# Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

## Gravity powered devices => Gravity powered devices => Topic started by: miloszlaw on September 14, 2019, 05:19:46 AM

Title: Gravity motor 2 rotor
Post by: miloszlaw on September 14, 2019, 05:19:46 AM
Two rotors shifted relative to each other allow if the bearing is used with relatively low friction to hold the weights in one position. My model is too imprecisely made to work.
https://youtu.be/cFgTsWNiWBE
I don't have a good workshop to do it precisely
Title: Re: Gravity motor 2 rotor
Post by: Turbo on September 14, 2019, 02:14:14 PM
The problem with most of these things is that the entire weight of the wheel is centered on one point.

You have to work with the weight of the wheel also.
And that means eccentric axle.

Title: Re: Gravity motor 2 rotor
Post by: citfta on September 14, 2019, 02:27:35 PM
Two rotors shifted relative to each other allow if the bearing is used with relatively low friction to hold the weights in one position. My model is too imprecisely made to work.
https://youtu.be/cFgTsWNiWBE (https://youtu.be/cFgTsWNiWBE)
I don't have a good workshop to do it precisely

An interesting design.  I saw in the video that you have more weighted arms laying on the ground.  What happens when you mount them to the wheels?  From the video it looked like your wheels stopped because with only two weighted arms it reached a balance point.  With more arms it appears it would work.

Thanks for sharing,
Carroll
Title: Re: Gravity motor 2 rotor
Post by: Turbo on September 14, 2019, 02:32:24 PM
No it would not work the whole weight is on one center point.

You really need to understand Gravity and the point of potential.

Title: Re: Gravity motor 2 rotor
Post by: miloszlaw on September 14, 2019, 02:48:35 PM

An interesting design.  I saw in the video that you have more weighted arms laying on the ground.  What happens when you mount them to the wheels?  From the video it looked like your wheels stopped because with only two weighted arms it reached a balance point.  With more arms it appears it would work.
The problem is friction. Bicycle wheels are not suitable for this idea. The distances to the pins with bearings must be the same throughout the entire rotation. Otherwise, stress is generated that prevents rotation.
Title: Re: Gravity motor 2 rotor
Post by: miloszlaw on September 14, 2019, 02:53:22 PM
No it would not work the whole weight is on one center point.
You really need to understand Gravity and the point of potential.
It is true that the whole weight is based on the central point. Despite this, the wheel is unbalanced, you saw the movement.
Title: Re: Gravity motor 2 rotor
Post by: Turbo on September 14, 2019, 03:09:51 PM
The wheel can be unbalanced but that does not change anything about the total weight on that central point.

That is the problem.

Do you not see the relationship between the weight and the weights.
Gravity acts on that center point not on those weights, their weight only add up to the total.

Think of it this way, you want to reduce the weight of the wheel.
Title: Re: Gravity motor 2 rotor
Post by: citfta on September 14, 2019, 03:24:49 PM
The wheel can be unbalanced but that does not change anything about the total weight on that central point.

That is the problem.

Do you not see the relationship between the weight and the weights.
Gravity acts on that center point not on those weights, their weight only add up to the total.

Think of it this way, you want to reduce the weight of the wheel.

Sorry Turbo, but you are incorrect.  Gravity acts on each part of the whole.  As you can easily see in the video when there was weight farther from the axle on one side than the other the wheel DID turn.  When the weight got balanced on both sides of the axle then the wheel stopped.

Carroll
Title: Re: Gravity motor 2 rotor
Post by: citfta on September 14, 2019, 03:30:27 PM
The problem is friction. Bicycle wheels are not suitable for this idea. The distances to the pins with bearings must be the same throughout the entire rotation. Otherwise, stress is generated that prevents rotation.

I see what you mean.  I wonder if it would work if you put a slot in the arm where it rides on the pin if that would let it keep rotating?

Carroll
Title: Re: Gravity motor 2 rotor
Post by: ARMCORTEX on September 14, 2019, 06:49:39 PM
Besslerwheel.com is full of these devices, it does not work.

This is a pretty obvious idea to think of, if it worked we would have cars with this by now, dont you think?

Title: Re: Gravity motor 2 rotor
Post by: Turbo on September 14, 2019, 07:18:19 PM

Sorry Turbo, but you are incorrect.  Gravity acts on each part of the whole.  As you can easily see in the video when there was weight farther from the axle on one side than the other the wheel DID turn.  When the weight got balanced on both sides of the axle then the wheel stopped.

Carroll

This is part of the illusion that emerges due to the gap in knowledge.
When you show a burning lightbulb to a neanderthaler and then give it to him he will devote the rest of his life rubbing that bulb in the hope it will magically light up.
He has no concept of a battery or power source.
All he can act on is what he can see.
Gravity is no different.
In reality we know very little about the subject.
It appears that you know enough to tell me that i am incorrect.
Can you prove it ?

Suppose that your idea worked... What would happen ?
The wheel would power itself and start to accelerate.
At some point it would turn into a gyroscope because its going fast enough.
How are you planning to control the movement ?
Is your plan to put a break on it ?
Do you think it will magically speed up to a certain rpm and then just stay at that speed ?
At which speed do you think the gyroscopic effects start to show ?

So we have two issues here.
The first one is to get the thing started, and the second one to control its max speed.
Maybe the solution is to be found somewhere, in the middle ?

Title: Re: Gravity motor 2 rotor
Post by: citfta on September 14, 2019, 08:25:50 PM
OK,

Let's clear something up.  I did not say that I was convinced it was a self runner or OU or whatever you want to call it.  I said it was an interesting idea.  That means that in my opinion it was worth looking at more closely.  My opinion is only worth what most people's opinions are worth.  Maybe 2 cents.

As can be clearly seen your assertion that the wheel can not turn because all the weight is supported by the axle is wrong because the wheel does turn.  Your throwing in the gyroscopic effect is nothing but an attempt to excuse your mistaken idea the wheel couldn't turn when it clearly does.  Since the weights are constantly shifting in respect to the center of rotation I doubt the gyroscopic effect will even come in to play.

Respectfully,
Carroll
Title: Re: Gravity motor 2 rotor
Post by: shylo on September 15, 2019, 10:29:28 AM
With no input, it will always balance.
That's how nature works.
artv