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 2213871 times)

truth

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 54
Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
« Reply #840 on: January 20, 2009, 11:43:40 AM »
 8)
How many of you have ever operated an overhead crane?
In order to stop the thing you are lifting from swinging around you move the point of lift directly over the location the item is swing to. That means you change the location of the axis of the swinging load. The change in the location of this device also changes the momentum of the swing with random either positive or negative results.

One swing may have more centripetal force while the next may have less.


Paul-R

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2086
Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
« Reply #841 on: January 20, 2009, 02:55:16 PM »
Well yes. The timing is really the hard part, at least that's my view.

But the actual mechanics involved is really as simple as one could have wished for.

Btw, for any of you have built this thing, is it possible to use wood as the main hinge, or would that maybe be to weak?
Good quality wood or plywood is fine for the basic device, but the actual bearing should be steel. Try a replacement
router bearing:
http://www.axminster.co.uk/product-CMT-CMT-Router-Cutter-Bearings-20906.htm
or the pedal from a scrapped bicycle.
Paul.

TinselKoala

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13958
Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
« Reply #842 on: January 20, 2009, 07:41:51 PM »
Yes, I doubt the "12 times overunity" value, and I doubt the water pumps. However, as I have suggested before, the geometry of the machine would EASILY allow the output end to be hooked up to bicycle-style cylinder-piston air compression pumps, and the compressed air thus produced could be stored. And, the input end of the Milkovic device could EASILY be actuated by a compressed-air pneumatic cylinder. AND, the losses and energy balances in pneumatic systems are WELL-UNDERSTOOD. So a team of competent engineers and researchers should be able, in short order, to construct and perform experiments using this pneumatic system, to close the loop and have the thing run itself, since it is SO MUCH overunity, and losses in the pneumatic system would only be on the order of a few tens of percent.

Now, I will sit back and wait for the reports of this carefully done experiment, which could reasonably either falsify or support the Milkovic hypothesis.

I wager, however, that for one reason or another, this simple and to my mind conclusive experiment will NOT be performed--because I believe that the smart engineers and scientists on the Milkovic team know exactly how it would come out.

PROVE ME WRONG.
Please.

SteinerP

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 5
Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
« Reply #843 on: January 21, 2009, 02:00:33 PM »
And, Steiner, newbie, if you would care to look at my posts, you might actually learn something about the content of postings that go into making a poster's ratings what they are. Many people on this forum troll, criticise and sling mud without any evidence, good ideas, or contributions of their own. Perhaps I do not fall into this category.
Into which category will you fall, when you have accumulated enough posts to acquire some credibility? I suppose that is up to you.
You have not, however, gotten off to a good start.


If you really had understood the meaning of my post, you would have reacted at least positively.
Instead, you continue with the way of communication which was the only reason for my addressing you.
I am in no way interested in making any kind of success in polemics making ego stronger, being in front of the screen putting people in categories and knowing nothing about them.
Obviously it makes you feeling good more than it does with really objective parts of your texts where one could think it is a person that strive to better understanding of issues he/she writes about. This contrast is what caught my eye. That is all, and there is neither any kind of start nor continuation of mastering the forum.

Best regards

TinselKoala

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13958
Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
« Reply #844 on: January 21, 2009, 04:37:19 PM »

If you really had understood the meaning of my post, you would have reacted at least positively.
Instead, you continue with the way of communication which was the only reason for my addressing you.
I am in no way interested in making any kind of success in polemics making ego stronger, being in front of the screen putting people in categories and knowing nothing about them.
Obviously it makes you feeling good more than it does with really objective parts of your texts where one could think it is a person that strive to better understanding of issues he/she writes about. This contrast is what caught my eye. That is all, and there is neither any kind of start nor continuation of mastering the forum.

Best regards


As you can see from the post immediately above, I have proposed (and did so several times earlier) a simple and easy experiment that would conveniently test the hypothesis:
"The Milkovic oscillator described here will produce 12 times more power out, on a continuous bases, than it receives as input."
Now, whether you want to argue about communicative style or not, the fact remains: an experiment has been proposed which could conceivably falsify the Milkovic hypothesis.
Now, the onus is on the claimants to properly perform such an experiment. The experiment I have proposed is not problematic at all; any competent mechanic could design and implement the system with off-the-shelf components in a short time.
If the Milkovic system is even near a COP of 1, this experiment will show it. If the system really has 12x OU, it will easily run itself through my pneumatic pumps, accumulators and actuators.

So, attack my style if you like, I really don't mind. But the issue is still there, and I have proposed a method to resolve it. Why not try to build something, instead of getting all huffy because of a turn of phrase?
I know the answer: It is because it is far easier to complain and attack a person's words, than to address the ideas behind them.

SteinerP

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 5
Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
« Reply #845 on: January 23, 2009, 06:43:28 AM »
As you can see from the post immediately above, I have proposed (and did so several times earlier) a simple and easy experiment that would conveniently test the hypothesis:
"The Milkovic oscillator described here will produce 12 times more power out, on a continuous bases, than it receives as input."
Now, whether you want to argue about communicative style or not, the fact remains: an experiment has been proposed which could conceivably falsify the Milkovic hypothesis.
Now, the onus is on the claimants to properly perform such an experiment. The experiment I have proposed is not problematic at all; any competent mechanic could design and implement the system with off-the-shelf components in a short time.
If the Milkovic system is even near a COP of 1, this experiment will show it. If the system really has 12x OU, it will easily run itself through my pneumatic pumps, accumulators and actuators.

So, attack my style if you like, I really don't mind. But the issue is still there, and I have proposed a method to resolve it. Why not try to build something, instead of getting all huffy because of a turn of phrase?
I know the answer: It is because it is far easier to complain and attack a person's words, than to address the ideas behind them.

to argue about communicative style
attack my style if you like, I really don't mind

Yes, even if this site has predominantly to do with technical aspects, it would lead all of its participants to the unwanted result of becoming machines itself if there is not an approach of mutual respect. No matter how much irony or even sarcasm one might use, there is an easy way for anyone to feel if it is addressing a problem (and I agree sometimes a person could and should be addressed as a problem itself, but even then there should be no triumphant satisfaction in doing it) or a person (in most cases it is highly inappropriate to do so).
I entered this forum not to derogate or blindly support anyone, but to see determination, strength and character of people that use their time and effort to make this world cleaner, healthier and more humane. Not much as a technical expert, but a person who is interested in issues this forum deals with from the above mentioned aspects. I am more than convinced that you share my opinion about the civilized, cultivated and refined communication with either friends or foes, and it comes from my respect of your texts - why else would I spend my time and energy to this correspondence.
As for the insinuations of being somebody's crew, just from a totally impartial post that had nothing to do with mere pro et contra style, I couldn't agree more with your conclusion:
It is because it is far easier to complain and attack a person's words, than to address the ideas behind them.

Having this said, I would add that maybe I am more agile critic of Mr. Milkovic work than many of his overt opponents. It is about the meaning and use of criticism that differs positive and negative approach, the former being far more productive and not less painful.

As for your suggestions and the overall tone that you use when speaking about technical matters, I find it very constructive and it is one of the reasons of what I have already said about this correspondence being worth time and energy spent on.

Best regards

Nabo00o

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 310
    • Naboo's homepage
Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
« Reply #846 on: January 23, 2009, 03:37:34 PM »
Thanks!

Merg

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 438
Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
« Reply #847 on: January 29, 2009, 05:57:43 PM »
Automatic pendulum driver system for Milkovic oscillator!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iI_ooL8hcrE

tagor

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1333
Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
« Reply #848 on: January 29, 2009, 08:28:56 PM »
Automatic pendulum driver system for Milkovic oscillator!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iI_ooL8hcrE

very nice system
we are waiting for data ( positive or negative one )

AB Hammer

  • elite_member
  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 1253
Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
« Reply #849 on: January 29, 2009, 08:54:26 PM »
Automatic pendulum driver system for Milkovic oscillator!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iI_ooL8hcrE

Interesting device there on youtube. Are you part of that program Merg?

rlortie

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 178
    • 'Arrache'
Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
« Reply #850 on: January 30, 2009, 12:08:33 AM »
Alan B. brought this thread to my attention via a phone call regarding the above 'youtube' link. I told him that it looked like 'Ron P's earlier version which has been considerably updated. 

I have not by any means read all that has been posted here, so bear with me as what I am about to say may have already been said.

There seems to be a lot of debate regarding the claimed 12:1 output of this machine and how to prove or disprove said claim. So I have a suggestion that may or may not have already been tried.

Attach a secondary pivoting lever with adjustable fulcrum to the output side of the machine. Place the fulcrum of this secondary lever at various distance from the pivot point. If a 1:12 ratio can be achieved then the output of the secondary lever should offer 12 times the distance of the working stroke. Sufficient travel to do something with. Test weights could be added at designated points on said lever.

Or with the amplified stroke one may attempt adding a connecting rod to achieve a rotating flywheel.
Picture an early 'walking beam steam engine' for an example.  The connecting rod would have to be slotted with compression springs to allow for the random effect created by the machines output, once turning, the flywheel should dampen the effect and in turn feed back a small portion of this dampening to help resonate the machine.

For those who have actually built or have experience with such a machine, I look forward to  your input on my suggestion.

Ralph   
« Last Edit: January 30, 2009, 12:28:57 AM by rlortie »

Merg

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 438
Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
« Reply #851 on: February 01, 2009, 05:19:37 AM »
Just found on a forum also considering Veljko Milkovic's oscillator
Source:

http://www.besslerwheel.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=2374&postdays=0&postorder=asc&start=30


While doing some mail box cleaning this post popped up, it was written by a contact of mine who is known as "the builder" on the Milkovic forum. It does not necessarily reflect my personal views on the subject.

Quote:
Ralph, you were doing pretty good!

But in all these types of discussions it is much like trying to explain color to a blind man.
Then of course my favorite,,," you can lead a horse to water but you can't make him think"

You are at a one down disadvantage in that you don't have hands on experience with this. Even I will admit to you that after two years
I don't have the answer. But I will keep on until I do.

So what are most people missing?

The pendulum is an old device, as close to a pm machine as we can get. It has always been build with a rigid structure, to prevent any motion
at the pivot point. It was Veljko that saw that if you could loosen off the pivot point, it will flop up and down and in looking at this movement, understand the theory of the energy released at this point.

As the pendulum falls through the 6:00 position the pivot has to restrain the fall. The whole gravity addition must be contained and diverted
into uphill swing, right? Then at the end of this swing the pendulum bob actually starts to lose weight. Just do the math or experiment...
at about a 120° swing the bob will weigh half it's weight... and at the bottom of the swing it will weigh half as much again.

This is the "force" then, that is on the axle/pivot point. No one before Veljko had ever tried to harvest this "potential energy" in this manner.

If, as Veljiko has done, we fasten the pivot point to a secondary arm and allow this arm to translate this previously hidden energy then the
possibility to extract and utilize this "force" is a possibility. In a grandfather clock the pendulum motion is a very modest 6 to 10° say, but to
generate the most "force" we try for from 120° to 180° of swing. The force is multiplied correspondingly but the DRIVING force is also
increased. Then too as I pointed out in the "botafumeiro" example the motion of the combined pendulum and secondary arm is counter-
productive, in that we are actually dropping the pendulum when to sustain the pendulums motion we should be raising it.

So if we have a 20 Kg pendulum swinging say 120° we have a force of 20Kg's at the pivot point that is relatively cost free, over a short distance.

This is a machine that becomes more practical as the size is scaled up. It might never be proven at small scale.

It will never be proven with bike parts, the lost motion of the ratchet clutch defeats it. One must use a zero backlash indexing clutch.

The motion of the secondary arm is slow and limited, electrical generation is nonexistent at this speed, yet to speed the "force" up 100
times diminishes the torque by 100 times....the end result, friction wins.

But coupled with an invention as postulated by Felix Wüth, such as the "Living Energy" machine....?

Another possibility is the Wilt device...http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nMb-mab7ad4

I hope I have shed a small ray of light?

Be of good cheer,

(Author name deleted)

PS: you have my permission to post parts, or all of this...

rlortie

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 178
    • 'Arrache'
Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
« Reply #852 on: February 01, 2009, 06:08:41 AM »
Merg,

Yup! one of my posts on Besslerwheel.com, and the whole thing should be in a quote box. But tha'ts OK as the point is made.

A number of people have and are involved with this Milkovic contraption and as stated elswhere none have been able to make a self-sustainer out of the alleged 12 X power gain????

From what I understand using a stationary suspended pendulum the best one can expect is 3 X the static weight,  but here again the amount of dynamic input is not measured. I would think that the moving pivot would dampen this making it less not more.

My above post regarding the secondary lever was simply throwing a concept out to see what kind of response and discussion it would bring.  No much response was there!  ;)

Ralph   

Merg

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 438
Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
« Reply #853 on: February 25, 2009, 06:44:17 PM »
I think this recommendation for all those who are making the replicas haven't been posted earlier:

"Preposition for decreasing of the friction:
Two-stage mechanical oscillator or some other gadget lay in direction east-west in order to decrease axial friction on bearings caused by Coriolis force."

I was wondering why this was so simple, but in the same time hard to work with it - interesting thought...
"To someone it is a problem if the idea was simple, but coming to the simple solution is the hardest and there are the most reasons for that."

Merg

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 438
Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
« Reply #854 on: February 25, 2009, 06:46:17 PM »
"