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.
Amazon Warehouse Deals ! Now even more Deep Discounts ! Check out these great prices on slightly used or just opened once only items.I always buy my gadgets via these great Warehouse deals ! Highly recommended ! Many thanks for supporting OverUnity.com this way.

User Menu

Tesla Paper

Free Energy Book

Get paid

Donations

Please Donate for the Forum.
Many thanks.
Regards, Stefan.(Admin)

A-Ads

Powerbox

Smartbox

3D Solar

3D Solar Panels

DC2DC converter

Micro JouleThief

FireMatch

FireMatch

CCKnife

CCKnife

CCTool

CCTool

Magpi Magazine

Magpi Magazine Free Rasberry Pi Magazine

Battery Recondition

Battery Recondition

Arduino

Ultracaps

YT Subscribe

Gravity Machines

Tesla-Ebook

Magnet Secrets

Lindemann Video

Navigation

Products

Products

WaterMotor kit

Statistics


  • *Total Posts: 523238
  • *Total Topics: 15576
  • *Online Today: 44
  • *Most Online: 103
(December 19, 2006, 11:27:19 PM)
  • *Users: 1
  • *Guests: 8
  • *Total: 9

Author Topic: SMOT Triangular Enclosure Variation, Closed Loop?  (Read 15469 times)

Offline jeffc

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 96
SMOT Triangular Enclosure Variation, Closed Loop?
« on: July 27, 2007, 04:35:31 AM »
Hi All, I've been lurking around here at overunity on an off for a few months. Here's a concept of a SMOT variation that I think has some promise.  Please review, along with the PDF docs attached which inclide diagram and walk through of the whole system.

Concept (suggest you look at diagram pdf first):
Combine the magnetic force of a SMOT to create increased gravitational PE which can be used in a way to close the system via triangular enclosure configuration.

IF the magnetic force can be used to drive a bearing up the ?ceiling? of a triangular enclosure, then using a triangular system with an internal ramp could potentially return the bearing to its ?launch? position and enable a closed loop self sustaining system.

Concerns:
Transition points are my biggest concerns, as I guess would be the case with all potential self running devices.  At point (2) as the bearing must transfer from the lowest end of the ramp to the triangular ceiling there must be enough in the combination of remaining kinetic energy from gravity and upward pull of the magnetic force from above to cause the bearing to round the transition point (D).

At point (3) the bearing must have enough energy from the PM series acceleration, with possible assistance from the PM at (F) to not get ?stuck? at the last magnet in the series.  If it can escape the magnetic force from the series, then gravity will take over and the system may indeed be closed and self sustaining.

Disclaimer:
I am not a scientist or an engineer.  Just a tinkerer  who has been interested in overunity since my grandfather shared a concept with me many years ago. 


Thanks, jeffc
« Last Edit: July 27, 2007, 07:41:46 AM by jeffc »

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy


Offline hartiberlin

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7972
    • free energy research OverUnity.com
Re: SMOT Triangular Enclosure Variation, Closed Loop?
« Reply #1 on: July 27, 2007, 04:43:14 AM »
Hi Jeff,
great idea,
this has merit, I think.

Maybe you still can merge the 2 PDFs into just one.

All SMOT setups really need very precise mechanical
setups up to 1/10 of a MilliMeter, so to avoid any sticking
it would be also good to use a glas ball just filled
with iron powder as user Epitaxy had used to avoid
the Remanz buildup as it happens in a real iron ball.
Good luck.
Regards, Stefan.

Offline jeffc

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 96
Re: SMOT Triangular Enclosure Variation, Closed Loop?
« Reply #2 on: July 27, 2007, 07:44:01 AM »
Thanks Stefan,
I really appreaciate your work on this site. 

I've combined the diagram and description into a single PDF.  Also added a gif version so it will be easier for everyone to get the idea without downloading.

Regards,
jeffc

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: SMOT Triangular Enclosure Variation, Closed Loop?
« Reply #2 on: July 27, 2007, 07:44:01 AM »
Sponsored links:




Offline gyulasun

  • without_ads
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4063
Re: SMOT Triangular Enclosure Variation, Closed Loop?
« Reply #3 on: July 27, 2007, 01:05:39 PM »
Hi Jeff,

Thanks for showing this interesting triangle SMOT setup.
If I understand correctly, the ball's own weight is kept also by the attracting magnetic path while moving uphill, right?  If so,  I wonder if this does not make the building of the ramp unnecessarily difficult, for it needs more 'work' from the magnets to hold the weight and move uphill the ball at the same time.
Surely some tinkering is needed but I also like this great idea.

Regards
Gyula

Offline Paul-R

  • without_ads
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1896
Re: SMOT Triangular Enclosure Variation, Closed Loop?
« Reply #4 on: July 27, 2007, 06:29:14 PM »
You might find the ball rushes up the inside of the ceiling like a
bullet, and crashes into the corner. SMOTs can be energetic.
Remember the gauss gun.

Can your idea be adapted into a circle? Have a gance at this:
http://www.overunity.com/index.php/topic,2745.msg40868.html#msg40868
Paul.

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: SMOT Triangular Enclosure Variation, Closed Loop?
« Reply #4 on: July 27, 2007, 06:29:14 PM »
Sponsored links:




Offline Honsou

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 1
Re: SMOT Triangular Enclosure Variation, Closed Loop?
« Reply #5 on: July 27, 2007, 07:21:47 PM »
I just read about over unity today, and an idea popped into my head.  I made a diagram, and it's kind of like this triangle theory except it employs a circular track and also uses magnetic shielding.  I assume magnetic shielding is a reality, and it will hopefully keep the ball rolling down the decline after it exits the magnet array.

Click to Enlarge
(http://img74.imageshack.us/img74/9523/smotidearx7.th.jpg)

I'm probably forgetting something dumb, or just don't understand the whole concept.  So please, debunk my theory or prove it's worth.

Offline jeffc

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 96
Re: SMOT Triangular Enclosure Variation, Closed Loop?
« Reply #6 on: July 27, 2007, 07:42:03 PM »
Hi Jeff,

Thanks for showing this interesting triangle SMOT setup.
If I understand correctly, the ball's own weight is kept also by the attracting magnetic path while moving uphill, right?  If so,  I wonder if this does not make the building of the ramp unnecessarily difficult, for it needs more 'work' from the magnets to hold the weight and move uphill the ball at the same time.
Surely some tinkering is needed but I also like this great idea.

Regards
Gyula


Gyula,

Yes, unlike some of the other SMOT configurations, this one requires the PMs to support the weight of the bearing against the ceiling.  I think this should work if the magnets are strong enough and arranged at optimal distance from each other.  I've been concerned that the magnets would be so strong that the vertical force would overcome the horizontal force and the bearing may get ?stuck? to the ceiling and not release at the end (step 3 in Figure).

Thanks for the feedback.  I guess we'll see how this all works out.

Regards,
jeffc

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: SMOT Triangular Enclosure Variation, Closed Loop?
« Reply #6 on: July 27, 2007, 07:42:03 PM »
Sponsored links:




Offline jeffc

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 96
Re: SMOT Triangular Enclosure Variation, Closed Loop?
« Reply #7 on: July 27, 2007, 07:55:01 PM »
You might find the ball rushes up the inside of the ceiling like a
bullet, and crashes into the corner. SMOTs can be energetic.
Remember the gauss gun.

Can your idea be adapted into a circle? Have a gance at this:
http://www.overunity.com/index.php/topic,2745.msg40868.html#msg40868
Paul.

Hi Paul,
Actually, I?m hoping you are correct and there is enough excess energy to launch the bearing at the end of the series.  If that is the case, the extra PM at (F) should not be necessary.  Because this SMOT design requires the magnet to support the weight of the bearing against the ceiling, I think it will require more magnetic force and result in a slower horizontal velocity. 

If the bearing crashes against the wall, we?ll just shorten the PM series until the bearing misses the wall and drops to the ramp below.
I?ve tried to consider a circular arrangement, but have not discovered one that can combine the magnetic force and gravitational force in such a way to close the system.  I believe it is the combination of these two forces that is key.  Each force creates the potential energy for the other (I hope) in this current design.
Regards,
jeffc

Offline jeffc

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 96
Re: SMOT Triangular Enclosure Variation, Closed Loop?
« Reply #8 on: July 27, 2007, 08:08:49 PM »
I just read about over unity today, and an idea popped into my head.  I made a diagram, and it's kind of like this triangle theory except it employs a circular track and also uses magnetic shielding.  I assume magnetic shielding is a reality, and it will hopefully keep the ball rolling down the decline after it exits the magnet array.

Click to Enlarge
(http://img74.imageshack.us/img74/9523/smotidearx7.th.jpg)

I'm probably forgetting something dumb, or just don't understand the whole concept.  So please, debunk my theory or prove it's worth.

@Honsou
I tried to design a circular SMOT like the one you show.  I think it is a smart concept, but as you have noted, I think some kind of shielding is necessary if the bearing would travel in the same plain of the magnets on the return.  I?m not an expert on magnetism, but I believe the only effective shield would be Faraday, and that it would require energy equal to or greater then the magnetism involved.

I?ve seen another similar SMOT variation on this site, which is circular, but the track drops below the plain of the magnets on the return.  I think this is an interesting variation.  You may want to find that thread (sorry I don't have  :-\ )

But my whole design is about combining magnetic force and gravitational force in a way so that you have a significant horizontal acceleration AND a significant vertical acceleration.  I hope the result will be self sustaining motion, and perhaps excess energy (over unity) that could be adapted for real work!

Regards,
jeffc

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: SMOT Triangular Enclosure Variation, Closed Loop?
« Reply #8 on: July 27, 2007, 08:08:49 PM »
3D Solar Panels

Offline Grolo

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 4
Re: SMOT Triangular Enclosure Variation, Closed Loop?
« Reply #9 on: July 27, 2007, 08:18:48 PM »
This is not going to work with 1 ball.
Point 1 - 2 = oke
Point 2 - up = not sure
Point 2 -3 = oke

But it will stop at point 3 or else magnet F will stop it. But I think the force at point 3 is really big.

When you want to shoot something you need other things. You can see someone shooting balls in this movie (time 00:35):
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RKyGDWeblQw
You alway's need a second ball otherwise it will just stop at the end.
Also your second idea has the same problem it will stop at the end of the magnets.
Correct me if I'm wrong.

But don't give up!  ;)

-edit-
Checked you drawing again.
Maybe when you use 3 balls on your first idea and also use magnets at point A. Hmmmm... could be...  ::)
« Last Edit: July 27, 2007, 08:41:43 PM by Grolo »

Offline jeffc

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 96
Re: SMOT Triangular Enclosure Variation, Closed Loop?
« Reply #10 on: July 27, 2007, 08:52:58 PM »
This is not going to work with 1 ball.
Point 1 - 2 = oke
Point 2 - up = not sure
Point 2 -3 = oke

But it will stop at point 3 or else magnet F will stop it. But I think the force at point 3 is really big.

When you want to shoot something you need other things. You can see someone shooting balls in this movie (time 00:35):
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RKyGDWeblQw
You alway's need a second ball otherwise it will just stop at the end.
Also your second idea has the same problem it will stop at the end of the magnets.
Correct me if I'm wrong.

But don't give up!  ;)

-edit-
Checked you drawing again.
Maybe when you use 3 balls on your first idea and also use magnets at point A. Hmmmm... could be...  ::)

@Grolo
Hi, thanks for your thoughts.  I've been thinking that if the horizontal kinetic energy is high enough at point (3) then the bearing will escape without needing magnet at (F).  If it gets stuck at (3) adding a magnet at (F) may provide enough force so that it will not get stuck.  BUT if it is necessary to put a magnet at (F), the magnet needs to be strong enough to assist the bearing to escape the grip of the series magnets at point (3), BUT NOT STRONG ENOUGH TO HOLD THE BEARING against the enclosure wall at (F). 

That way, the bearing will drop to the ramp below without getting stuck at (3) or against the wall at (F).

Does anyone else think this can work?  I think this can be configured so that the bearing doesn't stick.

Regards,
jeffc

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: SMOT Triangular Enclosure Variation, Closed Loop?
« Reply #10 on: July 27, 2007, 08:52:58 PM »
3D Solar Panels

Offline jeffc

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 96
Re: SMOT Triangular Enclosure Variation, Closed Loop?
« Reply #11 on: July 27, 2007, 09:10:53 PM »
I just read about over unity today, and an idea popped into my head.  I made a diagram, and it's kind of like this triangle theory except it employs a circular track and also uses magnetic shielding.  I assume magnetic shielding is a reality, and it will hopefully keep the ball rolling down the decline after it exits the magnet array.

Click to Enlarge
(http://img74.imageshack.us/img74/9523/smotidearx7.th.jpg)

I'm probably forgetting something dumb, or just don't understand the whole concept.  So please, debunk my theory or prove it's worth.
@Honsou

I looked at your diagram again, and I think that if you made a more rapid vertical drop of the track at the "fast" end of the SMOT, you might escape the plain of the magnetic force and not need the shielding.  This would be similar to the other design that I mentioned in my previous reply.
Regards,
jeffc

Offline gyulasun

  • without_ads
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4063
Re: SMOT Triangular Enclosure Variation, Closed Loop?
« Reply #12 on: July 27, 2007, 09:40:33 PM »

@Grolo
Hi, thanks for your thoughts.  I've been thinking that if the horizontal kinetic energy is high enough at point (3) then the bearing will escape without needing magnet at (F).  If it gets stuck at (3) adding a magnet at (F) may provide enough force so that it will not get stuck.  BUT if it is necessary to put a magnet at (F), the magnet needs to be strong enough to assist the bearing to escape the grip of the series magnets at point (3), BUT NOT STRONG ENOUGH TO HOLD THE BEARING against the enclosure wall at (F). 

That way, the bearing will drop to the ramp below without getting stuck at (3) or against the wall at (F).

Does anyone else think this can work?  I think this can be configured so that the bearing doesn't stick.

Regards,
jeffc

Hi Jeff,

Yes, I think your setup has got a chance to work. Surely it needs a LOT OF EXPERIMENTING and PATIENCE. I think you feel pretty sure where the places for pitfalls are found and how these could be eliminated. 
Some thoughts to help chances to work:
-vary the length and the steepness of slope B to control a little the kinetic energy of the ball
-try to change the mass of the ball to get a feel on the dependence of its mass (or weight) versus the magnets' strength, there must be an optimal ratio between the mass and the strength of the uphill magnets to get the best escape speed at point 3)
-you may wish to try the "normal" SMOT ramp where the ball rolls uphill on the upper level, not below the ceiling: this way there may be a better chance to let the ball escape at point 3) by making the track shorter than that of the raw of the pulling magnets, you have probably meant this in your earlier letter, I quote: (the track drops below the plain of the magnets on the return.  I think this is an interesting variation)

Surely there are some other 'pitfalls' to fight with, only experimenting can give the best answers.  Do not loose heart!

Regards
Gyula

Offline jeffc

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 96
Re: SMOT Triangular Enclosure Variation, Closed Loop?
« Reply #13 on: July 27, 2007, 10:37:28 PM »

@Grolo
Hi, thanks for your thoughts.  I've been thinking that if the horizontal kinetic energy is high enough at point (3) then the bearing will escape without needing magnet at (F).  If it gets stuck at (3) adding a magnet at (F) may provide enough force so that it will not get stuck.  BUT if it is necessary to put a magnet at (F), the magnet needs to be strong enough to assist the bearing to escape the grip of the series magnets at point (3), BUT NOT STRONG ENOUGH TO HOLD THE BEARING against the enclosure wall at (F). 

That way, the bearing will drop to the ramp below without getting stuck at (3) or against the wall at (F).

Does anyone else think this can work?  I think this can be configured so that the bearing doesn't stick.

Regards,
jeffc

Hi Jeff,

Yes, I think your setup has got a chance to work. Surely it needs a LOT OF EXPERIMENTING and PATIENCE. I think you feel pretty sure where the places for pitfalls are found and how these could be eliminated. 
Some thoughts to help chances to work:
-vary the length and the steepness of slope B to control a little the kinetic energy of the ball
-try to change the mass of the ball to get a feel on the dependence of its mass (or weight) versus the magnets' strength, there must be an optimal ratio between the mass and the strength of the uphill magnets to get the best escape speed at point 3)
-you may wish to try the "normal" SMOT ramp where the ball rolls uphill on the upper level, not below the ceiling: this way there may be a better chance to let the ball escape at point 3) by making the track shorter than that of the raw of the pulling magnets, you have probably meant this in your earlier letter, I quote: (the track drops below the plain of the magnets on the return.  I think this is an interesting variation)

Surely there are some other 'pitfalls' to fight with, only experimenting can give the best answers.  Do not loose heart!

Regards
Gyula

Hi Gyula,
Thanks for your suggestions, I think they are very important points to experiment with.  I have toyed with a design where the bearing rides on top of an inner track to support its weight instead of requiring the magnet series to handle the whole burden.   This would make the design more similar to a normal SMOT.  We?ll see, I want to try to make it work with my original design before applying the variation.

I?m working on the enclosure design so that I can vary the angle of the incline, as I think this will help with the fine tuning.  We?ll see!
Regards,
jeffc


Offline Freezer

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 414
Re: SMOT Triangular Enclosure Variation, Closed Loop?
« Reply #14 on: July 27, 2007, 11:09:14 PM »
Just an visualization.
(http://img231.imageshack.us/img231/9246/smotec7.jpg)

 

OneLink