Author Topic: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system ! (Read 2237992 times)

Merg · « **Reply #1755 on:** October 01, 2011, 02:54:49 AM »

Two Stage Oscillator Simplified
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8IvsFcyViUI

Low-Q · « **Reply #1756 on:** October 03, 2011, 09:31:12 AM »

Quote from: Merg on October 01, 2011, 02:54:49 AM

Two Stage Oscillator Simplified
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8IvsFcyViUI

Please see my two recent notes on youtube (from jallaguri).

I can summarize here:
The pendulum is only using energy to move MASS up and down. Mass will suffer from inertia which allways apply forces that is counteracting the pendulum. The less the mass is, the less energy is required to run the pendulum.
However, load through friction of any kind, pure energy, has no mass at all. So if you keep the mass in the "piston" down to an absolute minimum, a light weight aluminum coil, you will possibly be able to produce excess energy - WITHOUT violating thermodynamic laws.

Because the coil is very light, it can still be located within a strong magnetic field that consists of heavy duty magnets, like a loudspeaker driver. Since the magnets are fixed, and do not move, you have only the light coil that travels up and down. This coil should be able to produce more energy than it takes to lift the weight of the coil itself. If you load the coil, the distance it travels will also go down, but it will still require the same amount of input energy to run the pendulum. Heavier pendulums does not require more energy to sustain, so then you can increase the stroke of the coil - without adding energy to sustain the pendulum.

A similar design with a rotating disc that is out of balance, could replace the pendulum. Just make sure you only have vertical movement of the coil. With a rotating disc, you can just increase RPM, and keep the design smaller. However, you cannot harness energy from rotation itself - ONLY the vertical viberations. These viberations is perpendicular to rotation, and should not affect the energy to maintain rotation.

EDIT: I'm not sure if the rotating disc will have the same effect as the pendulum - I have a feeling it should.

I think you got something here!

Again, good luck!

Vidar

Low-Q · « **Reply #1757 on:** October 03, 2011, 10:24:11 PM »

I tested this setup in a similar way using a rubberband attached to a cotton thread. As weight I used a donut speaker magnet.

The rubber band clearly stretches out when the weight reach the bottom. However, the pendulum loose a great deal of kinetic energy when bouncing like this. I think the reason is the rubber band isn't acting like a spring. The losses are high, so when the weight increase the radius, the counter Coriolis force isn't compensated after the weight has passed the bottom.

I can clearly see that the rubber band is a bad choice of "spring load". It looses its ability to fully recover right away after it has been fully streched, and that will cause the weight to follow a path which is not perfect.

I compared with an unstretchable thread, and then the pendulum continued to swing for much longer.

I will try with a metal spring next time.

To be continued.

Vidar

Low-Q · « **Reply #1758 on:** October 04, 2011, 05:14:52 PM »

I did some test with a steel blade spring, actually three layers of them.

There is some friction between the blades which prevent the springs to work perfectly, but the result is much more promising.

I used an angle as reference point from where the pendulum dropped. And second reference with smaller angle. I measured the time for the pendulum to reach the second narrower angle.

Length of the pendulum: 200mm + ring magnet.
Magnet weight: 750g
Cycle time: 1s (regardless of situation)
Average deflecting of the spring: 5mm peak to peak
Average swing distance: 250mm (Started at 400mm, ended at 100mm
Start angle 60 degrees (initial swing angle approx 120 degrees)
Finish swing angle approx 30 degrees

I repeated the experiment 3 times in each two modes. The modes is 1. Spring loaded, and 2. Fixed.

Fixed pendulum: Average swing time was about 4 minutes, or 240 cycles.
Spring loaded pendulum: Average swing time was about 3.5 minutes, or 210 cycles.

Taking the non-perfect spring assambly into account I would probably get closeer to 4 minutes in spring loaded mode.

I will not yet assume it would be possible to harness excess energy from the bounce in spring loaded mode, but sings of it points in that direction.

I will do more test with even more ideal springs.

Vidar

Merg · « **Reply #1759 on:** October 09, 2011, 02:46:54 AM »

pumping a swing PT.2
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TTbeawIkDeo

Merg · « **Reply #1760 on:** October 25, 2011, 05:26:18 PM »

Veljko Milkovic - Pendulum - 3DSMAX Reactor Simulation
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rSZNV26IS9Y

Merg · « **Reply #1761 on:** October 26, 2011, 02:43:05 PM »

We need here something big like this pendulum

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=92SPXE4HIzw

Merg · « **Reply #1762 on:** November 20, 2011, 07:44:32 PM »

Replica from Hungary
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UAUkEHPjuZA

Cloxxki · « **Reply #1763 on:** November 20, 2011, 08:48:40 PM »

Best idea I've heard in a while is to extract energy from the downward swing of the second stage. Can it press down on something, do goo work, and have it cost less than the input?
IMO with some 8 y/o level engineering, just some ball bearing rolling over tracks, this could be tested.
I'm saying even that won't work, as the downward move of the 2nd stage is also there to keep the 1st stage going. Take out one ball bearing worth of anergy, and you'll need at least that to keep the thing oscillating.

Machi · « **Reply #1764 on:** November 23, 2011, 11:54:22 AM »

If the pendulum-lever system has no load, the pendulum can oscillate and chaotic, and considerable energy is dissipated.
Certainly, rule is valid for two-stage oscillator. The more strain output, and require lower inputs.

neptune · « **Reply #1765 on:** November 23, 2011, 07:33:01 PM »

It has been several years now since the release of info on the 2 stage oscillator . There have been numerous attempts to prove that it is overunity , some quite convincing and others less so . Some attempts show a COP of more than 2 . And yet nobody has succeeded in closing the loop . The main problem seems to be phasing . This could be solved in theory by storing output energy before feeding it back , but this will inevitably involve conversion losses . These losses do not need to be very great before the system falls below unity . RHEAD 100 did some great work . Has anyone heard from him in the last 6 months ? If looping proves to be impossible for now , then the best use is as an energy amplifier for human powered machines .Milkovich demonstrates this in his water pump , but how many have been sold and are in daily use ? By using an unbalanced constantly rotated flywheel instead of the pendulum , posssibly we could use it to help power a bicycle . Remember that globally , more people rely on bikes than cars .
One posibilty for looping would be to store energy in a large clock spring . The great thing about a spring is that you can intermittently wind one end whilst taking energy from the other end . Any comments would be most welcome .

DreamThinkBuild · « **Reply #1766 on:** November 23, 2011, 11:50:31 PM »

Hi All,

This is just something I've been "toying"

with trying to combine a lever and pendulum. Small motor on top shifts a weight which gets the heavy mass (diametric magnet) swinging like a pendulum. Powered by a 1500F ultracap. This design is not OU the pulse is too short and intermittent. It does slow down the discharge of the cap though. I may rip it down and rebuild a new design.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hr0KyMqMZtc

Cloxxki · « **Reply #1767 on:** November 25, 2011, 03:39:26 PM »

Quote from: neptune on November 23, 2011, 07:33:01 PM

It has been several years now since the release of info on the 2 stage oscillator . There have been numerous attempts to prove that it is overunity , some quite convincing and others less so . Some attempts show a COP of more than 2 . And yet nobody has succeeded in closing the loop . The main problem seems to be phasing . This could be solved in theory by storing output energy before feeding it back , but this will inevitably involve conversion losses . These losses do not need to be very great before the system falls below unity . RHEAD 100 did some great work . Has anyone heard from him in the last 6 months ? If looping proves to be impossible for now , then the best use is as an energy amplifier for human powered machines .Milkovich demonstrates this in his water pump , but how many have been sold and are in daily use ? By using an unbalanced constantly rotated flywheel instead of the pendulum , posssibly we could use it to help power a bicycle . Remember that globally , more people rely on bikes than cars .
One posibilty for looping would be to store energy in a large clock spring . The great thing about a spring is that you can intermittently wind one end whilst taking energy from the other end . Any comments would be most welcome .

Which was the most convincing for you?

I think calling it a multiplier is even too much at this stage of verification.
Perhaps it's a transformer and capcitor more than amplifier. Still, flywheels are better at this as far as I know.

I was most impressed by the effortless water pumping. To me it seems like the the trick here was overcoming the stiction in the pumping mechanism. The 2SO converts a long, gentle push into spikey pull.
The fact that Mr. Hand is raised before tapping the first stage may be something that many overlook. Mr. Arm doesn't get tired from the pushing down, gravity does that. Raising is where Mr. Arm is puts in energy.

johnny874 · « **Reply #1768 on:** November 25, 2011, 03:44:56 PM »

Quote from: Cloxxki on November 25, 2011, 03:39:26 PM

Which was the most convincing for you?

I think calling it a multiplier is even too much at this stage of verification.
Perhaps it's a transformer and capcitor more than amplifier. Still, flywheels are better at this as far as I know.

I was most impressed by the effortless water pumping. To me it seems like the the trick here was overcoming the stiction in the pumping mechanism. The 2SO converts a long, gentle push into spikey pull.
The fact that Mr. Hand is raised before tapping the first stage may be something that many overlook. Mr. Arm doesn't get tired from the pushing down, gravity does that. Raising is where Mr. Arm is puts in energy.

Jan,
I think what I posted to Andrea is the solution everyone has over looked.
He has been working on it himself. It allows a secondary weight to momentarily increase the potential of the main weight on the pendulum. And as it cycles, it can be utilized for this purpose.

Jim

neptune · « **Reply #1769 on:** November 25, 2011, 04:59:41 PM »

@Johnny874 . please show a link [ or a reply number if its in this thread ] to the solution that everyone overlooked .
@Cloxxki . Forget about Mr Arm and Mr Hand . Look at the youtube chanel of Rhead100 . He shows a 2so powered by a falling weight . The load is a heavier weight being lifted . He claims 80 inch pounds of input gives 2400 inch pounds on the output . Not an amplifier? This is the demo I found most convincing .

News:

User Menu

Author Topic: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system ! (Read 2237992 times)

Merg

Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !

Low-Q

Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !

Low-Q

Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !

Low-Q

Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !

Merg

Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !

Merg

Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !

Merg

Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !

Merg

Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !

Cloxxki

Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !

Machi

Device can be loaded

neptune

Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !

DreamThinkBuild

Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !

Cloxxki

Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !

johnny874

Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !

neptune

Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !