Language: 
To browser these website, it's necessary to store cookies on your computer.
The cookies contain no personal information, they are required for program control.
  the storage of cookies while browsing this website, on Login and Register.

GDPR and DSGVO law

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

Google Search

Custom Search

Author Topic: New accelerating gravity wheel ! Converted video from www.newenergymachine.com !  (Read 581536 times)

Offline LarryC

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 911
@Charlie,

Interesting concept. Let us know how it works out. [edit] Do you think it might work better with a follower and cam guide on the upper weight box? It would seem that you would have more leverage....just a thought.

Yes it is more leverage at center, but over a proportional shorter distance, should work out the same when weight rise, distance, and speed for the same time is considered. Also the rise at center would be many times greater and harder to tweak. With the bottom cam I should be able to have real accurate control over the rise. But let me know if you still can see a problem, since Bob K said his cam was around the center. Don't know if it was due to the actuator arm or not.

I could be wrong but the round object could be part of the drive gearing for his generator? Small gear on the shaft to a much larger one to ramp up the rpms?

Good point.

Regards, Larry

Offline noonespecial

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 278
Yes it is more leverage at center, but over a proportional shorter distance, should work out the same when weight rise, distance, and speed for the same time is considered. Also the rise at center would be many times greater and harder to tweak. With the bottom cam I should be able to have real accurate control over the rise. But let me know if you still can see a problem, since Bob K said his cam was around the center. Don't know if it was due to the actuator arm or not.

Regards, Larry

The only problem might be (and its a problem no matter how we attempt this) is that the weights need to be lifted rapidly to take advantage of as much centrifugal force as possible and maintain momentum. Bob mentions starting his lift at around 4:00 and completing it at 6:00. This is only 60 degrees to lift the weights at least 13" (his design). This is pretty aggressive but probably necessary to make this work. You are right that you will have a longer sweep at the bottom to make this happen. I just hope that it doesn't stall out on you.
This is where WM2D would come in real handy......(hint, hint)  ;D
Charlie

Offline broli

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2233
I'm stock on understanding the locking? mechanism. Kind of don't get the purpose of the levers.

Offline AB Hammer

  • elite_member
  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 1253
Broli

 make some cardboard cut outs and just move it around and you will see what you need to do your simulations.

Offline noonespecial

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 278
I'm stock on understanding the locking? mechanism. Kind of don't get the purpose of the levers.

When the weights are forced to the top during the rotation, the locking mechanism is used to hold the weights against the springs until about 4:00 (going clockwise) the locking mechanism is released which releases the potential energy of the compressed springs and aids in lifting the weights upward. The actual mechanism would be whatever would work. For instance, a pivoting catch and pin. However, it will need to be very strong as you'll see.
Regarding the levers, we are currently unsure of the exact geometry of lifting levers. Larry is currently working on an approach which may not require the levers. It would be helpful if you could complete as much as you can and present it and we can comment on how to proceed.
Thanks for your help!
Charlie


Offline noonespecial

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 278
@Bessler007

The problem with most evaluation versions, including this one is that you can't save your work.
Charlie

Offline broli

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2233
Also suggesting a completely new program to someone who is already knee deep in a design and build is a bit nonchalant. You're asking the person to first try and build experience in wm2d (which believe me takes a big while with wm2d's quirks) and then finally simulate his design.

And I think I understand the design "completely" now. Going to try and build a locking mechanism in wm2d. You guys can help with ideas since building locks isn't my expertise :p.

Here's the base that has slidding weight and springs on both ends...

http://ziosproject.com/NJ/bobw1.PNG

You can suggest locking mechanisms by painting it over and I'll try and build it.

Offline LarryC

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 911
@Broli,

Sorry, I've been trying to reply to you off and on today, but evertime I would insert your post I would get error on page. Finally tried other post and they work fine ???

Well, anyway if you look at the Door latch stop pic, you will see a regular door knob with a lever attached to it hitting a stop to cause it to release. The catch is attached to the weight box rear on a piece of 2X4 almost even with the hole. The other piece of 2x4 below that is attached to the main board and forces the catch into alignment to latch properly.

The  cam guide pic is a graph to represent the proposed slope to raise the weights. Each square is 1". The bottom length is 2"8", which is the length over two clock positions when the diameter is 5'. The side length is 13" which represents the height to raise. The top length is 2'1" which is the length over two clock positions when the diameter is reduces by the 13".

I have a dot at every 4" with a rise value before it. So the cam guide will follow the dotted path.

@All,
Had a new disturbing idea today, what if Bob K is using the spring force at first then after that loses force, he releases the stored shock pressure to further assist the rise. This would throw our simple design out.

Regards, Larry

 



 

Offline 4Tesla

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 946
I have searched everywhere for Bob Kostoff's patent.. doesn't exist!  I think he got the idea from this website:
http://www.fuellesspower.com/6_Gravity2.htm

Maybe these photos can help:
http://www.fuellesspower.com/Fuelless%20Gravity%20photos.htm

Jason

Offline noonespecial

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 278

@All,
Had a new disturbing idea today, what if Bob K is using the spring force at first then after that loses force, he releases the stored shock pressure to further assist the rise. This would throw our simple design out.

Regards, Larry

Brilliant observation! I was thinking that they just absorbed the shock of the shifting weight. Let's see what Uncle Bob had to say....
"The air cylinders I use as a shock absorber, similar to that in a car and it also stores a bit of energy that locks the 2 weights together almost at the bottom."

So it may very well be that he is using the air cyclinders themselves  to 'latch' the weights. He could have valving set up that transfers the pressure at the correct time to release (and possibly assist in lifting) the weights. OK....now what?
Charlie
« Last Edit: August 27, 2008, 03:07:51 PM by noonespecial »

Offline broli

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2233
What absorbed shock? Didn't we all plan on two springs on both side  ;D. That would leave no shock into play and restore the force back in to a spring. But my initial tests (still not finished since I have to do certain stuff manually) shows that it barely reaches to lock itself. I was thinking...what if an electromagnet was used to give a small push at the middle of the way going back just to help it pass the lock mechanism and lock itself. I will soon post a video of the simulation if it's done.

Edit: I just had a flashback of thinking or posting that bob used pneumatic pumps to push it slightly to lock itself. Maybe I just misunderstood when he was talking about his shock absorbing thingie. On the other hand we would have never knew either since there was no sound of the machine. Btw simulation video will follow shortly. I'm starting to think more and more about this idea. In an ideal situation with the most ideal locks without any loses this system should self accelerate without any outside aid. The springs help bring the weights up and gravity does the rest....I think :p. But even a simulation can't be ideal in this case so hence the need for a small aid to make it go that extra cm or so.
« Last Edit: August 27, 2008, 03:03:40 PM by broli »

Offline LarryC

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 911
Interesting thoughts guys!

I'll add a few.

Springs: Since Bob had springs on the ends and bellows in the middle. To simulate, I put bungee cords in the middle so with their length they would not apply tension until they got around 4" to the end/middle. You can see the green in reply 353 (Bob-Machine pic) on each side. It had the eye bolts to add bungees to the other side of the boxes, but wasn't needed yet.

Momentum: I normally try to keep any supporting structure mass on a gravity machine as low as possible, believing that mass should be focused as much as possible into the unbalanced weights to give gravity the advantage. But in this case with one rotor, additional structural mass may be required to pull the unit thru the lift phase. Does the end plates of the unit in Bob K's pic look like fixed weights?

Rpm: It seems a certain minimum rpm will be needed for the centrifugal sling effect to work.

Regards, Larry       

Offline broli

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2233
Oke scrap that. The weights not going all the way back is not due to loses but due to gravity  ;D. When it goes back up gravity pulls down on it constantly so it will just barely make it. The bad thing is that extra cm push I talked about is actually a lot of energy....

Btw here's the video...

http://ziosproject.com/NJ/bobW1.avi

As you can see it doesn't go beyond the lock.

Offline AB Hammer

  • elite_member
  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 1253
OK Guys

 Springs work both ways in energy transfer. They always want to go to neutral position. So for every action there is a equal and opposite reaction. In this device it is obvious.