][/font]
Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: centraflow on July 07, 2014, 06:08:55 PM
This is how the top drive works, it is interreactive with the middle weight, which is in turn interreactive with the bottom weight/load.

Simple but effective

regards

Mike 8)

Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: turbogt16v on July 07, 2014, 06:33:01 PM
i have been thinking a loot lately on output,when  power is reduced from
the device  equal or greater than input it falls out of sinc or stops.

would it be more effective to drain power from the first weight as it
is helped by second weight any way
Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: centraflow on July 07, 2014, 06:39:37 PM
More load produces more torque in the machine, quite brilliant, also it can't be over loaded, as more load is applied, the top lever will move more toward the center axis of the gimbal, when it hits that center then the drive just turns on the end of the lever.

It seems the machine is totally load reactive

regards

Mike 8)
Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: RMatt on July 09, 2014, 03:38:29 AM
Why the extra large oversized pic?
Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: d3x0r on July 09, 2014, 01:05:33 PM
*sigh*
Got my build mostly done... first day was too wobbly, had to add some supports at the bottom, now the frame is rigid enough...
My drive bar... well I need to reinforce it, the weight on the end makes it flex in the middle, which results in the mass actually at a 0 angle on the main axis.

I found a plate used to make like swivel chairs...
http://www.homedepot.com/p/Everbilt-6-in-Lazy-Susan-Turntable-49548/203661089 (http://www.homedepot.com/p/Everbilt-6-in-Lazy-Susan-Turntable-49548/203661089)

which inside is a wheel on the end of the main shaft, and then attach a crossbar so as the axel turns, it moves the swivel plate, which makes the axis tip... which should make it a self runner :)  I'm sure it will self destruct as soon as I get all these kinks worked out, since there is no clutching, and it's just a small dimple on the end it's sitting in... already was playing with getting the flex out of the bar and it toppled.  Have to get some patio blocks or something to add some mass to hold the frame down.
Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: d3x0r on July 10, 2014, 07:11:23 AM
I reinforced my pipe with basically a guy wire to the top of the axle and a ways out on the weight shaft... then reconsidered that the flex was actually increasing the angle not decreasing like I had indicated... but, keeping it square is good anyway.

I've been experimenting with this trying to fill in the variables of the math... the length of axle that is below the rod B sticking off determines how much the weight gets raised... the length of rod above B (maybe the total axle length) determines how much force is required to lift m.

The top swivel plate turns very freely... and it has a wheel that goes around very freely within the ring.  I attached a plate to the top of the axle and used lock washers so it turns exactly with the axle.... I tried various angles and configurations... and if I manually keep the tilt off-center, then the weight falls, and turns the shaft, which freely turns the swivel plate... and if I keep it at a constant(apparent) distance from one of the posts on the plate, then it goes and keeps accelerating... but if I tie it to the plate at the same distance it stops.   Something about equal and opposites... I guess putting the backwards load on the swivel plate means it can't actually go forward...  Even if I tie it so it actually is 90 degrees and a consistent lean... not sure where all the force goes but it doesn't generate rotation.

If I put a lot of pressure inward on the swivel plate it doesn't really turn any more difficult....

Conclusion: a single mass doesn't help.
Adding a second weight with the skinner offset plate... I dunno... could add reactive power as part of the system... otherwise it's just a flywheel... that large skinner machine would certainly store a lot of potential energy....
Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: shylo on July 11, 2014, 12:12:10 AM
The top drive is like centraflow drew.
Draw a plumb line from the centre of the gimmble to the center of the upper input pulley.(if the clip loads)
Everything needs to be lined up .
There is a cross bar that joins the 2 inputs ,180 degrees apart.
This connection gives the illusion of an agitator.
The upper shaft that connects to the translation plate is rotating, only because it is connected to the outside of a pulley.

Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: seychelles on July 11, 2014, 02:59:18 PM
HI ALL THE TOP MECHANISM IS AS PER ATTACHMENT..
Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: ARMCORTEX on July 12, 2014, 07:46:57 PM
The elliptical method I have shown in this thread is the best for homemade precision builds.

Good enough is enemy of the best, old engineers think this.

Someguy made a nice build on EF, but his drive seems to have problems.

Seychelles, I dont understand the middle thin chain with the arrows, wtf  do you mean.

Plz add another view and thickness.

Why do you think this is better than individually controlled and electronic feedback ?? You add more more unncecessary mass and longer chains.

How  does this mechanism defeat the property that things seem to slow down and go out of sinch ( since you are faster) when a future toaster is connected.

Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: ARMCORTEX on July 14, 2014, 02:10:03 AM
No, I make this machine that I invented.

More powerful than Skinner, only loss is by purposeful pulse, bearing and pulley loss, motor must simply refill storage system in time.

I will get the synergistic effect of pulse system that you wont, and the little cult will cry.

Drive to speed via one way clutch then release shaft drive and only drive from disconnected middle.

Sorry, I only have time for the best, and I make for real with big investment and big planification, using metal.

Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: ARMCORTEX on July 14, 2014, 10:04:13 PM
No! You are confused.

I make torque arm like this, but better.

It doesnt cost much to keep flywheels in motion.

You pay only for push/pulse/loss. And here, ''aspden effect'' will be here, + DePalma effect of rotating pendulum bob.

You will not have Aspden effect or depalma effect.

My invention based on Dimitriev >>> William Skinner 1939 device.  The whole Skinner cult will be defeated with their puny 1.5 HP (1100 watts) output.

Bye!
Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: ARMCORTEX on July 15, 2014, 02:24:56 AM
You pointed out the only non-advantageous force of the mechanism, I was aware of that and have a solution, but this makes it also simple and precise contact point, a good compromise.

There will be a counter force, if the ramp is included into the mobile frame, you are right.

But there will be a net forward force, same principle as him with his feet, In fact, I think he is generating much torque..

My new re-design will allow the heavy wheels to push themselves on immobile external static ramps. Placement must be absolutely perfect for every wheel.

I still think however that pushing from the frame will be just fine, you have to remember that this lower area is lower speed and will have much forward mass and will never be pushed back, its as good as static concrete, just slightly less delta, what matters is the difference relative to.

Deal with it bro.

Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: Kator01 on July 15, 2014, 01:19:27 PM
Armcortex,

go ahead.. it works. Found this here however almost any trace in the internet is gone:

Regards

Kator01
Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: Kator01 on July 15, 2014, 05:44:46 PM
sorry,

Regards

Kator01
Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: ARMCORTEX on July 15, 2014, 09:31:03 PM

Considering those circus acts are setup with a balanced device to the weight of those working it,, look at the forward angle required to make it spin,, kind of huge that,  and then consider how much it "should" take to just make it spin,, sure looks to me like they are doing a little more than just climbing uphill, so that is no even a 1:1,, it is a big loss system,, not a good example I think.

Deal with the fact that I  re-engineered Dimitriev and made an OU invention, noob.
LOL, not OU, 1:1 noob says...

The harvest of the fall is OU, noob, see this guy fly @ 50 seconds, the machine barely felt anything.
Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: ARMCORTEX on July 15, 2014, 11:55:54 PM
The logic is, 2 humans jump on a mechanism, that consumes no power.

After a few sweats, they reach a point where they can launch a human 25 feet into the air.

And they can do it again and again as long as they dont get tired.

I hire those guys to make OU for me, see whats their max speed.

See, they understand the value of pulse.

I belt that together they make more energy then the 3 of them running bycicle generator..
Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: shylo on July 17, 2014, 01:24:14 AM
Hi All, The upper weight of Skinners' device is heavy enough that it keeps the translation plate in a position relative to the lower ,so the lower is always at the highest part of a tilt , "always falling".
Wheels that have weights that are thrown out, To me will never work. Once sped up all the weights will just throw out .
artv
Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: ARMCORTEX on July 17, 2014, 01:37:59 AM
Poor lowly minds...Its too bad that you are not able to compute and have to follow the cultists, Skinner was DOA since the beginning, idiot.

I dont have to calculate things to know if they are generating energy, I have to calculate if the bearings will hold and load the bearings up to 80 %, in good environment.

The clever design makes it produce more energy, when 1 way bearing is used, naturally is OU, by the invention of 1 way bearing all is done for me.

Fuel is replaced by bearings, bearing is the new consumable, 10% fail after 10,000 and maximum recommended is 50,000 hour,

And finally, the missing piece of the puzzle. I have just equipped you with OU device knowledge that will satisfy all your needs, and this is how you thank me ?

Scumbag, I will remember this, all this shows that you are a lowly mind.
Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: ARMCORTEX on July 17, 2014, 02:57:54 AM
I am working on this atm.

I call them ''modules''.

Tsss...Cant wait to crush your little ego with a nice video, give ya a couple smacks.

It will be fun to just stompede on the doubters afterwards then go hide, like a rich man, boss on the lake.

Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: ARMCORTEX on July 17, 2014, 06:58:43 AM
before we move onto Skinner, one last idea. This just hit me, I remembered this video from purelyprimitives.

I like this device  but the way he pulses the motor is very inefficient. If we could transmit rotational power to the weight itself as per my method.

We could really get a good contact, and then a nasty energy release and subsequent pulse of speed.

Now I hope people ignore this revelation as this will leave alot of people butthurt @ me.

There is also other ''pseudo-theories'' that apply, pendulum resonance by taps etc... Lee Tseung , Aspen effect, De palma effect, coo coo effect, crank effect.

(http://i61.tinypic.com/miky8j.jpg)
Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: ARMCORTEX on July 19, 2014, 03:21:15 AM
Well well it seems like the method I posted was the best after all.

There is no way to have static pushers outside of the frame besides that  method.

This means I cant make my new cheaper version with less materials

This means  is gonna be quite a tuning and material gathering procedure.

I need 8x 50 to100  pound wheels and 8 x bycicle wheels, something with wider contact surface than bycicle would be better.

This is gonna be pretty big quest, I may have to pursue other ideas on my mind.

Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: FreeEnergy on July 19, 2014, 07:50:17 PM
Well well it seems like the method I posted was the best after all.

There is no way to have static pushers outside of the frame besides that  method.

This means I cant make my new cheaper version with less materials

This means  is gonna be quite a tuning and material gathering procedure.

I need 8x 50 to100  pound wheels and 8 x bycicle wheels, something with wider contact surface than bycicle would be better.

This is gonna be pretty big quest, I may have to pursue other ideas on my mind.

could you please post the simulation file for this so i can run it in Algodoo?
Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: FreeEnergy on July 19, 2014, 08:01:58 PM
Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: ARMCORTEX on July 19, 2014, 09:58:28 PM
Sorry those are not my sims.

Im not good with sims, and I dont think you can trust them 100%, especially not for something that needs sprag clutches.

Whats really stupid about algodoo is that you cant even add some emulation of thickness, how is this supposed to be comprehensible.

+ the fact of rotating bob and\or pulse systems, for wich special new physics needs to me taken into account.

Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: ARMCORTEX on July 20, 2014, 11:43:23 AM
Making a tiny build would be a good idea, it would be a beautiful Dimitriev variation, an inverted  design.

On another note, I like this epicyclic drive I showed you guys, I have a couple ideas with that, I think this is what Jim Murray was doing, that crappy picture he showed he called "torque doubler".

Bobby amarasingham was doign a nice method too. Nice things from him :)

So many designs...
Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: ARMCORTEX on July 23, 2014, 09:39:57 PM

new video by valy energy
Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: ARMCORTEX on July 23, 2014, 10:50:57 PM
Its basicly, 25% inspired by this video by purelyprimitives. I am pretty sure that he saw the video, he goes on the net and checks out FE videos.

A few days ago I thought to myself, this pendulum idea is nice, but in double form would be even better, and there you go, see valy video few days later.

A double resonant device would be quite an  operation to get it to sync, 2 motors  out of phase via encoders, unless this can be done with help of neighbor and lucky timing

In hind-sight, I dont think my pulse idea with rotating bob would have been great, good maybe, but adds much complexity.

Perhaps he knew this and modded the pivot, and replaced by inverted pendulums, wich add a secondary resonance and more easily controlled by a mechanism.

The lower driving unit is sometype of synchronised driver for the inverted pendulums, does this  pendulumqualify as inverted pendulum ??

Isolate resonance of driver, brg main wheel to resonant speed via motor.

Noonespecial

What you think of the following idea, we take some cheaper motor and gear and freewheel it in the frame ( not with cheap internal gears of drills),
we take motors and mount a sliding frame as to minimise their weight.

Install reflective encoder and have 2 motors brg themselves to speed but out of synch, then drive wheel.

Would there be a mechanical method to link them ? perhaps find both of the center radius or the motor hinge swing perimeter
and lock the synch by chains and drive by single motor ?? Seems complex, and that their rates would be locked together, wich is bad.

What I am not sure if what is "resonant" control maintenance motor, one that drives big wheel, or 2 smaller ones. Valy is a clever guy.]\
Is he not satisfied with his other model ? Belt not durable enough ?? Ive seen a couple OU videos where the guys have a tensionner, in the middle of a long stretch of belt.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

One thing I notice from the Turkish and Valy and Chas, is that everything is normal, but the tensionner is always homemade,

all is just useless delay line, see the gear proportions are entirely useless, pay attention to the evolution of the frame and yellow wheel.
It is not there at first then appears, and it is on sometype of adjustabloe base, then we see a clear focus by the video man on that part
Unfortunately there doesnt seem to be any eccentricity with that yellow wheel, I really wonder what its achieving.

One thing I noticwe that can be totally wrong, I wonder if there is somekind of "confusion", on a sudden pulse of speed, or brake even.
If there is oscillation, what is difference between normal-faster and normal-brake.

Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: ARMCORTEX on July 24, 2014, 03:17:11 AM
Holy shit, I think there could be enough elasticity to get loose enough couple for a single drive mechanism, and make valy with 2 by 4's

Once its locked it dont need constant error feedback individually, so elastic link could be doable. hmmm...

With the ever trusty swinging chain method. ;)

Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: DreamThinkBuild on August 05, 2014, 10:51:25 PM
Hi All,

I got a message asking if I'm still working on this. I'm a little hesitant to post this because it's not following Skinners design and purists get a little upset when you don't build exact replicas. It's based on similar ideas but using the attraction of magnets instead of heavy mass. It's still work in progress as I've been busy setting up solar for the summer.

Attached is a sneak peek and a image of concepts. The basics; a magnet is static, a hill is static, a magnet can create a static hill, a shifting axis can move the reference point of a static hill. A wheelbarrow full of bricks on a hill only needs to be lifted (static) past the angle of repose to take off down the hill. When your chasing a wheelbarrow full of paver's down the hill the only energy your inputting is the lift and running wildly behind it :). That is the direction I'm headed to create a static hill that the reference location can be shifted by the changing axis, with minimal input from the prime mover. The magnets provide the static lifting by repulsion. The attraction magnets are used to drive the axle as they always want to be pulled to the magnetic base/lowest point of hill.

Hi Armcortex,

Thanks for those videos. In elastic surfaces you might want to check the Woodward effect.

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

Here is an interesting patent application that uses a deformable rubber wheel to compress one side while letting the other side expand creating a directed force.

US 2003/0192988: Propulsion device with rotating elastic material

Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: d3x0r on August 06, 2014, 02:32:38 AM

Thanks for those videos. In elastic surfaces you might want to check the Woodward effect.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Woodward_effect (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Woodward_effect)

Here is an interesting patent application that uses a deformable rubber wheel to compress one side while letting the other side expand creating a directed force.

US 2003/0192988: Propulsion device with rotating elastic material

somewhat off topic; but a friend shared a link about an EM drive...
http://ntrs.nasa.gov/search.jsp?R=20140006052
This method originates from Roger Shawyer (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/EmDrive)

Not a lot of exact info to replicate independantly... there's a few news articles
http://news.discovery.com/space/private-spaceflight/impossible-space-engine-may-actually-work-nasa-140802.htm  (aug 2)

but again entirely off of gravity drive topic :)
Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: DreamThinkBuild on August 08, 2014, 02:54:15 AM
Hi Webby,

I noticed similar results with using mass, the weight would have to become synchronized or it wouldn't generate any force or become erratic (strong and weak pulses).

I've been shifting more over to Bramkamp's ideas of having the motor a part of the weight that drives the precession. Magnets can be used as a static lifting force and as an offset to aid shifting the mass over the fulcrum. The motor would have to do very little but create a slight displacement over the fulcrum to keep the magnets out of balance.

US 4290601 : Wobble plate exercise device and toy

Hi d3x0r,

Interesting. Wonder if Viktor Grebennikov's beetle used the resonant cavities in the surface to focus background radiation in a similar fashion.

http://www.ermetica.net/pk/?p=174

If the structure were measured it could be 3D printed and slapped on skate boards.  :)

http://www.nanoscribe.de/en/applications/photonics/
Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: i_ron on August 09, 2014, 07:23:20 PM

My final thoughts:

The Skinner device could be a scam. The weights never fall. It is a system in balance. For the weight to fall it must be positioned away from its lowest position, in other words, further up the ramp. However every increase in drag angle to meet this criteria is met with a corresponding increase in input power. We view the lower unit as a source when in fact it is a sink.

The dog that didn't bark:

The line shaft. Industry knew how to make small motors by 1939 so the line shaft was already obsolete. However it was a hold over from an earlier age of wind, water, and steam, when the prime mover was a localized source. The line shaft spread the source around to the various machines.

So William Skinner's line shaft was powered, probably by an electric motor, in the vicinity of the line shaft...yet it is never shown...but critically, never shown that it is disconnected! The left hand end of the line shaft is never shown.

The above is the key, what follows is purely subjective. If you watch flat belt videos of threshing machines and saw mills you can notice that one side of the belt flaps more than the other. This is because one side is in tension, the driving side.  Looking at the drive belt from the line shaft to the gravity machine in the '39 video... the pulley on the machine is turning CW as viewed from Mr Skinner's position. This means that if the machine was driving the line shaft the top of the belt should be under tension, right?  However it appears that the top of the belt has more flap than the lower, as I say subjective, but if the device was the sole source of power to the line shaft, the top of the belt would be taut. What is shown in the video is that it is very possible that the device has two sources of power, the 1/8th horse power motor and the line shaft.
Ron

Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: ARMCORTEX on August 10, 2014, 12:21:47 AM
Knew we couldnt trust this kid from EF, whats his name.

I_ron, now that you are back, I have been studying the chas campbell device, Im gonna make a thread dissecting it.
Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: ARMCORTEX on August 10, 2014, 12:41:13 AM
http://www.overunity.com/14817/purelyprimitives-pendulum-power/#.U-aiGvldV8E

This is a skinner like device, but from our old friend.

I thought I had OU in the video, I guess I was just stupid, obviously the larger wheel is going @ lower rpm.

I shows some strange things, but I cant quite get OU power in the form of HP @ the shaft, I get it in joules/sec.

I believe tho, 2 machines, 90 degress out of phase, we coulld get the pull the highest velocity point of the CF force, all the time. Thus overcoming tendency to desynch and always maintain itself.

thus making OU device.

Its as if it was hopeless, I believe I am to the point where I must try the idea from that shady british guy.

I am a bit devastated, this and Skinner is not 100% in the bank.
Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: ARMCORTEX on August 10, 2014, 12:03:07 PM
Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: ARMCORTEX on August 11, 2014, 06:50:22 AM
OK, I made a small dissection of the chas campbell video.

I am merging my thread with that of grumage, (hijacking). Old grumage needs help.

We can safely abandon this sinking ship, in favor of more productive discussions.

I firmly believe, that the shaking flywheel device from india, turkey, chas, is the best technology out there. Safe, and very powerful.

http://www.overunity.com/12464/using-chas-cambel-flywheel-system-for-15-horsepower/msg413984/#new
Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: ARMCORTEX on August 12, 2014, 12:51:51 AM
I really wonder what your brain asks itself, when you are looking @ that skinner array of yours.

I hope you get visions of future upgrades, to fix the problems that I_ron just mentionned.

Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: shylo on August 12, 2014, 02:17:31 AM
I believe what Skinner found was that 270* there is gain but 90* there is lose.
By using 4 branches he is offsetting  the drain (input), by using the momentum of the other three.
On the backshelf til I can get my automatic feed to work for my rocket heater.
I can heat my house or light some LEDs'
Detours are good.
artv
Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: ARMCORTEX on August 12, 2014, 03:36:40 AM
I believe what Skinner found was that 270* there is gain but 90* there is lose.
By using 4 branches he is offsetting  the drain (input), by using the momentum of the other three.
On the backshelf til I can get my automatic feed to work for my rocket heater.
I can heat my house or light some LEDs'
Detours are good.
artv

webby1, that is good man, good to know, you may proceed.

Shylo,

No, you make no sense, detours are bad. Are you stupid ?

if they are all disconnected, whatever happens should happen more times than less.

why is 270 better than 90, explain to me your reasoning. So you have figured out machine ?

Care to explain in more than 5 lines... ;D
Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: shylo on August 13, 2014, 01:03:24 AM
The input is only required for 90* of rotation , the other 270 feeds back ,the most feed back is at 135.
I think that is why there are four. While one is drawing power the other three are adding. They are all at 90*  separation.
Detours, When I work on something and begin to get frustrated I will switch to a different exp. It lets me reflect. Maybe that's stupid?
artv
Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: ARMCORTEX on August 13, 2014, 04:55:27 PM
Why dont you show a video of that.

Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: Dev on August 14, 2014, 07:06:14 PM
Hi everybody, I'm a newbie on the forum but not to OU in general.  Before I babble about Skinner I just want to say thanks to everyone who is posting their work on this device. I've been following this thread with interest and I hope people are still working on it because it seems clear the machine is not fully understood yet.

It may well be a lathe-powered gang of flywheels.  But maybe not, and the inconvenient truth of the matter is that we won't know until someone builds a really good replica, preferably at full scale.  I've done the Lego model thing, to help me understand the movement and linkages.  When I feel like I also have a solid grasp of the forces involved, I'll start on something like a complete 1/5 scale model.

For the record:  I thought for a long time that there was a crossbar/camshaft/agitator thingy swinging the tops of the upper shafts in ellipses.  I now know that the crossbar is an illusion created by the motion of four arms swinging the tops of the upper shafts in circles.  Like many optical illusions, once you 'unsee' the crossbar it becomes obvious there isn't one.  There are beams from center to the outer frame, but they don't move.  The youtube versions of the video will never resolve the circle/ellipse debate, the vid quality is just too low.  It's crucial to download the vid and play it on your local machine with a good player like VLC or Gom Player to get the most out of the lousy resolution.  That's what changed my mind about ellipses vs circles.

While I'm on the subject of the upper shafts, here is a point of interest:  The arms that swing the upper shafts are much longer than necessary, extending well beyond the shaft.  I suspect they were either mounting points for a lighter set of weights, or the extra steel *is* the lighter set of weights.  There may be some other purpose for that extra metal but the one firm conclusion that can be made is, they are there on purpose -  there's nothing sloppy about Skinner's construction of his device.  He didn't just leave some pieces untrimmed.

In my opinion we need to view this machine as a stack of 3 gyroscopes, and sort out the forces on that basis.  The axis of the top gyro is the upper shaft, with a set degree of precession.  Second gyro is the smaller weight that Skinner swings by hand to show it's degree of freedom, and third is the heaviest weight  mounted at the bottom of the lower shaft.  The precession angles of the lower gyros change until they are up to speed, so a static analysis is of limited use.

For example, at full operating speed the shorter pipe weights rise until they approach 180 deg from their static position.  That's why there's a downward bend on their mounting arms - the bend ensures that the weights don't strike the horizontal frame member above them when they are at their uppermost orbit.  (they could probably still strike the frame if too much power is applied)

So there is a very dynamic, transitional stage of operation when Skinner's device is spooling up.  Even in my lego model it takes time to settle into a groove, easily half a minute or more.  People testing their devices will need to allow settling time after they make a change like applying a load - for big machines it could easily be a couple minutes or more before any resonant condition is re-established.

The counter-intuitive nature of gyroscopes in general, combined with the complexity of their relationships in the Skinner machine, makes this thing a brute to figure out.  I don't think we'll crack it until we nail down the gyro interactions.

@ Gotoluc, your build and vids are great, thanks for sharing.  I just wanted to mention the possibility that your concrete weights may be too heavy.  If we assume there is an amplification process at work in the system, then it's possible to overwhelm the driving signal with too much feedback force.

I'm not sure yet how to establish correct masses but I think a good starting point might be to use Arto's dimensions and assume Skinner used Schedule 40 pipe in his device.  From there we can do a guesstimate calculation of the masses involved, based on a typical density for steel.

I nominate armcortex to do that calc and post it here, so he can make his first useful contribution to this thread.
Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: ARMCORTEX on August 14, 2014, 08:46:20 PM
Shylo, I guess everything you say is not serious, like fishing stories.

non-useless people like Webby1 are so rare these days.

Dev: You have got some nerve calling me out like that, the purelyprimitives Skinner-esque redesign derivative I posted is actually better suited to harvest gravity than Skinner's, take that as useless, your useless.

Skinner device was useless, a fraud. Prove me otherwise. The machine was not even patented, how can anybody believe with reasonable doubt claims of 1200%... I know, blame it on a conspiracy.

You are not in a position to call others useless, you are a newbie. Take a backseat and let me and Webby1 do the explaining, and I_ron, your only job is to listen.

Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: gotoluc on August 14, 2014, 09:40:41 PM
Hi Dev,

at first I thought this device was easy to understand.  I even believed someone well known from another Forum to have real results.
I found none to be true.  There's so many unknowns that I now think a replication is not possible.

I'll keep an eye on the topic in hopes to see your replication attempt and wish you success.

Kind regards

Luc
Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: ARMCORTEX on August 14, 2014, 10:05:45 PM
Did anybody notice the valy videos? Whats with the plethora of devices, is this guy addicted to gravity  ? 3 different OU machines... LOL...

300w (1/2hp)  to 10kw. I have a hard time believing that, I really do . That would make it, the most COP ever for gravity device.

I am gonna try to sim the valy device  in algodoo. I think it can be done, hope my comp can handle that.

Vertical has advantage that its simmable, I know its ridiculous right..simmable OU, would that even be valid or unvalid no matter the result.

Gotoluc, see my videos. Its not hollywod capture but basicly, a bizarre machine, where mass is moved by totally disconnected pendulums wich keep their momentum,
drive by only CF ''fictitious'' force.
Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: gotoluc on August 14, 2014, 10:35:17 PM
Gotoluc, see my videos. Its not hollywod capture but basicly, a bizarre machine, where mass is moved by totally disconnected pendulums wich keep their momentum,
drive by only CF ''fictitious'' force.

I'll look at them but can you post a link

Luc
Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: ARMCORTEX on August 14, 2014, 11:09:11 PM
http://www.overunity.com/14817/purelyprimitives-pendulum-power/#.U-0k_vldV8F

Im watching Valy now, guy seems to be making a company

Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: ARMCORTEX on August 15, 2014, 08:48:10 PM
thx luc for backing me up. ;D

this kid must be so butthurt right now. ;D

as if he just got out of missouri prison, ferguson county. ;D
Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: Dev on August 16, 2014, 03:36:39 PM
So, about those pipe masses: I'd forgotten that Arto included figures for weight in his drawing.  I don't have the original post location for that, but d3x0r reposted the Version 4 drawing here:  http://www.overunity.com/14655/1939-gravity-power-multiply-power-by-1200/390/#.U-7agfldVsI

Arto calculated for solid steel masses but I'm inclined to think the cylinders are pipe.  The mounting arms don't look beefy enough to me, to support solid steel cylinders.  More importantly, the way the cylinders are mounted suggests they're hollow.  There's a wide piece of flatbar across the bottom of the smaller weights, with a nut in the center.  If the weight were solid there would be no need for that flatbar strap on the bottom.

I'm sure he didn't bore the length of those big cylinders, although he obviously had a lathe that could have done it.  The telling detail on the big weights is the oversized cap plates that would not need to be there if the cylinders were solid.  And that's my case for hollow cylinders.  All of them do appear to have been turned on the lathe, judging by the distinct areas of color variation along their length.  Seems pointless to do that for dimensional reasons so I figure that's how he achieved uniform weights all around.

Judging pipe size relative to Skinner's hand, I think the lower cylinders are 4" diameter, and taking that dimension with calipers on my screen I then get 6" dia. for the upper cylinders.  Lengths are 8" each for upper cyls, 30" each for lower cyls.  To estimate weight I'm assuming both sizes of pipe are Schedule 40 because it is an extremely common grade, making it relatively cheap and readily available.

Found a handy table that gives nominal weight per foot for steel pipe so I don't even have to get my pi on.  http://www.engineeringtoolbox.com/ansi-steel-pipes-d_305.html  Based on the table the weights are:  Upper cylinders 6.47 kg (14.23 lbs) each; lower cylinders 12.26 kg (26.97 lbs) each.

The difference in size and weight between upper and lower masses is really interesting.  It would have been simpler and easier to build with one pipe size or another. Why are the lower weights so long, and the uppers so much shorter?  And is it coincidence that the lower masses are double the weight of the uppers?  ...things that make me go, 'hmmm'.

@armcortex, I don't get butthurt - the key is to just relax.  I'm delighted to hear that you've decided Skinner was a fraud, because now there's no reason for you to follow this thread and continue spamming it with off topic posts and sphincterous bullying comments to your peers.  You can move on to greener pastures, and I'll stay here and and try to figure out for myself if Skinner was running a con, or an OU device.  Win:win.
Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: ARMCORTEX on August 16, 2014, 04:30:00 PM
Fine, discuss your meager theories. But there will always be a bit of  spamming by me in this thread, I will reduce a bit.

You are clearly uncertain, lost and seeking help. Why dont you just admit that you dont know how it works and that you wont built it.

Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: d3x0r on August 16, 2014, 05:19:02 PM
So, about those pipe masses: I'd forgotten that Arto included figures for weight in his drawing.  I don't have the original post location for that, but d3x0r reposted the Version 4 drawing here:  http://www.overunity.com/14655/1939-gravity-power-multiply-power-by-1200/390/#.U-7agfldVsI (http://www.overunity.com/14655/1939-gravity-power-multiply-power-by-1200/390/#.U-7agfldVsI)

Arto calculated for solid steel masses but I'm inclined to think the cylinders are pipe.  The mounting arms don't look beefy enough to me, to support solid steel cylinders.  More importantly, the way the cylinders are mounted suggests they're hollow.  There's a wide piece of flatbar across the bottom of the smaller weights, with a nut in the center.  If the weight were solid there would be no need for that flatbar strap on the bottom.

I'm sure he didn't bore the length of those big cylinders, although he obviously had a lathe that could have done it.  The telling detail on the big weights is the oversized cap plates that would not need to be there if the cylinders were solid.  And that's my case for hollow cylinders.  All of them do appear to have been turned on the lathe, judging by the distinct areas of color variation along their length.  Seems pointless to do that for dimensional reasons so I figure that's how he achieved uniform weights all around.

Judging pipe size relative to Skinner's hand, I think the lower cylinders are 4" diameter, and taking that dimension with calipers on my screen I then get 6" dia. for the upper cylinders.  Lengths are 8" each for upper cyls, 30" each for lower cyls.  To estimate weight I'm assuming both sizes of pipe are Schedule 40 because it is an extremely common grade, making it relatively cheap and readily available.

Found a handy table that gives nominal weight per foot for steel pipe so I don't even have to get my pi on.  http://www.engineeringtoolbox.com/ansi-steel-pipes-d_305.html (http://www.engineeringtoolbox.com/ansi-steel-pipes-d_305.html)  Based on the table the weights are:  Upper cylinders 6.47 kg (14.23 lbs) each; lower cylinders 12.26 kg (26.97 lbs) each.

The difference in size and weight between upper and lower masses is really interesting.  It would have been simpler and easier to build with one pipe size or another. Why are the lower weights so long, and the uppers so much shorter?  And is it coincidence that the lower masses are double the weight of the uppers?  ...things that make me go, 'hmmm'.

@armcortex, I don't get butthurt - the key is to just relax.  I'm delighted to hear that you've decided Skinner was a fraud, because now there's no reason for you to follow this thread and continue spamming it with off topic posts and sphincterous bullying comments to your peers.  You can move on to greener pastures, and I'll stay here and and try to figure out for myself if Skinner was running a con, or an OU device.  Win:win.
I concur that it's probably sections of pipe... but I would think more like street plumbing, and in 1939, the wall would have been thicker than what's made today... hard to tell.
I found when I put a load on my aparatus, that the vertical drive axle bent with the weight, so the reinfocing guy-wire thing helps keep that from flexing.  I would think it's considerably more weight than 26 pounds... I mean the top weight looks like it's on 1/2" maybe 3/4" iron and at least 3" wide... I dunno maybe they're bent so they don't hit the top; always sorta considered they were flexed by the weight on the top...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nominal_Pipe_Size (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nominal_Pipe_Size) says
"In March 1927, the American Standards Association authorized a committee to standardize the dimensions of wrought steel and wrought iron pipe and tubing. At that time only a small selection of wall thicknesses were in use: standard weight (STD), extra-strong (XS), and double extra-strong (XXS), based on the iron pipe size (IPS)"
"Also, in 1939, it was hoped that the designations of STD, XS, and XXS would be phased out by schedule numbers, however those original terms are still in common use today"
so the materials available up to that point were

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iron_pipe_size (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iron_pipe_size) "the IPS system was primarily used in the US and the United Kingdom. In the 1920s, the Copper Tube Size (CTS) standard was combined with the IPS standard." (CTS)  "But the schedules were limited to Standard Wall (STD), Extra Strong, (XS) and Double Extra Strong (XXS). STD is identical to Schedule 40 for NPS 1/8 to NPS 10, inclusive, and indicates .375" wall thickness for NPS 12 and larger. XS is identical to SCH 80 for NPS 1/8 to NPS 8, inclusive, and indicates .500" wall thickness for NPS 8 and larger. Different definitions exist for XXS, but it is generally thicker than schedule 160 "

so I was thinking something along the line of 1/2" thickness...

@armcortex
I think you're right, a gravity wheel is likely to be a better gravity engine... have been unable to get any math for this skinner/john device idea... if the bearing is frictionless... it definatly has merit since the fall length is much greater than the rise, therefore a smaller input can result in greater acceleration in a torque direction.. but having tried various methods to make it drive itself, it ends up 'what goes down, must go up first' and that's all there is... therefore it's just a ginormous flywheel for a lathe.  On energetic forum I left a long post (http://www.energeticforum.com/261132-post445.html)  about the history of lathes and what could be bought, (and what's in museums and with collectors now) and any flywheel for a metal working treadle lathe was WAY less mass, and was still sufficient to do the job.

Although I do wish I could decode Andrei Ermola's(err maybe he's Ermola Andrei) design. http://www.overunity.com/14746/ermola-andrei (http://www.overunity.com/14746/ermola-andrei)  which is true potential->kinetic translation
Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: ARMCORTEX on August 16, 2014, 06:41:18 PM
Dexor, see my postrs on pendulum power

I put many new mechanism.
Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: ARMCORTEX on August 23, 2014, 01:46:46 AM
Noonespecial, I_ron

O great masters

Me and Webby have reached near final illumination, we are grateful to you immensely.

We will put our minds to the benefit of you, have your mortgage paid, everything.

Webby does not deserve to be punished because of me.

Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: gotoluc on August 26, 2014, 10:06:00 PM
Hope you're not wrong and wish you success.

Thanks for sharing

Luc
Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: ARMCORTEX on September 02, 2014, 08:38:16 PM

This video of turkey and the video of Chas Campbell indicates to me that the Lead out theory is real,

The machine works by barely noticeable lobe on the yellow reflector, wich causes pulley squeeze and pulling, read my analysis back in this thread.

Thus creating pulses of tangantial force.

http://www.filedropper.com/dissection ( my dissection of chas campbell)

Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: gotoluc on September 12, 2014, 12:46:32 AM
Very interesting webby1

Looking forward to more tests

Thanks for sharing

Luc
Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: Dev on September 14, 2014, 06:02:35 PM
Still watching with great interest, thanks Webby for continuing to post your efforts.   8)  Time limits prevent me from building at the moment but I'm still squeezing in some schooling on gyroscopes and I recently scored a sweet set of teflon gears that will serve well in a complete quad-unit Skinner build - eventually.

I think your speculation about the unit producing an excess torque is probably correct.  Hazarding a wild guess, I suspect the machine separates inertial and gravitational mass behaviors and the difference results in that extra torque.

One thing that concerns me about my current gyroscopic perspective is the very low speeds that Skinner probably used (we can't assume the machine was actually at operational speed in the Pathe film, but it seems likely).  Gyro behavior is almost nil at low speeds of rotation so that might be a fatal flaw in a gyro theory of Skinner's device.  I'm counting on the mechanics being sensitive to very small forces and from what I've seen in my own and other people's models, that does seem to be the case.

I agree with your observation about the shift in position of the weights during operation. (if I'm reading you right).  While at rest the upper weight falls to the lowest point, directly below the gimbaled driving rod.  At full speed the upper weight is flying in a position approaching 180 degrees opposite of the resting point, and of course as it travels to that point the lower weight goes with it.  Once that transition is over, the device settles into its operating groove but still with some interesting oscillations in speed and position - interesting as clues to operation but undesirable in a working unit since they represent wasted power.

I'm not sure if it was this thread or the other at EF, but somewhere David Quirey noted that his double unit ran at reduced power input compared to his single unit model.  That makes me think that due to the masses being 90 deg out of phase with each other, Skinner's quad embodiment might be necessary to cancel enough oscillations to permit a level of efficiency where OU becomes apparent.

Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: Genegene on October 20, 2014, 04:14:22 AM
I started a build 3 days ago. I got 25lbs rotating at 60 rpms using 12v and .15amps. My problems is when I connect to a 12"  pulley on the main shaft going to a 2" pulley on a motor/generator it dies. The motor/ gen is 36v 500 watts. This motor is  hard to turn by hand so that's got to be it.
Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: burnit0017 on October 26, 2014, 02:19:59 AM

Hi, this is my attempt at a simple style Skinner device. I had poor results. When I added any load the tilt plate stalled.
I look forward to other attempted results.
Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: Genegene on October 27, 2014, 01:24:40 AM
I have one working. I'm using a 24v motor with gear reduction to drive the weights. I have 28lbs of weight. One 12" pulley on the drive shaft going to a 3" pulley on a DC motor as a generator. Right now it's 60 to 70 rpm and getting 3.49 V out of the generator. But the math is right. 3.49 V at 240 rpm is right for this motor/generator.

drive motor

motor/generator
Model: MY1020 Motor By Unite Motor Co., Ltd.
Type: Brush
Voltage: 36 Volt DC
Rated Speed: 2500-3000 Rpm
Rated Current: 18.3 Amp
Output: 500 Watts
will post more when I get a 20" pulley working.
Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: Low-Q on October 27, 2014, 11:32:29 AM
When you're working on a gravity based device, just have in mind that gravity is a constant that pulls the weights towards the ground at equal force no matter where the weigts are present. This will therfor result in a net potential energy of absolute zero in one revolution. Hence no energy out. Using gears etc to spend less force to lift anything, will only cause an equal increase in time, which in turn results in the same total hight the weight is lifted. Hence no excess energy.

Vidar
Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: MoRo on October 31, 2014, 02:00:14 AM
http://youtu.be/SN79z_TndI8?list=UUW7H7Zi1J9Zy8ynmSP7x35g

Enjoy and subscribe!
Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: 2020man on October 31, 2014, 05:36:30 PM
Hi!

In wanting to draw attention to the need for research and more opened minds to free energy and doing a lecture about it to a school, I found Patrick Kelly's description of this device and it captivated me. It's like reversing a linear motor concept back into a circular motion and one's gut feeling is that if the top shaft is directing rather than driving, then something interesting might happen . . .

I tried simply with a pole and a weight on an arm and it feels as though it should work just as MoRo posts with his video with a wheel. Genegene's experience will be most interesting and look forward to hearing more.

Best wishes

2020
Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: MoRo on November 01, 2014, 12:15:49 AM
Hey MoRo,,

How are those talented assistants doing?

Long time since I have seen you post.
Hey webby1 and all others!

Thanks! They are doing great and growing up fine.

I definitely will have more videos to share on this device! I'm working now on a frame and an accurate and scientific way to measure torque in versus torque out. Will definitely find out if this is truly a torque amplifier or not. If it is, that would be a game changer. If you guys want to know what I am thinking then first look at this video:

Then think of a large unit at the bottom producing massive torque and progressively smaller units above it! with the very top small unit being driven with a very tiny motor, and the gravitational chain reaction driving each successively bigger one!  ;D

Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: 2020man on November 01, 2014, 04:43:28 AM
Then think of a large unit at the bottom producing massive torque and progressively smaller units above it! with the very top small unit being driven with a very tiny motor, and the gravitational chain reaction driving each successively bigger one!  ;D

Hi!

I don't think it's a matter of torque in at the top - one wants to put next to no energy in there - just direct it, lean the pole, let the weight want to fall and do the work. The pole simply has to lean forward, at 90 degrees to the arm and follow the arm round rather than lead it or drive it.

For this reason stacking them won't work, I'm sure but excess electrical energy should come out of the bottom with the idea of that powering the directing motors on others

Best wishes

2020
Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: Spirit on November 01, 2014, 05:06:23 AM
Just close the loop already and see what happens.
Small motor for input and a generator for output then link them together.
If the generator can run the small input motor then it will be a self running machine :)
Use appropriate weights.
I’m thinking you would have to started by hand then let the machine run itself.
Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: MoRo on November 01, 2014, 06:21:34 AM
Hi!

I don't think it's a matter of torque in at the top - one wants to put next to no energy in there - just direct it, lean the pole, let the weight want to fall and do the work. The pole simply has to lean forward, at 90 degrees to the arm and follow the arm round rather than lead it or drive it.

For this reason stacking them won't work, I'm sure but excess electrical energy should come out of the bottom with the idea of that powering the directing motors on others

Best wishes

2020
On the contrary, even with my bare hands I can detect that torque around the center point is definitely an input function, in order to get the mass to accelerate. It doesn't just fall, you must also stay some degree ahead of it for it to continue to accelerate. Any load applied to the output would counter this acceleration by lifting the mass as it goes out of angular phase with the input shaft. The greater the rotational degree that you stay ahead of the mass, the more output torque you get. (up to 90 degrees out of phase for maximum possible output torque). However one must also consider that there is another force that comes into play besides gravity after the mass begins to rotate and also works to keep the mass in phase with the angle of the input shaft. That is centrifugal force. So it is imperative to take a torque measurement to determine the truth of the mater.

So the question IS whether there is a torque difference between the input and the output wile maintaining a constant angle out-of-phase positioning of the mass from that of the input shaft. This should be tested in both a static and dynamic fashion.

Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: thngr on November 03, 2014, 11:03:18 PM
some little math on it...
Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: thngr on November 03, 2014, 11:40:49 PM
COP=8.5 when there is no friction or some thing. this is only one of the stages, if you build it like W. Skinner there will be COP=8.5*8.5 but if no friction is present!
Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: 2020man on November 04, 2014, 12:29:39 AM
THANKS so much for doing this! Very helpful. Very encouraging.

But friction will be irrelevant with such a high gain . . .

Best wishes

2020
Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: thngr on November 04, 2014, 01:50:37 AM
How come so easily made mistakes to overcome our wishes?
Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: 2020man on November 04, 2014, 09:06:04 AM
some little math on it...

I can't find the post I saw last night redoing this analysis showing COP=1 . . . Which represents the reality?

My gut feeling is that the top of the pole must be directed and not driven, simply loosely following the motion of the arm so that the weight does its work in wanting to fall and the top of the shaft is merely preceding the position to maintain that situation. As the weight wants to fall the top of the shaft should want to move forward and so not provide a backwards force causing work to be needed to be done . . . so no energy input at the top . . . ?

Best wishes

2020
Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: MoRo on November 04, 2014, 06:45:13 PM
My gut feeling is that the top of the pole must be directed and not driven, simply loosely following the motion of the arm so that the weight does its work in wanting to fall and the top of the shaft is merely preceding the position to maintain that situation. As the weight wants to fall the top of the shaft should want to move forward and so not provide a backwards force causing work to be needed to be done . . . so no energy input at the top . . . ?

Best wishes

2020
The weight will merely pursue balance at a lowest point. It does indeed require energy in the form of torque to rotate the top of the rod around a center point, to cause the imbalance which the weight will continue to pursue. (see my earlier post)
Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: ARMCORTEX on November 04, 2014, 07:56:06 PM
The device never worked, video and claims were wrong.

Who is to blame for all this commotion ?
Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: ARMCORTEX on November 04, 2014, 10:10:47 PM

I want you guys to work on this now.

Mechanical ''pulse shock'' oscillator designs using eccentrics or simply geometry.

And I dont wanna hear about magnets.

Either the lead out effect is true, or somekind of standing wave echo is happening within the belt.

Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: 2020man on November 06, 2014, 12:06:52 AM
The device never worked, video and claims were wrong.

Who is to blame for all this commotion ?

Have you tried this device?

Thanks for the maths above but I'm not at all sure it's right. It doesn't seem to take into account the phase difference between top of pole offset and arm/weight offset.

The very simple mockup of the device that I have made up behaves entirely as expected until one leans the top of the pole at 90 degrees to the arm, and then moves in the direction tangential to the weight, it wanting to fall, it wanting to go around in a circle. This device is difficult to picture in 3d and causes difficulties in analysis as a result. Who has actually built one? And who has let the top pole be loose rather than fixed? It's essential also to put direction in at the top but not a driving energy - one has to direct the pole and then allow gravity to do the work.

Please forgive my stupidity in pursuit of this device but the behaviour of the test pole, arm and weight I've put together indicates something unexpressed by the mathematical analysis and indicates also how merely as a driven exccentric flywheel it's not going to do anything but be exactly that. . .

Best wishes

2020
Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: 2020man on November 06, 2014, 12:52:24 AM
Yes

I have,, and I have used a single stage as well as the double stage that Skinner showed in the clip.

I have tried it with the shafts locked and unlocked and indexed at various angles relative to the whole setup,, I have even tried things that I have not already shared in this thread.  The upper shaft acts both to transfer a torque through its own twist as well as a leverage via the gimbal,, the lower weight can be small if raised up high or large and left low,, there are very many little things that can be adjusted.

I think there is something with this setup,, but not how it is currently understood.

THanks greatly for this

I have just set a prize for a school DT department to get students to make one with a prize for the best device and an offer to buy a working one for £1000 which I thought to be adequate inducement to inspire . . . . and was worried about leading young people up the garden path. But clearly your hunch and my hunch that there's something capable of happening here indeicates it's worthwhile to direct young people's energies and intellects to examining this.

Best wishes

2020
Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: MoRo on November 06, 2014, 01:22:48 AM
Have you tried this device?

Thanks for the maths above but I'm not at all sure it's right. It doesn't seem to take into account the phase difference between top of pole offset and arm/weight offset.

The very simple mockup of the device that I have made up behaves entirely as expected until one leans the top of the pole at 90 degrees to the arm, and then moves in the direction tangential to the weight, it wanting to fall, it wanting to go around in a circle. This device is difficult to picture in 3d and causes difficulties in analysis as a result. Who has actually built one? And who has let the top pole be loose rather than fixed? It's essential also to put direction in at the top but not a driving energy - one has to direct the pole and then allow gravity to do the work.

Please forgive my stupidity in pursuit of this device but the behaviour of the test pole, arm and weight I've put together indicates something unexpressed by the mathematical analysis and indicates also how merely as a driven exccentric flywheel it's not going to do anything but be exactly that. . .

Best wishes

2020

The math above also does not appear to consider the reaction of centrifugal forces that would come into play after the mass is revolving at any given speed.

I am currently gathering the necessary items to assemble a very simple first stage unit with the means to accurately measure the static output torque and compare this with the static input torque required to out-of-phase the tilt bar at various angles (an output load state) up to 90 degrees. After this dynamic input/output torque will be compared up to a point where the mass cannot overcome a load.

once I'm done, I'll put it on my YouTube.

MagnaMoRo

Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: teamsource on November 07, 2014, 06:17:37 AM
This setup looks similar to me except I could never figure out what the extra weights were for?

http://peswiki.com/index.php/Directory:Mann_Gravity_Mover (http://peswiki.com/index.php/Directory:Mann_Gravity_Mover)
Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: ARMCORTEX on November 07, 2014, 02:55:20 PM

placement is based on this wedge type arrangement.

But again, you use assumption that the device of Mann worked, wich is unproven.

http://www.besslerwheel.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=2769&postdays=0&postorder=asc&start=15

Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: 2020man on November 07, 2014, 03:46:49 PM
This setup looks similar to me except I could never figure out what the extra weights were for?

http://peswiki.com/index.php/Directory:Mann_Gravity_Mover (http://peswiki.com/index.php/Directory:Mann_Gravity_Mover)

How very intriguing

Having the wheel resting on the brick edge would seem to take any gravitational addition out of the system there - it's merely acting as an eccentric flywheel there . . .

Best wishes

2020
Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: Genegene on November 09, 2014, 05:24:00 PM
Here is what I have so far, My 12v motor got fried, so I'm using a 24v motor. I built it based on what I have read here on this forum and energetic forum. Tell me what you think so far.
Genegene
Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: 2020man on November 09, 2014, 06:22:31 PM
Here is what I have so far, My 12v motor got fried, so I'm using a 24v motor. I built it based on what I have read here on this forum and energetic forum. Tell me what you think so far.
Genegene

You're on the right lines, I'm sure. Your experimental setup is really helpful and most interesting. Kelly suggests running the top motor on a motor controller so that it can build up steam. But from what you've done it looks as thaough it's going to work and that it demonstrates how hard the mathematical analysis really is.

If this works, it's the one device that anyone can understand and can prove that free energy is not beyond imagination.

Best wishes

2020
Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: Spirit on November 20, 2014, 11:28:59 PM
http://youtu.be/xqEqjZl3ZOg
Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: rice on November 20, 2014, 11:48:46 PM
i don't speak the language.  anyone know what they're saying?  sure looks like they're trying to prove that its looped...  are they saying its looped?
Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: Spirit on November 21, 2014, 01:06:19 AM
http://youtu.be/gMk-1ouP-gg
Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: Spirit on November 21, 2014, 01:50:17 AM
http://youtu.be/hWvSzZztu48
Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: noonespecial on November 21, 2014, 04:38:41 AM
Those videos are essentially the same as the John Device.
Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: ARMCORTEX on November 21, 2014, 08:57:32 AM
not a single lightbulb was lit I dont understand.

even the reporter seemed unimpressed.

noonespecial: long time no see, hows the spring device coming along, I sometimes have my doubts, we may have over-reacted and assumed things that were not true.
Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: noonespecial on November 21, 2014, 06:19:50 PM

noonespecial: long time no see, hows the spring device coming along, I sometimes have my doubts, we may have over-reacted and assumed things that were not true.

No overunity by traditional standards but there is greater output than to be expected. Given the common efficiency of both the motor and alternator the best systemic efficiency should be in the neighborhood of 40% but I'm close to 80% which is unusual. There are quite a few variable to go through so its taking a while.

Charlie
Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: Spirit on November 21, 2014, 08:08:51 PM
Those videos are essentially the same as the John Device.

No i think it's more like skinner's principle
Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: Spirit on November 21, 2014, 08:21:26 PM
This is what i plan to build using about 100 pounds for the weight.
Any suggestions on what alternator to use?
What small motor to use?
What battery or batteries to use?
What inverter to use?
Also i don't want my battery to overcharge..i think the alternator has something that controls this?

I'm on a budget so i can't be spending too much..
Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: TinselKoala on November 21, 2014, 08:40:44 PM

No overunity by traditional standards but there is greater output than to be expected. Given the common efficiency of both the motor and alternator the best systemic efficiency should be in the neighborhood of 40% but I'm close to 80% which is unusual. There are quite a few variable to go through so its taking a while.

Charlie

Do you have specific efficiency figures for the alternator and motor that you are actually using? Because even a short internet search tells me that alternators of 80-85 percent "common" efficiency are not unusual, and motors of 95 percent efficiency are in common use.  So your finding, if it is correct, of being "close to 80 percent" is neither unusual nor particularly special. 0.85 x 0.95 = 0.80 or slightly over, and even if you use not particulary efficient items, .80 x .90 = 0.72, probably within your margin of error for "close to 80 percent."

And if image posters would size their images to be no more than 1024 pixels wide... it would make the images themselves easier to see, and it would not disrupt the page formatting the way outrageously large images do.
Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: Madeo on November 21, 2014, 08:47:47 PM
This is what i plan to build using about 100 pounds for the weight.
Any suggestions on what alternator to use?
What small motor to use?
What battery or batteries to use?
What inverter to use?
Also i don't want my battery to overcharge..i think the alternator has something that controls this?

I'm on a budget so i can't be spending too much..

im planning on building this one myself when i get the chance. I would suggest that you stay within the 12v-18v system because you can use lead acid batteries and have a charge controller to automatically maintain a safe charge on the batteries. Charge controllers are cheap on Ebay (the simple ones anyway). I am not certain on the cost of the motors, but i don't see why you can't find cheap ones that are rated at those voltages. If you are thinking of using car alternators as your motor/generator,  I'd highly advise you not to use that.  Those alternators do not have permanent magnets inside. You'd be forced to modify it by tearing it apart and installing magnets yourself which I heard can be a pain in the ass.

Btw, charge controllers are for solar panel setups. For as long as you make sure your output current is DC and filter it with a big capacitor,  it will work just fine.  You can build your own charge controller, but unless you are good at putting electronics stuff together,  i think it's a lot easier just to buy them. The only reason I would build my own is if i'm using voltages outside the 12-18v range.
Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: Spirit on November 21, 2014, 09:17:38 PM
ok thanks for the input.

i had forgotten to add the swivel extension on the shaft that connects to the generator so i edited the attached photo above.
Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: noonespecial on November 21, 2014, 11:25:37 PM
Do you have specific efficiency figures for the alternator and motor that you are actually using? Because even a short internet search tells me that alternators of 80-85 percent "common" efficiency are not unusual, and motors of 95 percent efficiency are in common use.  So your finding, if it is correct, of being "close to 80 percent" is neither unusual nor particularly special. 0.85 x 0.95 = 0.80 or slightly over, and even if you use not particulary efficient items, .80 x .90 = 0.72, probably within your margin of error for "close to 80 percent."

And if image posters would size their images to be no more than 1024 pixels wide... it would make the images themselves easier to see, and it would not disrupt the page formatting the way outrageously large images do.

There may be some newer versions or PMA's that run at higher efficiencies but a garden variety automotive alternator will typically peak at 60% and is a function of speed. The RPM I'm running at is down around 30%-40%:

http://electronics.stackexchange.com/questions/96051/what-makes-automotive-alternators-so-inneficient-relative-to-other-applications (http://electronics.stackexchange.com/questions/96051/what-makes-automotive-alternators-so-inneficient-relative-to-other-applications)

Plus I also have frictional losses with bearings that I'm not even including.
Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: noonespecial on November 21, 2014, 11:27:23 PM
No i think it's more like skinner's principle

Skinner uses an upper lever mechanism to move the lower arm. I didn't see any upper arm in the videos?
Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: ARMCORTEX on November 22, 2014, 01:35:13 AM

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

Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: Madeo on November 22, 2014, 02:27:32 AM

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

how will you attach a generator with that design ??
Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: ARMCORTEX on November 22, 2014, 03:31:52 AM
From the midpoint, where else  :P?

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.

Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: Madeo 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.
Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: noonespecial 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
Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: ARMCORTEX 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)
Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: akbill 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?
Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: poplianil 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
Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: ARMCORTEX 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.
Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: poplianil 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
Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: justcurious 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!
Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: Low-Q 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 (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 (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
Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: justcurious on March 15, 2015, 04:08:44 AM
phew thanks low-Q at least I got something right.
Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: Artoj 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.
Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: MoRo 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 (https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/19888528/energy/GRAVPOWER.gif)
Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: Pirate88179 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 (https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/19888528/energy/GRAVPOWER.gif)

Nice job on the gif.

Bill
Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: FreeEnergy on January 21, 2016, 07:19:30 AM
Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: mscoffman on January 21, 2016, 07:37:56 PM
to be a dual belt drive. Smooth belts do not do true synchronous operations.
That is, the eccentrics in this machine are only temporarily in the position shown
and over time they will drift away from one another in phase slowly changing the
machine's equations in an uncontrolled way. Perhaps storing or releasing energy?
Use shaft/gear drives or drive chain and sprocket or synchronous notched belts and
hubs for true deterministic operation.
Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: sm0ky2 on January 22, 2016, 08:17:56 AM
559 posts and we are still trying to figure this machine out??

Please stop what you are doing, and do yourself a favor....
Go to the local playground, get on the spinny thing.
sit on the outer edge, facing the middle and while you spin around, lean back,
then sit up again.

you can adjust the speed, go faster or slower, like swinging a swing.
try this with 2 or 4 friends,. its the same principal this device uses.

like a substrate of specific mass aligns itself on a centrifuge tray......

forget the drive motor... start with a crank-shaft. you can turn with your hand. one shaft, one counterweight...
build a one-stroke engine, before you try to build a 4 cylinder....

have the counter weight such that you can adjust it (turn it) around the shaft to find the best angle that adds momentum to your cranking action. This will be affected by the angle of both the shaft and the weight.

The amount of weight is scalable, this determines your torque, also your required input energy.
Measure the output at various RPM while adjusting the "timing" of weight to crank.

theres a tool,. kind of "u" shaped, with a knob that spins on the handle, and usually a drill bit on the other end
or various spinning attachment...

you can get these things spinning something serious with just tiny impulses.. like a flywheel.
when you hold them at a certain angle...
enough to drill through a piece of wood without even trying...

forceful drilling the same wood, using this tool, requires a lot of energy.....

Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: sm0ky2 on January 22, 2016, 05:50:48 PM

I did not find the "magic" within this device as I tested for it,, I will state, however, that there are a few more interactions going on than what you have described.

Try placing the swing on the merry-go-round,, I think that covers most of what I ran across.

the point is:  Experiment

It is easier to understand when you can see and feel the forces you are trying to harness.
now, consider the elliptical pattern, and the timing involved. What does this accomplish?
the angle of the shaft is changing with time, what relationship does this have with the RPM?
How does the force of gravity change over this range of angle vs the timing of rotation?
(i.e. - where the counterweight is at each respective angle over time)
Take your time, and look at why it does what it does.....

with one counterweight, you can see that the action/reaction takes place at basically 1/2 rotation intervals.
the first half of the stroke, you crank the shaft with input torque "X"
the second half, output torque "Y" is returned, via the counterweight.
so the "timing" of a two stroke engine would be 180-degrees forward from the first shaft.
a 4-weight device would have each 90-degrees out from one another, 8 weights = 30 degrees, etc.

this gives you a combination of low-torque, high-torque, low-torque, high-torque
you alternate these like a cam, the high pushes the next low around....

its not "magic", its physics....  both the drive shaft and the crank shaft experience a change in torque.
in a one-stroke engine, the first half of the cycle the crank shaft requires a high torque input to turn the shaft.
the output shaft experiences very little translated torque.
This is because you are lifting the counterweight "upwards", it is the equivalent of e=mgh, but the math is a little more complex
due to the angle of the shaft from vertical, and that it is moving in an ellipse, not straight up and down, or in a perfect circle.
the second half of the cycle, the input shaft requires very little torque to turn the shaft, in fact the actual value can have a (-) sign.
the output shaft experiences a great torque, this is because of the force of gravity and the angle of rotation. (~=E=mgh)

the total energy of the system does not change, however, there is a great conversion of available torque.
while maintaining the same rpm.
an analogy would be the hydraulic brakes on your car. you push a little with your foot, and the pressure on the brakes is amplified many times.
Momentum conservation is why we basically get a free torque boost.
output energy does not translate to the input when measured directly. its like a worm-gear in the sense that you can't really send it backwards.
the system boundaries have to be set prior to the output shaft for an equilibrium analysis.

Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: sm0ky2 on January 22, 2016, 06:15:13 PM
i'll help a little more (sometimes I forget that not everyone else understands whats going on in my own head....)

when the counterweight is going "down" the shaft has a good angle to it, the outside of the ellipse. gravity is really swinging that weight!
This is governed by the equations of Sir Isaac Newton.

as it approaches "bottom dead center", the angle of the shaft is changing directions, and heading back towards vertical.

when the going "up", well the shaft is approaching vertical so its not really going "up" its just swinging around in a horizontal plane...
with the momentum of the counterweight x its' velocity. E = mg (what?)

So, how does it go "up" ???

ok, here you go:

the crank shaft is a gigantic LEVER. the Fulcrum being the bottom of the shaft, calculate the Archimedes leverage
and you have the Torque Conversion Ratio of your device.

the leverage allows the crankshaft to lift the weight of the entire shaft/weights using very little input force.

the opposite occurs when gravity pulls it down.

when your test unit is set appropriately, you will feel a force pulling the driveshaft towards the angle of the ellipse.
the particular ellipse is determined by the length of the shaft and the radius of the counterweights, and the period (T).
this is governed by the equations of (believe it or not) Kepler.

So here we have a device that takes advantage of the principals of several core scientific foundations.
All in perfect order.
Not magic at all, but a work of engineering mastery.
I only showed you the major three,
but I can clearly identify at least 7 more fundamental scientific principals used in the complex device from the 1939.
This machine is equally as beautiful as a Whimshurst Machine, or a Sterling Engine.

Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: sm0ky2 on January 23, 2016, 08:17:00 AM
There is also a double leverage action going on,, maybe you should play with it and get a good feel for all of what is going on within the system.

There is a feedback to the prime mover,, considering that the motor driving the system is the prime mover I am talking about and not the prime mover that the system is working with that is providing for the motions and initial torque.

With this feedback, with the pulses that get sent into the electric motor that was running this device it would be very easy to see that it was the motor that was adding all of the extra,, that is those pulses can create a condition where the motor can and will exceed its rated power,, that is both for what it consumes and what it delivers.

I think that when the gas engine was used the mystery went away and the system failed to function as described,, it did allow the engines input to be added to the main system,, but I kind of doubt that it added any more than that.

yes the feedback is a necessary component.
with something like a gas engine, the rotation is rigid. it is fighting the system instead of allowing the flywheel effect to push the crank around.
you can design an engine that will work like that, as some do (or did). but this was probably not the case.

the system needs this feedback, in the same way a sterling engine needs a displacer.

for a given length shaft, given set of weights, and radius of placement:
there is a certain angle, at which the effect will occur (or be most effective).
both in the downward direction, and in the upward. equal and opposite forces.
the difference between these two angles, over the time period of the cycle, defines the particular ellipse that it must travel in.
it can also be determined by the gravitational force, orbital vector, velocity, and several other factors....
but we can more simply relate it to the angle of incline because there are measurable force factors involved that can be observed in experiment.

both equations give the same answer.

you don't want a perfect circle, (there are one or two discrete dimensions where the appropriate ellipse is a perfect circle, but..)
most ellipses will not be circular, when you build this device...

Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: d3x0r on July 10, 2017, 01:53:37 AM

last night it struck me that my math was a little wrong... and came back to check some progress....

rohndoe had a pretty good demo...

I guess gotoluc had built quite a contraption too... didn't quite get off the ground though :)

the longer the vertical shaft, the less work is used (L2a/L1*Mg) to raise the weights so they can fall, but the real work is resulting as torque on the shaft, (L2*Mg).  removing Mg as a common factor from both leaves L2 (length of the arm),  L2a (length of the arm + a little for the offset of the horizontal from the bottom), L1 (Length of the arm from the horizontal to the top).

L2 is constant so whatever length arm you have determines the base multiplier of torque.
L1 increasing decreases the work to raise the weight.

Oh, but it's the sin of the angle only that gets applied to the torque so a longer arm has a lesser angle (unless the top rotation is increased in diamter, which is doable I suppose; limited by the angle of ... well no, I guess a gear system on two hemispheres could be made such that even 90 degrees can result in good torque transfer.  (100% gravity to torque translation)  (or really just 2 45 degree gears since it doesn't have to pivot)

I guess 1.0 translation of mass to torque would be having the drive bar horizontal (attached image)

(Attachment 2)

you don't gain RPM directly - the red (output generator/transmission) could be a gearbox to leverage it.  The lower the output load, the lower the weight will be up to a maximum.... would need to be some sort of limit.

The outside ring would have to be fixed to the center part and rotate together... (lazy suzan plate in the center? )

That design is of course less horizontal space efficient but gains vertical stacking efficiency (somewhat).

(classic john device model, with a mostly vertical shaft, but then output torque only gains the sin(theta) torque, where theta is < 5 degrees, whereas the above is 90 degrees which sin(90) = 1.0 )
(attachment 1)

Some possible builds of a flat device....
The top is like a peice of plywood or something with a hole cut in it in the center for the gear drive, and a hole for the arm to go through, can then mount the drive arm down to that....
the second is the same sort of idea but maybe a bicycle wheel with a few spokes removed so the drive gear can get through...would have to keep the bar from moving in and out and keep it meshed against the center gear...

(attachment 3)

But this sort of arrangement simplifies the math some; should be easier to prove that the linear force required on the outside of the drive is less than the torque force you can get out for basically any mass > 1 on the mass-arm.  and based on how much greater you can then consider moving it back to a more vertical drive

But then also the load needs to be a greater force than the input in order to require any gain from the pivoting mass.  The mass would hang vertically and basically be a 1:1 transfer from the input drive to the output drive, then as the output requires more load, the weight would raise and compensate, and the input would gain at a rate of L2/L1 ( if L2(the mass arm) is shorter than L1 (the drive arm) the required force will then be that fraction of force required, and you'll start to note a greater output.

The skinner device would mostly be leveraging its inertial to drive a lathe, and probably only a very very tiny shift in the weights would be required.  Full load would be the drive shaft ahead of the mass by 90 degrees.  (even in Rohnjoe's video because there's no real load, the mass is only slightly lagged from the drive, only the slight force required to overcome the friction on the bottom would lag the weight).

---
After posting that on energetic forum; I did some searching for 'gravity torque multipler'  and or 'gravity torque amplifier' and didn't really find anything similar. (gravity torque amplifier did find gotoluc's stuff and a few others skinner related)

And sorry for wide images; they're just slightly too wide though
Title: Re: 1939 Gravity Power - multiply power by 1200%
Post by: d3x0r on July 10, 2017, 05:15:23 AM

nevermind; I guess in the flat orientation the force has to be applied on the drive side.