Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy
Gravity powered devices => Gravity powered devices => Topic started by: iacob alex on June 14, 2016, 10:33:55 PM
-
.....as a proposal , at : http://moteur-hackenberger.over-blog.com/article-la-machine-de-sellier-42901661.html
Playing the same idea ( a variable class 2,3 leverage , on the same side of the fulcrum so to obtain a possible continuous gravity unbalance...) , at :
https://youtu.be/A5pPaTqd-4w
www.geocities.ws/iacob_alex/Some_Drafts/text032.jpg
Al_ex
-
.....as a proposal , at : http://moteur-hackenberger.over-blog.com/article-la-machine-de-sellier-42901661.html
Playing the same idea ( a variable class 2,3 leverage , on the same side of the fulcrum so to obtain a possible continuous gravity unbalance...) , at :
https://youtu.be/A5pPaTqd-4w
www.geocities.ws/iacob_alex/Some_Drafts/text032.jpg
Al_ex
If I get time I will post a few pictures of the machine(s) built using this design the first of which was 2006-7 and was a very good learning in why I do not pursue gravity machines. In the meantime you can see the same basics in a drawing on my website http://www.backgauges.com/Gen-E-Sys%20II/wpimages/wpdd16de76_06.png
-
Hi TV !
I suppose you are talking about your compound countinuously variable leverage ( see photo from "The impossible wheel...") , intended to be used as a "FUEL" adder arm ...?!
Sellier continuous variable leverage is not an "adder..." (so to increase the rotational inertia of a separate power supply...) , but a possible manner to use the gravity power , only.
We have two different starting ideas...but as a root of creation , many ideas grow better when transplanted into another mind.
Al_ex
-
Hi TV !
I suppose you are talking about your compound countinuously variable leverage ( see photo from "The impossible wheel...") , intended to be used as a "FUEL" adder arm ...?!
Sellier continuous variable leverage is not an "adder..." (so to increase the rotational inertia of a separate power supply...) , but a possible manner to use the gravity power , only.
We have two different ideas...but as a root of creation , many ideas grow better when transplanted into another mind.
Al_ex
Continuously Variable Fulcrum levers: CVF levers as used in the "module" shown in the photo I did post back in March, and they are all about using gravity as the input power to develop energy. They do work. They are not cheap, easy, or practical in my opinion. That is only one of many builds for proofs of each different concept.
That "module" shown there is one of three used in my last and final build of gravity powered machines. The "FUEL" is not shown. Full "fuel" load tested on each CVF lever was 441 pounds of steel, for a total "fuel" load of 2646 pounds. The full build is not shown. The power and torque generated are awesome at any speed. #40 chains break in less than one minute, 1-1/2" wide H series timing belts get the teeth ripped off in not much longer than 15 minutes. The harmonics are intense and set the entire 30,000 sq ft building vibrating including the 24' roof support columns as it came up to near design velocity.
Humorously: Similar to TK's Texas video ..... "Wisconsin had resonance" albeit briefly. ;D
The bottom line I saw on CVF levers was this: Too many parts. Sure it can work BUT net Horsepower output is very low for the amount of expense and maintenance required. Please keep in mind "Horsepower" is the one and only thing that can be used to power a conventional alternator/generator; if electricity is practical "power" you can use to grow and live with is the "idea" in your mind and you are working towards.
Have you built and tested your "ideas"?
-
Hi TV !
Sellier design is a crystal-clear one...we can test his workability so easy.
Your photo and drawing are "shadowy"...sorry!
..."using gravity as the input POWER to develop ENERGY"...
...the "FUEL" is not shown...
..."the full build is not shown"...
..."too many parts"...
..."That is only one of many builds for proofs of each different concept"...
In my opinion , here is a dilemma : gravity powered vs. gravity assisted device...
Ok! If so, what is your web-site or "the prime line concept"?
Al_ex
-
Hi TV !
Sellier design is a crystal-clear one...we can test his workability so easy.
Your photo and drawing are "shadowy"...sorry!
..."using gravity as the input POWER to develop ENERGY"...
...the "FUEL" is not shown...
..."the full build is not shown"...
..."too many parts"...
..."That is only one of many builds for proofs of each different concept"...
In my opinion , here is a dilemma : gravity powered vs. gravity assisted device...
Ok! If so, what is your web-site ( hope not like an Ohio's WITs...) , or "the prime line concept"?
Al_ex
"Sellier design is a crystal-clear one...we can test his workability so easy. " Yep in 3d it is crystal clear that it is basically the same design as what I already built, tested, debuged, and learned a lot more from in ACTUALLY DOING SO as is clearly shown in the photo. If you build one like the 3d drawing you will learn several obvious (to me) shortcomings of that drawing and eventually find that it is not going to get you where you need to be in terms of something workable: meaning that holds up and has real world usefulness such as driving something else that is real.
I realize that 2d drawings are not easy for some people to visualize what is being presented and to them it may seem "shadowy", but fact is they are what people in shops actually use to make simple parts.
What is the website about? It is stated very clearly on every single page of it: "Generated Energy Systems. Power plants using solid Matter in motion as “Fuel”.
On the first page it also states what the website was/is about; "This entire site is all about PEOPLE HELPING PEOPLE." Will that suffice for "the prime line concept"?
Is that clear enough?
-
Hi TV !
I will take a look at your website.The prime line concept for a possible gravity powered device , is in my opinion a short verbalization/to express in words ( "non multum , sed multa " ) , if not a simple design or a natural model ...as you said...people helping people.
Usually , the destiny helps them that help themselves...
Al_ex
-
Al_ex
I have the new stand done and will finis up after my armor season is over and I have my sinus operation done. The VA is going to burn out excess flesh that causes me problems.
The stand will be able to take a lot of action effects.
Alan
-
.....has a " reversed " pair , at : www.geocities.ws/iacob_alex/Some_Drafts/text033.jpg
If we add multileverage ( crankshaft ) , we can test something alike animation :
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crankshaft#/media/File%3ACshaft.gif
A little test can upset a lot of verbose...
Al_ex
-
.....as a proposal , at :
http://moteur-hackenberger.over-blog.com/article-la-machine-de-sellier-42901661.html
.....as a possible test , at :
https://youtu.be/5I4NDGcj1UA
Al_ex
-
.....as a proposal , at : http://moteur-hackenberger.over-blog.com/article-la-machine-de-sellier-42901661.html
fr ----
"Le couple appliqué à la manivelle est d'autant moins important que le contact bras/manivelle est éloigné de l'axe d'articulation du bras, ce qui devrait faire qu'on récupère un excédent d'énergie, théoriquement, du moins!"
en ----
"The torque applied to the crank is less important when the arm/crank contact point is far from the axis of articulation of the arm, which should result in an excess of energy being recovered, theoretically at least!"
It is a great confusion. Torque is the product of force by the distance between its point of application and the axis of rotation. Energy is the product of force by displacement. The torque is less important, true, but the displacement is proportionally longer, the energy is conserved, theoretically at least!