like to see a picture just to confirm


thanks

to all,

while i see alot of people trying to use bicycle's to close the loop of this device, i don't see anyone thinking about where the tourqe is located in this device!  everyone seems to be trying to take maximum torque from the end of the lever, even after it has loaded a spring. 

if you look at the point where, maximum power or, (crush force), is , you will see that it is at the fulcrum of the lever!  not at the end of the lever.  (where would you rather have your finger?)  if you don't want your finger at the end of the lever( under the hammer), you damn sure don't want it any closer to the fulcrum. 

the thing is, that none of the replications, that i have seen, have taken this into cosideration.  please, someone take this into consideration and see what kind of power you can develop from the axel of the fulcrum on the lever.  not to be mistaken for the end of the lever. 

no wonder you can't get any power!

lol
ss

hi all, me again.

just a suggestion. what if you hang the whole device like a pendulum from the lever's fulcrum? i think you will have more torque in the other end of the pendulum.

Perhaps mr milkovic's design would become perpetual motion, if a balloon type water pump, like what the doctor uses to check your blood pressure, was put under the hammer and compressed, with each swing. The hose could be used to squirt water on the pendulum.

@hans,

do you really believe that gearing at the fulcrum is the right way to go?  i  have to agree with you if this device will ever be looped!  if there is twelve times more power out than in then it is only a mattter of, where do you extract the power from to keep the device running and how much power do you have left to generate energy?

lool
sam

G'day Supersam and all,

When I first came across the Milkovic device I created this animation just for fun. The trouble though with the Milkovic idea is that you do indeed have an increase in power, but no increase in available energy. The power developed is only of a very short duration, so when you multiply each side power times time you will find that the total ENERGY is in equilibrium minus friction losses as one would expect. That is why no-one, including Milkovic has been able to achieve a self runner. But for the hell of it look at this and PLEASE don't take it too seriously.

If you want some further information on the device go to my website and have a look, there are two papers there on the device that I wrote some time ago.  http://www.keelytech.com/news.html and follow the links.

In the meantime here is the "Beast" :-)

Hans von Lieven

Hi Hans,
As a builder of a few Milkovic oscillators I have to take issue with your contention of equilibrium. While it appears that what you put in is what you get back, this has not been my experience.
If you have a 10 lb pendulum on one side, and a 10 lb weight on the secondary for balance, without any input energy you have a system in equilibrium. If you pick the pendulum up to a point of about 45 degrees and let it go, what happens? It swings down to the bottom of it's arc and applies force, through the arm, to the 10 lb weight. Say the 10 lb weight travels 1 inch vertically. The pendulum continues in it's arc and reaches the peak of it's swing on the other side. The 10 lb weight has no force on it so it drops down to rest. On the return swing the same thing happens with the 10 lb weight.
The energy put into the system is what it took to lift the pendulum in the first place. This energy was used to raise a 10 lb weight 1 inch, twice.
Now we need to put more energy into the system to raise the weight 2 more times. This is the amount of energy required to return the pendulum to it's starting height. A gentle push is usually sufficient to accomplish this, and another gentle push to do it again and on and on.
Now, take the pendulum off it's arm and let the 10 lb weight rest on the other end. By pushing down on the lever where the pendulum was attached, raise up the 10 lb weight, 1 inch, two times.
You will immediately realize how much work that pendulum is doing every time you give it a gentle push. Even better, do it with a 500 lb weight. You will not be able to budge that weight without the pendulum attached. Swinging the pendulum once will pick up that 500 lb weight twice. If you had a scale under the weight, it would go from 0 to 500 lbs two times. That's real work.
Where does this work come from? It's not gravity. It's centrifugal force. The force that "doesn't really exist", only it does.
A mass in circular motion doesn't always listen to Mr. Newton.

G'day Eddy Currentz and all,

If what you are saying is right, why then has no-one managed to build a self sustaining engine in what is now 10 years or so since the idea has been around. With THAT kind of surplus energy it should be a walk in the park. Many have tried, no-one has succeeded. After all, this is a very simple device which can be built by almost anyone who has some experience with tools. The materials required can be got for free if you are strapped for cash, so this is no barrier either. Everyone that was seriously experimenting with the device has walked away from it, even Milkovic has been remarkably quiet since the first of March this year.

The first one to demonstrate perpetual motion with this device will go down in history, The physics books will have to be re-written. You would think there is enough incentive there. And yet is doesn't happen. Food for thought maybe?

Hans von Lieven

Hi Hans,
How do you know it hasn't been done? Veljko has a tendency to hold some cards close to his chest. 
I like your animated drawings, you have some very clever ideas. Nevertheless, without hands on experience it's very difficult to understand this mechanism.
To me, building a self runner is secondary to really understanding the physics involved. This looks like a simple machine, and physically it is. The difficult part is determining how the power is developed and how to efficiently use it.
I'm still learning a lot of new things with different configurations of this mechanism. I'm also experimenting with full rotation of unbalanced wheels. There is resonance, feedback, geometry and many other parameters that all work together in creating a desirable or undesirable output. Parasitic oscillations alone are a big problem. It's not quite as straight forward as it seems. A lot of time is spent in design and construction.
In other words, these machines are great fun. 

Hey Hans,
One of the reasons that I switched to full rotation was the problem of stability with the pendulum. It's difficult to produce even and regular pushes in order to keep the pendulum in the sweet spot.
I agree with your assessment of turning the mechanical force into electrical energy. Its a very lossy process. On a larger scale with some serious engineering it might be more feasible.
Here is a machine I built that combines a Bedini wheel with a Milkovic oscillator. I called it the Milkodini. I stuck about 10 lbs of weight on the wheel to unbalance it.
The coil gets the wheel moving fairly well, enough to go through a few oscillating points during spool up.
The secondary will start to bounce wildly at certain RPMs, even with heavy springs to dampen it, unless I hold on to it. Even grabbing on to the arm and really leaning on it doesn?t completely stop it from oscillating. There is a lot of leverage when the stroke is shortened.
It only takes about 600 ma @ 12 volts to put out a considerable amount of force in the lever. And, of course, the current stays the same regardless of the loading.
After all the gearing I was only able to light a few led's with a stepper motor I stuck in there. It was quite a sight when it all got going. The problem was having way to much mechanical loss in the gearing, and I should have stuck the flywheel on the final shaft. The gearing should have been done in one step too.
It was a fun motor though. Here's a few pics.

Here is a side view.

(http://img136.imageshack.us/img136/1200/widefnl5.jpg)

Here is the gearing mechanism I used. I took apart an old bicycle and used the sprockets. It creates a 1-5 increase in speed (and a 5-1 reduction in torque). The flywheel weighs 20 lbs.

(http://img113.imageshack.us/img113/8334/milko6qz5.jpg)

I used a stepper motor as a small generator to light a few led?s. There wasn?t much left by the time the generator received some rotation.

(http://img113.imageshack.us/img113/7840/gearstd2.jpg)

I also borrowed heavily from Mr. Constantinesco and fashioned a mechanical valve from a couple of gear wrenches. It worked well, but had more slop than I could have hoped for. A clutch bearing would work much better, but you would have to machine an arm to fit on it.

(http://img514.imageshack.us/img514/1874/mechvalveeg0.jpg)