Author Topic: Gravity Wheel Design by BrotherJoeM (Read 5568 times)

BrotherJoeM · « **on:** June 26, 2014, 02:45:39 AM »

Attached is a simple picture of an ACAD project still in progress. It is a dual rotor design. I would like to build it although my health prevents me. If I could do it though, I would use either PVC or Polypro for the frame and rotors, steel for the weights and precision bearings. For the cams I would use something strong yet easy enough to shape to proper specs. I realize the picture is not so good, but many should get the overall concept here. A good size for prototype would be 48" rotor diameter. The picture does not show it but the forward 4 weight (slider) bearings are u-groove and the inside 2 cam bearings are flat follower bearings. Anyone think this would work? Any suggestions about improvements? Bear in mind that I know the frame will be different ...it is only a generic encasement.

LibreEnergia · « **Reply #1 on:** June 27, 2014, 12:08:42 PM »

Quote from: BrotherJoeM on June 26, 2014, 02:45:39 AM

Attached is a simple picture of an ACAD project still in progress. It is a dual rotor design. I would like to build it although my health prevents me. If I could do it though, I would use either PVC or Polypro for the frame and rotors, steel for the weights and precision bearings. For the cams I would use something strong yet easy enough to shape to proper specs. I realize the picture is not so good, but many should get the overall concept here. A good size for prototype would be 48" rotor diameter. The picture does not show it but the forward 4 weight (slider) bearings are u-groove and the inside 2 cam bearings are flat follower bearings. Anyone think this would work? Any suggestions about improvements? Bear in mind that I know the frame will be different ...it is only a generic encasement.

There is no embodiment of a gravity wheel that can actually work. The reason is that gravity is a conservative field. There is (provably) no geometry that can ever give rise to an imbalance (hence creating a torque and velocity) that does not require an equivalent input of energy to maintain it.

if you create an imbalance then the unbalanced mass then needs to be raised again for the cycle to continue. Raising the mass costs you exactly the same amount of energy (or more due to friction) than can be recovered from the movement of the unbalanced mass.

The mathematical proof is somewhat arcane (Noethers theorem), but it holds absolutely true. Trying to develop such a machine is futile.

FreeEnergy · « **Reply #2 on:** June 27, 2014, 11:07:27 PM »

Quote from: BrotherJoeM on June 26, 2014, 02:45:39 AM

Attached is a simple picture of an ACAD project still in progress. It is a dual rotor design. I would like to build it although my health prevents me. If I could do it though, I would use either PVC or Polypro for the frame and rotors, steel for the weights and precision bearings. For the cams I would use something strong yet easy enough to shape to proper specs. I realize the picture is not so good, but many should get the overall concept here. A good size for prototype would be 48" rotor diameter. The picture does not show it but the forward 4 weight (slider) bearings are u-groove and the inside 2 cam bearings are flat follower bearings. Anyone think this would work? Any suggestions about improvements? Bear in mind that I know the frame will be different ...it is only a generic encasement.

Need more details the picture is not self explanatory.

Check out:

Skinner's: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rxIRaJlTD4Y
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JolNozy8UEY&list=UU-41VqjATdRAlN7ztX8S30A
https://www.youtube.com/user/aaronmurakami

John's: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DlVvyBickHE
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J0AsR126bSI
https://www.youtube.com/user/davidwjohn

TinselKoala · « **Reply #3 on:** June 27, 2014, 11:43:34 PM »

It seems perfectly clear to me. Here, maybe this will help:

BrotherJoeM · « **Reply #4 on:** June 28, 2014, 11:20:45 PM »

Thanks for labeling the picture for me. I didn't do it since it is also very straight forward to me. Two things though... In this design, there is no drive motor. It is purely gravitational. I see you renamed the pic to reflect your view of the concept. The name I chose is not religiously geared, but simply means - gravity operated device - <smile>
The rest of the design is not in the photo just to keep it from getting too busy and hard to see. The rotors would be connected so that they would be in synch. There are a lot of ways to do it.
I did build a similar design (a much earlier version ) lol... and I did it using particle board, a motorcycle wheel bearing, some nylon roller bearings and steel bar from the hardware store. I did have it working off and on for short stints. I believe this will work if it is built using the best materials, balancing and high tolerances.

TinselKoala · « **Reply #5 on:** June 28, 2014, 11:57:12 PM »

Well, you wanted some suggestions as to how to get it to work... so I told you how to do it.

No, it won't work without a drive motor, no matter how well it's built or how good the materials are. Of course, if you can find some negative-coefficient-of-friction bearings to use, all bets are off.

Your statement "I did have it working off and on for short stints" clearly uses some other definition of "working" than I'm used to, because a "working" gravity wheel keeps on working, it doesn't do "short stints" unless... it's not working.

Here's a short video you may find interesting:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XMIsABzDkw0

Don't let me discourage you from _testing_ your ideas though. Just make sure you are really testing, not assuming.

News:

User Menu

Author Topic: Gravity Wheel Design by BrotherJoeM (Read 5568 times)

BrotherJoeM

Gravity Wheel Design by BrotherJoeM

LibreEnergia

Re: Gravity Wheel Design by BrotherJoeM

FreeEnergy

Re: Gravity Wheel Design by BrotherJoeM

TinselKoala

Re: Gravity Wheel Design by BrotherJoeM

BrotherJoeM

Re: Gravity Wheel Design by BrotherJoeM

TinselKoala

Re: Gravity Wheel Design by BrotherJoeM