Storing Cookies (See : http://ec.europa.eu/ipg/basics/legal/cookies/index_en.htm ) help us to bring you our services at overunity.com . If you use this website and our services you declare yourself okay with using cookies .More Infos here:
https://overunity.com/5553/privacy-policy/
If you do not agree with storing cookies, please LEAVE this website now. From the 25th of May 2018, every existing user has to accept the GDPR agreement at first login. If a user is unwilling to accept the GDPR, he should email us and request to erase his account. Many thanks for your understanding

User Menu

Custom Search

Author Topic: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !  (Read 2213833 times)

tagor

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1333
Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
« Reply #810 on: November 05, 2008, 04:02:30 PM »
And to be able to figure out correct math we need correct Physics!
what is this correct physics ?
until now the standart model is correct !

astroshima

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 19
Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
« Reply #811 on: November 05, 2008, 05:33:19 PM »
what is this correct physics ?
until now the standart model is correct !
Yeah that's exactly what I mean.
But as we can all see there is no System Equations in quoted "measurement" by Jovan Bebic.
So my "analysis" of that measurement is:
No (system) equations = No correct physics = No correct Math = No correct measurement ...

tagor

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1333
Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
« Reply #812 on: November 05, 2008, 06:36:49 PM »
Yeah that's exactly what I mean.
But as we can all see there is no System Equations in quoted "measurement" by Jovan Bebic.
So my "analysis" of that measurement is:
No (system) equations = No correct physics = No correct Math = No correct measurement ...

ok

Merg

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 438
Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
« Reply #813 on: November 05, 2008, 09:33:04 PM »
And for that particular scenario and that particular apparatus, I think measurement of input energy calculated by formula E=m*g*h is correct.

What I see is that the same author explained very well, shortly and clearly, what is the problem with that formula for input measurement E=mgh and why it cannot be correct for efficiency measurements of this two-stage oscillator:

However, over time, two problems using this simple formula (E=mgh) were found:
1) Once the pendulum starts swinging and moving the lever arm up and down, its
starting angle (position 1 or position 5 in Fig. 3, see below) will go down each
new period. The Pendulum will not be able to move the lever arm until the
end of its swing
. It will stop moving the lever arm once its starting angle
comes close to position 2 or 4, see below. Then it will continue swinging in
vain, one hour or more. This means that the pendulum has spent around half
of its potential energy on moving the lever arm and the other half as friction
loses while swinging in vain
. This ratio could be even worse, depending on
the oscillator.
2) The second problem is, that each new pendulum period would diminish the
amplitude of the lever arm
. This would complicate measuring of the output
energy by any chosen method.  

The method chosen by Jovan Bebic has solved both these problems. That is, to
keep adding energy to the pendulum once its starting angle was in position 1 at all times.
Thus the amplitude of the lever arm, as well as the output energy on the generator is
constant and easy to measure.

Also, Mr. Veljko Milkovic has always had an opinion that the efficiency of the
oscillator is in the fact that it is necessary to invest less energy to keep the pendulum
swinging than the energy received from the lever arm
. Using a formula for potential
energy would be the same as measuring the efficiency of an engine before it reached its
working temperature.

Extract from:
http://www.veljkomilkovic.com/Images/Jovan_Marjanovic_Recommendations_for_Efficiency_Measuring.pdf

astroshima

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 19
Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
« Reply #814 on: November 05, 2008, 11:13:31 PM »
http://www.veljkomilkovic.com/Images/Jovan_Marjanovic_Recommendations_for_Efficiency_Measuring.pdf

1.
Quote
"The method chosen by Jovan Bebic has solved both these problems. That is, to
keep adding energy to the pendulum once its starting angle was in position 1 at all times."

I think that instead Ep= m*g*h we will have Ep=m*g*dh (dh=height differential) which is the same formula.
BTW you need here precise strokes to the pendulum + very accurate (slow motion mode) camera with visual scale measuring system + error of the measurement as approximation of the last pendulum swing angle recorded by the camera in slow motion mode...

2.
Quote
"For short term usage of the oscillator, formula Ep = mgh can be used..."
If the oscillator is intended for long term usage (and it is) then the initial energy for raising the pendulum up
can be easy disregarded. For short term usage it can not.

And for only one! lift of the pendulum, we have no problems to calculate Ep = mgh.
Since Jovan Bebic uses only one lift of the pendulum here:
http://www.veljkomilkovic.com/Images/Analysis_Jovan_Bebic_2-measuring.pdf
formula for input Energy Ep = mgh is correct!

3.
Quote
"Then it will continue swinging in
vain, one hour or more. This means that the pendulum has spent around half
of its potential energy on moving the lever arm and the other half as friction
loses while swinging in vain. This ratio could be even worse, depending on
the oscillator."

I have seen live apparatus used by Bebic:
http://www.veljkomilkovic.com/Images/Analysis_Jovan_Bebic_2-measuring.pdf
I think it has been optimized to reduce loses in potential energy of the pendulum. So it is capable to move lever arm longer than other apparatuses. But anyway we can subtract loses by the formula Ep=m*g*(h1-h2).
However all this is not very relevant to for the scenario described in Bebic's paper ("Analysis_Jovan_Bebic_2-measuring")
He has no problem with input measurement (Ep=mgh) there!!!

4.
Quote
Using a formula for potential energy would be the same as measuring the efficiency of an engine before it reached its
working temperature.

a) I think that formula for potential Energy is universal and as shown in item 1. can be used in many measurement scenarios including some when aparatus has reached "working temperature"

b) If I remember well, Milkovic claimed that extracting the work at lever arm side do not impact the oscillation of the pendulum! So why do we need "working mode"? If you claim that you can do whatever you like at lever arm side and that this do not impact the pendulum side and that machine is overunity why have you been bothered with Ep=m*g*h? You can input Ep=m*g*h and extract 22 or (12) times more energy at lever arm side with no impact on pendulum side!!!
 
c) If Milkovic, Bebic, or somebody else publish the measurements of this scenario:
http://www.veljkomilkovic.com/Images/Analysis_Jovan_Bebic_2-measuring.pdf
using formula Ep=m*g*h for measuring input energy and some Generator or lifter etc... for measuring output energy, and if this measuring do not show overunity then I think it would maybe be "proof" that Extracting the Work (Energy) at lever arm side actually impact the pendulum swing!
And if extracting the work at lever arm side impact the pendulum energy than we maybe have the proof of the Energy Conservation Law in affect!
IF previous deduction is correct then it seems to me that somebody is trying to hide that eventual fact!

d) I think that any attempt not to do or show all measurements (including ones with Ep=m*g*h)
has nothing to do with science but only with some (in my opinion) marketing...
Serious scientific people do all measurements in all scenarios and publish all results!
« Last Edit: November 05, 2008, 11:55:03 PM by astroshima »

astroshima

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 19
Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
« Reply #815 on: November 06, 2008, 02:01:58 PM »
I think that instead Ep= m*g*h we will have Ep=m*g*dh (dh=height differential) which is the same formula.
BTW you need here precise strokes to the pendulum + very accurate (slow motion mode) camera with visual scale measuring system + error of the measurement as approximation of the last pendulum swing angle recorded by the camera in slow motion mode...

Or (maybe) even simpler and more easy to measure:
1. When pendulum fulcrum reach starting point (= maximum height) (and lever arm weight is in contact with the base so it has minimum heigth h=0)
and
2. when pendulum weight reach appropriate angle-amplitude
then just:
3. Grab the pendulum weight with hand and
4. lift it for some height: dh (or h) (dE= m*g*dh)
5. repeat this energy input when necessary

Merg

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 438
Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
« Reply #816 on: November 14, 2008, 07:39:22 PM »
Can anyone explain me how we will calculate the output energy of generator in case of using E=mgdh for input energy??? If I attach simple wattmeter it cannot show me precise output energy cause volts and amperes will vary (decrease) during the work of oscillator.

Since we read above that pendulum amplitude will decrease during the time - it means the lever movement will decrease too.
Does anyone know any measuring device that can calculate output power graph where volts and amperes vary? We will have the output result as an output graph and I suppose we need some clever software to calculate output energy from this graph in the unit of time e.g. 10 secons or 1 minute.

We need constant oscillation of pendulum to precisely measure the output energy.

TinselKoala

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13958
Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
« Reply #817 on: November 14, 2008, 09:09:13 PM »
The very best way that I can think of, without a fancy and expensive DSO, is to run your output current through a resistor immersed in, say, water, and then look at the temperature change in the water. The water acts as an "integrator" that stores and sums the incremental Joule heating caused by the volt-amps from the source flowing thru the resistance, however much they vary over time.
There is some math involved and things have to be done precisely, but in principle it is something that the home experimenter should be able to do fairly accurately.

Using this technique (which is basically Joule's method) you don't even need to convert the output to electricity first. With a suitable mechanical arrangement, the water can be stirred directly by the mechanical oscillator's output and the heating measured.
In theory, anyway.

Another way to do it, the old timer's way, is to display the curren t( ie voltage drop across a known resistence) and voltage waveforms on an ordinary scope, then trace the waveforms on tracing paper, cut out the appropriate segments and weigh them on an accurate scale. This process is equivalent to integration. Some math magic, and voila!

sm0ky2

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3948
Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
« Reply #818 on: November 21, 2008, 09:36:27 PM »
apparently someone must intervene here, because this malkovich pump is being analyzed in completely the wrong way......

the energy of the pendulum is well known, and most seem to grasp the understanding of this.

BUT - the force acting on the lever arm is causing a whole lot of unnecessary confusion.
allow me to clear this up::::

Force (downward) causes the action of the lever.  <-- this is the force we must calculate.
the 'reset' (upward) is caused by the other end of the lever arm being heavier, and does not affect the energy value of the pendulum.

The equation that gives you the downward power of each swing is the equation for Tension (Force) on the rod, for a duration of T ( where T is the duration of time it takes the pendulum to pass 1 radian at maximum velocity @ bottom dead center) 
Tension is often overlooked, for the simple fact that most pendulums are constructed on a rigid fulcrum, and Tension normally has no effective value.
Tension is represented by:     Tens =  [ mv^2 / r ] + m g (3 cos {} - 2)
     Where:  m = mass
                 v = velocity
                 r = rod length (or radius)
                 g = gravity
           and {} = 0 @ bottom dead center

The tangential force on the pendulum is effectively 0 @ bottom dead center and can be ignored.
   This is due to the angle from verticle being itsef 0.

  Thus:  E =  (T * Tension)
         where E is the energy of each lever action.
                   T = duration for pendulum to pass 1 radian @ max velocity

example:
if you raise a given pendulum and let it swing , and it oscillates 100 swings,
   then:  E(average) =  MGH/100
   where E =  energy of each lever action
     MGH is that of the original pendulum bob when raised to its starting position.
In practice, E is max on the first swing, and decreases slightly with each swing, and eventually ends up at 0 when the pendulum stops.
 This is observed when the pumps are used by the decrease in water-flow*pressure as the pendulum slows down.


This extracted energy does not affect the swinging of the pendulum, but is rather a derrivitive thereof.
it is essentially re-obtaining the energy from the natural decelleration of the pendulum in a unique way.
The total energy value is = to that obtained by an identicle impact hammer.
This device is not "overunity". it's "overconvenient", at least for the purposes for which it is used.
It is quite possibly the most efficient method of energy transfer we have to date.

I hope this clears everything up. if anyone needs further explanation, feel free to ask.

Talmin

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 13
Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
« Reply #819 on: December 10, 2008, 04:39:06 PM »
"Mechanical Fission: Two-stage mechanical oscillators should be set in accordance with geometry progression system, by which mechanical chain reaction could be achieved: 1<2<4<8< oscillators...
This could be the best way to confirm the overunity effect and accomplish replacement for nuclear fission."

hmm interesting thinking - mechanical fission!

Merg

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 438
Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
« Reply #820 on: December 18, 2008, 10:52:41 AM »
To all,

I have just read this paper and I believe it deserves to be shared with others.
We have here one very good described experimental work on Milkovic's two-stage oscillator by Jovan Marjanovic where he reports on his replication work and attempt to close the loop…

I am very grateful for this excellent paper – it will be very useful for all experimenters. It’s better you first read it.

Jovan Marjanovic – Mechanical Feedback Loop Problems and Possible Solutions in the Two-Stage Oscillator of Veljko Milkovic
http://www.veljkomilkovic.com/Images/Jovan_Marjanovic_Mechanical_Feedback_Loop.pdf

tagor

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1333
Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
« Reply #821 on: December 18, 2008, 11:41:19 AM »

Jovan Marjanovic – Mechanical Feedback Loop Problems and Possible Solutions in the Two-Stage Oscillator of Veljko Milkovic
http://www.veljkomilkovic.com/Images/Jovan_Marjanovic_Mechanical_Feedback_Loop.pdf


this is the wrong way to loop the  Two-Stage Oscillator !

Paul-R

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2086
Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
« Reply #822 on: December 19, 2008, 03:30:25 PM »
this is the wrong way to loop the  Two-Stage Oscillator !
...then tell us what the right way is.

astroshima

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 19
Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
« Reply #823 on: December 20, 2008, 05:49:17 AM »
Can anyone explain me how we will calculate the output energy of generator in case of using E=mgdh for input energy??? If I attach simple wattmeter it cannot show me precise output energy cause volts and amperes will vary (decrease) during the work of oscillator.

If you have all that, (I believe) you have all tools that you need for complete system analysis!
Please do not be fooled by some (you know who) "overunitists" claims that you need "this and that" or that it is "too complicated". I believe its easy if you are really honest person!

1. For Output energy measurement I think you could use:
- your "wattmeter" +
- good timer (or watch) +
- simple video camera (that clearly captures: time + "wattmeter" data + oscillator) + (*)

If you have previous and publish good made video (which Milkovics "team" newer do!) on youtube, other people could calculate(!!!) and they (or you) would also need:
(*)
- pencil +
- paper with precise (millimeter) grid (to draw "volts and amperes" or Electric Power graph as a function of time) +
- Few formulas from Physics (dA=dE= P*dt, A=E=Sum(or Integral) P*dt) - please correct me if I made mistake with this formulas...it was long ago when I have used them. But it is very easy to use them! Trivial! Every student knows them!

So after watching good made video and drawing Electric Power (P) Graph as function of time P(t), it is needed to Sum all Energy differentials (dE) (= Work differentials dA) = Power(P(t)) * Time differentials (dt). (or Sum(dA=dE= P*dt)).
So the final formula is E (=A) = Sum (or Integral) (P(t) * dt)

That Sum (or integral) is equal to physical area between Electric power graph line (P(t) or P) and time axis line (t).
So use precise (millimeter) grid on paper to approximate area that is consisted of many little squares (or columns of squares = polygons) that forms it! Its Easy! Students do this!
The units for this physical area calculation are: seconds (s = time from horizontal time axis line (t)) and Watts (W = (electric) power from vertical Power axis line (P)). A = E = P*t
And you made it! And we all made it!

2. For Input Energy measurement you need:

- good timer (or watch) +
- simple video camera +
- felt tip (to make a visible dot at pendulum mass center) +
- Paper with precise grid (behind pendulum so you could measure heights recorded by video camera)

And please publish intelligently made videos (and or measurements) on youtube...

PS: I believe that (if one know physics), the most simple experiment that is needed is a single pendulum swing recorded with all necessary measurements data by video camera. Ofcourse other experiments could be also usefull like: single Energy input scenario (is enough I think...) or more (repeated) energy inputs scenario (which is same as previous but repeated many times)...
Personally I do not believe Milkovic. As to my knowledge he is a historian and not a physicist so I believe he do not know physics! I also do not know physics but at least I have past Theoretical Mechanics and Some Electric Engineering exams in College.
And Real Scientists do all measurements and publish all measured data! But people who do marketing publish only data that serves they private purpose!
« Last Edit: December 20, 2008, 04:41:01 PM by astroshima »

TinselKoala

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13958
Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
« Reply #824 on: December 20, 2008, 01:45:55 PM »
@astroshima: You make too much good sense. You had better be careful, you will be placed in the "Evil Skeptic" category and be accused of impeding progress in this important area of research that might be the Answer that will free us from the Tyranny of Oil!!

The reason what you have suggested isn't being done, or shown, is very clear.

It is because your suggested method will not indicate overunity performance...therefore it must be wrong.

Because Milkovic has already proven that his device is overunity. Don't you recall the hand-pumped flashlight demo? What could possibly be better proof than that??

Why, soon we will all be driving around in Milkovic-oscillator powered cars, our cellphones will be powered by tiny 12x pendulum stacks, air travel will be revolutionized...

Now, if only we could get rid of the noise...