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: Chas Campbell free power motor  (Read 676180 times)

Offline wattsup

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2606
    • Spin Conveyance Theory - For a New Perspective...
Re: Chas Campbell free power motor
« Reply #930 on: November 09, 2007, 06:42:51 AM »
@weri812

Thanks first for your advance PM and for following through with your corrections directly on the thread so others can see it. I had my figures all crunched on a spreadsheet and had done these very late at night.

It's funny, out of all the posts on Chas' thread, I think there may have been 5 on the actual gearing. Glad to see yours at this stage since I will be trying this soon.

Actually, the numbers look great using a standard 1800 rpm 60hz giving the needed 3600 rpm. At 1800 rpm, the drive will use maximum torque and at 3600 rpm, this is perfect 60hz production level. The magic of 3-6-9.

What's so good about this configuration is that generator drag (E) can reach the pulleys at (D) but will have a hard time stopping the Wheel at (C) because the 9" will try to stop the 6" that will have the advantage.

The startup may be difficult and may require a manual push on the flywheel to reduce start up amperage, but once this baby gets going, watch out.

If you are planning a 10kwatt gen, the bearings and pulleys should be on minimum 1" shafts, maybe even 1 1/4" shafts. Pulleys could be with toothed belts. Everything has to be well bolted and the flywheel structure should be extremely strong, possibly caged.

Again, good call. I appreciate it.

wattsup

Offline linda933

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 111
Re: Chas Campbell free power motor
« Reply #931 on: November 09, 2007, 07:47:35 AM »
@wattsup and weri

Hi...what will be the goal of this 3-6-9 machine?  Are you expecting the thing to put out more energy than it takes in?  If so, I'm curious what the theory is...is it strictly the series of false claims that Charles Campbell has made (all of which that have been tested have been found absolutely no where near truth) or is there some other reason to put effort into such a machine?

Charles' latest claim of having built and operated a successful self-running version is completely unverified and only a report, so far.  If you recall, the last set of claims Charles made that his machine drew 800W and produced 3500W were absolutely disproven and the truth was that it drew over 1400W just to run with no load and could not even put out 1000W for ten seconds!

His claim of having a self-running perpetual motion wheel based on pool balls was equally fraudulent and the design not only failed to run in practice but was easily proven to be unworkable in principal as well...even given a frictionless and loss-free ideal situation, there was no evidence of net torque or overbalance.

So, I am wondering what it is that keeps people willing to spend endless time and effort and money discussing, planning, building and speculating on this idea of motor-pullies-flywheel-pullies-generator as a smart idea for getting "overunity" operation.  How do you expect to combine a bunch of lossy elements in straight mechanical series and come up with an overall energy gain?  The only thing you'll get is energy storage and that will be at a considerable loss overall.  Not to mention noisy, bulky, heavy, maintenance-hungry and dangerous.  Oh, did I leave out expensive?

If you want to store energy in a flywheel; great!  Just be careful...it's dangerous...and expect to lose some of the energy you put in...a significant amount based on the design you show here.  I would guesstimate the overall losses will probably be at least 40% and probably more. 

Please tell me if you think I'm wrong and, of course, why you believe that.  Thanks...

Linda

Offline hansvonlieven

  • elite_member
  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 2558
    • Keelytech
Re: Chas Campbell free power motor
« Reply #932 on: November 09, 2007, 10:02:55 AM »
G'day Linda, I give you:

               The Secret Of The 3-6-9 Machine

(http://www.overunity.com/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=2487.0;attach=14156;image)


You really don't know much about fadic addition and numerology do you Linda dear?

Fadic addition (also referred to as "digiting down").

Simply add all the numbers together. If the sum is a double digit number, reduce it until you arrive at a single digit number. Zeros don't count.

Example:  19563 = 1+9+5+6+3 = 24 = 2+4 = 6   So 19563 becomes 6 by fadic addition, Get it??

This enables numerologists to reduce everything in life to a number between 1 and 9 and make predictions or by clever use of these numbers do extraordinary things.

Now we are getting to the 3-6-9 design.

3+6+9 = 18 = 1+8 = 9       So nine is the key number of the machine

The motor runs at 1800 revolutions                                    1+8 = 9

The next shaft with two pulleys runs at 900 revolutions              = 9

The flywheel runs at 2700 revolutions                                 2+7 = 9

The next set of pulley run at 1800 revolutions                     1+8 = 9

The generator runs at 3600 revolutions                               3+6 = 9

The flywheel is 18 inches in diameter. yes, you guessed it  1+8 = 9


See it is a nine machine, it will definitely work because of it.

Hans von Lieven

Offline linda933

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 111
Re: Chas Campbell free power motor
« Reply #933 on: November 09, 2007, 11:13:02 AM »
Ahhhh...enlightenment at last!  Let me see...five nines is 45 is 4+5 is...hot damn....9!  Okay then.  Not only that, but that makes six nines and that's 54 which, again, is...5+4=9!  And that makes seven nines, which is...63...oh, my God!  And that makes eight nines which is 72...this is a danged miracle!  Let's see...nine nines is...Oh, my Lord and Savior!  81!  Dare I test this further? 

Now I know that I have found the secret to all the universe for sure and I am finally and certainly able to accomplish all manner of heretofore impossible things.  Hans and all...I am eternally grateful for your impartation of this ancient wisdom.  I feel I must now give something back to the world...

Gee...maybe I could make something fantastic.  I have some of those new Canadian Gold Maple Leaf coins made from 99999 fine gold.  If I follow the advice of Lawrence Tseung and drill an axle-hole a bit off-center in a few of them (9?) maybe I can combine this 9 thing with the new "Wobbly-Flywheel Lead-Out" theory and it will take off spinning at an incredible radial velocity with unimaginable torque.  Why, of course it would...it would have to!

I figure I should be able to hook it up to a 9hp generator and get at least 99,999 Watts of continuous output power, utilizing my own newly-discovered Damiani Opto-mystic Multiplier principal.  I hope I can get one or nine of those special high-temperature Tseung expansion bearings that can handle and absorb the excess power when I can't find a load to accept it.  Let's see...hmmmm...maybe I can beat Charles, Ash, Gaby, Lawrence, Patrick Kelly and Ms. Forever to the punch and collect that $5,200,000 AERO prize myself!

Let the replications begin!  That should be enough information, I would surmise, for the average OU.com replicator to get started on the project.  How's that for open source, folks?

By the way, everyone, I have some 99999 fine gold Maple Leaf coins for sale that have been especially treated using Orgone Aetherization Frequency (OAF) magnets and Beardini Ultra Neutronic Kinesis (BUNK) energy waves!  I guess I could let some go for, oh, maybe $1800 each. I might even discount that for quantities of nine...say $15,111 for nine (1+5+1+1+1=9).  Just PM me for payment and delivery details! 

Of course, I cannot guarantee overunity because you will be responsible for drilling your own holes and, of course, the proper bearings.

Linda Damiani
« Last Edit: November 09, 2007, 11:49:27 AM by linda933 »

Offline wattsup

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2606
    • Spin Conveyance Theory - For a New Perspective...
Re: Chas Campbell free power motor
« Reply #934 on: November 09, 2007, 02:37:54 PM »
@linda933

Hans' depiction is correct but the main point is keeping advantage on the drive side.

Chas' original design does not have bearings on the drive and generator pulley so both of them will suffer from direct side stress on the motor bearings. First mistake. Then his design lacks the section "D", so his generator is directly on a 2.5" wheel connected directly to the flywheel, second mistake. So when the generator gives drag, it is directly pushed to the flywheel and then to the other side. So Chas' design favors the generator, where the 3-6-9 design favors the drive.

These differences alone warrant trials in my view. The investment will always be there in anything you undertake. I already ave motors and generators so what's a few gears and some structure.

All this was covered on the first pages of the Chas' flywheel thread months ago, but again, funny thing no one wanted to talk gears.

Also, the other trick is to use a smaller drive and larger generator and not to run the generator at full potential, meaning just take enough to loop the system and some small extra. This is the only point here. We're not looking to light up Manhattan.

So even if this design comes very close to OU without breaking the barrier, there then leaves room for better drive and generator choice, RV potentials, etc., and maybe then Honk or others could jump in with some fancy circuit control.

Like I said on the outset of this thread, Chas' designs may not work, but there is a foundation there that has potential to be explored. Plus, if you ask me, there are many who are trying this right now. Jesse McQueen is hard at work putting out his patented demo unit as we speak and it relies on gears also.

And imagine. @weri812 had the insight to go all the way back to the beginning of the threads to find the design. Crunch the numbers and make these corrections. Although his corrections to the rpm does not change the 3-6-9 design, you're always better to have the right numbers. Hats off to you guy.

I still would like to know what simple idea Chas is talking about? Every bit of "applicable" info would help.

Offline linda933

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 111
Re: Chas Campbell free power motor
« Reply #935 on: November 09, 2007, 04:33:55 PM »
@linda933

Hans' depiction is correct but the main point is keeping advantage on the drive side.

Chas' original design does not have bearings on the drive and generator pulley so both of them will suffer from direct side stress on the motor bearings. First mistake...

ACCORDING TO LAWRENCE TSEUNG, THE WOBBLING UNBALANCED BEARING-DESTROYING FLYWHEEL IS ONE OF THE PRIMARY KEYS TO CHARLES' NEW SUCCESS! [liNDA]

...Also, the other trick is to use a smaller drive and larger generator and not to run the generator at full potential, meaning just take enough to loop the system and some small extra. This is the only point here. We're not looking to light up Manhattan. 

IF YOU ACHIEVE SELF-RUNNING AND ANY SMALL AMOUNT OF USEFUL ELECTRICAL OUTPUT OR ABILITY TO DRIVE EXTERNAL ROTARY LOADS FOR A PROLONGED PERIOD OF AT LEAST SEVERAL DAYS WITHOUT DECELERATION, YOU WILL EFFECTIVELY HAVE LIT UP THE ENTIRE WORLD, IN MY OPINION.  [liNDA]

So even if this design comes very close to OU without breaking the barrier, there then leaves room for better drive and generator choice, RV potentials, etc., and maybe then Honk or others could jump in with some fancy circuit control.   ETERNALLY OPTIMISTIC..."HOPE SPRINGS ETERNAL", THEY SAY. [liNDA]

Like I said on the outset of this thread, Chas' designs may not work, but there is a foundation there that has potential to be explored...

I MUST HAVE MISSED THAT PART...THE FOUNDATION.  WAS IT WHEN HE LIED TO EVERYONE BY SHOWING THE GRAVITY WHEEL HOOKED UP TO THE FLYWHEEL MOTOR/GEN THINGY, WHEN HE DELUDED HIMSELF BY USING UNMEASURED SHORT-DURATION OUTPUT POWER PULSES, WHEN HE DECLINED TO EVEN MEASURE THE INPUT POWER AND, INSTEAD, READ IT OFF THE MOTOR NAMEPLATE, WHEN HE PAINTED EVERYTHING PRETTY COLORS, WHEN HE INSISTED THAT ONLY PULSED LOADS WOULD REVEAL THE SPECIAL OVERUNITY OPERATION OR WHEN HE GOT ASHTWETH TO BEND OVER IN FRONT OF THE WATTMETERS SHOWING EVERYONE HIS PLUMBER'S BUTT AND THUS TRYING TO DISTRACT US FROM THE METER READOUTS WHICH SHOWED 12% ENERGY EFFICIENCY? 

WHICH PART WAS THE "SOLID FOUNDATION"?  [liNDA]

 Plus, if you ask me, there are many who are trying this right now. Jesse McQueen is hard at work putting out his patented demo unit as we speak and it relies on gears also...

ANOTHER OBVIOUS CASE OF SEVERE SELF-DELUSION AND ZERO DEMONSTRABLE FUNCTIONALITY.  NEVER SHOWED A WORKING PROTOTYPE TO ANYONE, NEVER MADE A VIDEO, EVEN.  [liNDA]

And imagine. @weri812 had the insight to go all the way back to the beginning of the threads to find the design. Crunch the numbers and make these corrections. Although his corrections to the rpm does not change the 3-6-9 design, you're always better to have the right numbers. Hats off to you guy.  YES...HATS OFF...DEFINITELY...LOVE THOSE NINES!  THAT MUST BE THE KEY THAT WILL MAKE IT ALL HAPPEN, BUT I LIKE MY SOLID GOLD APPROACH BETTER...SO MUCH SMALLER AND LIGHTER!  [liNDA]

I still would like to know what simple idea Chas is talking about? Every bit of "applicable" info would help.

WELL, LAWRENCE TSEUNG SAYS ITS THE WOBBLY FLYWHEEL AND SPECIAL FIRE-PROOF BEARINGS.  HOW CAN YOU IGNORE THAT? 

CHARLES' MAIN NEW SIMPLE IDEA, I THINK, IS THIS:  WAIT UNTIL NO ONE IS AROUND, SNEAK INTO THE WORKSHOP, DO NOT TAKE YOUR VIDEO CAMERA WITH YOU, COME OUT A HALF HOUR LATER, WRITE AN EMAIL TO PATRICK KELLY AND PROCLAIM SELF-RUNNING SUCCESS PLUS 75W EXTRA.  THEN TELL ABOUT HOW THE MACHINE MELTED DOWN DUE TO IMBALANCED FLYWHEEL AND MELTED BEARINGS JUST TO MAKE SURE NO ONE CAN ASK FOR A VIDEO OR LIVE DEMO!  SEE HOW SIMPLE THAT IS?  [liNDA]

EVERYONE SAID HE WAS A GENIUS...NOW THERE IS NO DOUBT!

Offline wattsup

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2606
    • Spin Conveyance Theory - For a New Perspective...
Re: Chas Campbell free power motor
« Reply #936 on: November 09, 2007, 05:55:45 PM »
@linda933

Like I said. Nobody wants to talk technical gears, motion, inertia. The whole Chas threads are full off the same crap you just "lead out". So obvioiusly, there is a difference between someone who has actually built systems and someone who has obviously not held a screwdriver in their hands.

So you think we don't know the odds, we do not realize the challenge, we do not appreciate the difficulty. So when fishermen leave the port, you are the only one who knows there could be huge and dangerous waves in the coming days.  And those fishermen are just blind assholes wallking into danger.

What you are saying is totally rediculous. So thank you very much for being as helpful as your mind allows. Now we know.

Offline linda933

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 111
Re: Chas Campbell free power motor
« Reply #937 on: November 09, 2007, 06:16:31 PM »
@linda933

Like I said. Nobody wants to talk technical gears, motion, inertia. The whole Chas threads are full off the same crap you just "lead out". So obvioiusly, there is a difference between someone who has actually built systems and someone who has obviously not held a screwdriver in their hands.

So you think we don't know the odds, we do not realize the challenge, we do not appreciate the difficulty. So when fishermen leave the port, you are the only one who knows there could be huge and dangerous waves in the coming days.  And those fishermen are just blind assholes wallking into danger.

What you are saying is totally rediculous. So thank you very much for being as helpful as your mind allows. Now we know.

Yes, it is rather remarkable how, in only a couple of paragraphs, you now know all there is to know about Linda, from my ability to properly hold a screwdriver to my level of practical experience in design and building machinery.  You are truly remarkable in your perceptive abilities.  How do you do it?

If these fishermen are walking, as you suggest, then it is a high probability they will drown unless they have all mastered the famous "water-walking" technique.  Storm or calm! 

I do indeed feel like the long-suffering wife being left on shore as her husband and his fisherman brothers march determinedly and bravely for the seven hundred sixty-third time into a small but deep fresh water lake fully rigged for harpooning blue whales.  "But Dear Husband" she cries one more time..."there are no whales in the lake!  Take nets, not harpoons!  Seek small fish, not whales!".

The hardy men pay no heed to the foolish wench, of course and, those who return always come back empty handed, spent and with great tales of the sea monsters who drove away the whales once again.

Linda


P.S. Here is a hint:  Gears and pullies are analogous to transformers.  You can increase torque at the expense of speed or vice versa.  Like a transformer can increase Voltage at the expense of Current or vice versa.  Power, in either case, is the product of speed x torque or voltage x current and remains constant except for the inescapable losses.  In the case of your approach, I guarantee you will gain no power by gearing or using pullies and your losses will be large in all regards: time, money, noise, heat, wasted energy, frustration, etc. 

You may store energy inertially in any moving mass, of course, but you nor Charles Campbell nor Lawrence Tseung nor anyone else have suggested any actual working theory as to how, when or why any increase in overall energy from input to output should be expected from a system such as you and they describe.  Nor has anyone ever demonstrated such, nor will they in the future. 

Keep in mind as you hurl your insults at me:  I asked you a simple enough question...What is the basis for your belief that you might gain free energy from a system of gears, motors, generators and flywheels?  What is it you refer to as Charles Campbell's worthwhile "foundation" or principal of operation or theory?  You moan and whine and insult me about no one wanting to talk good solid physics here...well?  Tell us the physics theory of how you expect or hope to get freee energy out of this design, can you?  Please?  You can't, of course, without resorting to utter nonsense and meaningless babble like Tseung, can you? 

Build random ideas without any understanding of basic mechanics or guiding theory or working principals forever if you please.  No amount of effort or altruistic hopeful belief will cause a set of gears and flywheel to amplify energy...Sorry. 

It would be far far wiser to forever attempt to lift yourself into graceful flight by tugging upon your own buttocks, truly.  It wastes fewer precious material resources, costs less and, yes, you guessed it...the worst danger is you become an even bigger asshole!  Now you've got me expecting the impossible!

Linda
« Last Edit: November 09, 2007, 06:52:49 PM by linda933 »

Offline wattsup

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2606
    • Spin Conveyance Theory - For a New Perspective...
Re: Chas Campbell free power motor
« Reply #938 on: November 09, 2007, 06:59:43 PM »
@linda933

First of all you're the one throwing the stones.

Second of all, you talk of impossible and the futility of trying. Poor you.

Yet, for months on end you have been on this Forum bashing people left and right, trying to put some "sense" into their all ignorant minds, since you hold the true knowledge. So after so many months, you know now that it is "impossible. to disuade people from this task, and especially from people on this Forum.

So if anyone here is running after the impossible, intangible, unaccessible, it is clearly you and not I or those others here who "do give a damn". So you be happy pursuing your impossibilites and leave us to pursue ours. Could not be more simple then that.

Offline linda933

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 111
Re: Chas Campbell free power motor
« Reply #939 on: November 09, 2007, 07:46:27 PM »
Still no answer, huh?  You have none, do you.  I understand.  You're afraid if you were to force yourself to think hard enough to actually state your theory or even a good hint at it or to put into words what you think the foundation of Charles' machine consists of...that you would be forced to realize in your own mind just how silly and nonsensical it really is. 

That's okay...I'm glad I was able to help you fully realize that your endeavors have nothing to do with science or physics but rather form "a belief system" based on pure hope and strict avoidance of all critical thought.  Congratulations.  You have earned the rank of True Believer!

By the way, I am enjoying this very much and I really hope you are, too.  It's easy to enjoy and learn when you do not get all frustrated expecting the impossible to happen, isn't it?  Cheers!

Linda

Offline ltseung888

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4363
Re: Chas Campbell free power motor
« Reply #940 on: November 10, 2007, 02:23:31 AM »
The "help to Chas Campbell win the AERO competition" will be continued at:

http://forum.go-here.nl/viewtopic.php?p=399#399


Quote
Since the overunity.com forum has too much disruption from debunkers, I shall use this forum (forum.go-here. nl) where I have moderator privilege for the discussion.

Please note that I would modify or delete any post without prior notice.

(1) Chas Campbell did a simple test. After his input motor finished spinning the wheels to the designed speed, he disconnected the input motor. The wheels continued to spin at approximately the same speed.

(2) He then connected the wheels to the output alternator and a 75 Watt light bulb. The light bulb continued to light for long periods (beyond what is expected as storage energy by the flywheel effect.)

(3) One of his bearings over-heated. He could not cool it by an external fan. He needed a bearing that could stand the high temperature.

The Lee-Tseung Lead-Out theory predicted that unbalanced rotation could Lead Out gravitational energy. The three stage Chas wheels with pulley and belts could be considered as cascading unbalanced wheels.

The spinning to high speed first allowed a high lead-out rate of gravitational energy. The overheating is a result of the excess energy having nowhere to go.

The chance of modifying the Chas device to meet the AERO competition condition of 72 hours at 1 KW is very good.

We shall work with others to help Chas win the AERO competition.

Lawrence Tseung
Disruption from know-it-all debunkers Lead Out use of moderator privilege by Tseung

Offline linda933

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 111
Re: Chas Campbell free power motor
« Reply #941 on: November 10, 2007, 03:08:59 AM »
Quote
It would be far far wiser to forever attempt to lift yourself into graceful flight by tugging up on your own buttocks, truly.  It wastes fewer precious material resources, costs less and, yes, you guessed it...the worst and only danger is you become an even bigger asshole!


Lawrence, I am thrilled and honored that you have taken my advice above.  May your flight be graceful and eternal and may your hind quarters and hands remain tensely balanced in eternal levitational bliss.

What?  You can't answer a straightforward question without hiding behind censorship and "moderator privileges"?  My God, man.  And you expect people to accept your leadership into the age of free energy?  Sounds like Chairman Mao to me, my friend!   Give Che a big kiss for me, Chairman Larry!

I shall never follow where leaders lead out blatant censorship to hide from honest questions. Many lemmings will swim into your net happily and I'm sure you will be very pleased where all voices sing your praises in harmony and never venture to query.

Linda

Better a Debunker than an Arch E-Bunker...apologies to Carrol O'Conner

Offline hansvonlieven

  • elite_member
  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 2558
    • Keelytech
Re: Chas Campbell free power motor
« Reply #942 on: November 10, 2007, 03:33:01 AM »
Sorry Lawrence,

What is all this debunker's crap??

If there is nothing to debunk, no debunkers!

Q.E.D.   

which means, in case you don't know,  Quod erat demonstrandum. I leave the translation to you, since someone your age with an M.Sc. acquired in England is bound to have learned the language.

Hans von Lieven

Cetero censeo Lawrence esse delendam. (Cato the elder, well, sort of)

Offline linda933

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 111
Re: Chas Campbell free power motor
« Reply #943 on: November 10, 2007, 03:55:24 AM »
Too Freakin' Che  (Oh, that's French, I guess...never mind)

For those who follow the great LT to his Domain of Utter Monotonic Babble...(DUMB)...I say only:

Caveat Emptor! 

Offline hansvonlieven

  • elite_member
  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 2558
    • Keelytech
Re: Chas Campbell free power motor
« Reply #944 on: November 10, 2007, 04:03:35 AM »
et in terra pax hominibus bonae voluntatis!

Hans

Sed libera nos a Lawrence