My mind is the same - it does not spin when all members stationary.
When hand holded - then yes 
Gruss,
khabe

Hi Guys;

I also built a Hamel 3 cone device a few years ago after reading about it on several sites.  Mine did exactly what Anand's did in his video. I must have made a hundred adjustments but it would always stop.

Regards'
Vince

Hey Vince,

Nice job on your set up. The thing I notice the most in all builder's attempts is the frame. If the frame is too weak or not structurally established, it could add to the shut down of the cones. The vibration could be lost in the frame. Try not to use any wood in the construction. Make it all metal. This may be why AnandAadhar is having trouble as well. I noticed a lot of wood present. The frame should be rigid. Try to use non-magnetic metal tubing, rather than thin diameter rod. I am using 1 inch diameter tubing and it is very strong. The base is all metal and the tubing is very secure to the base.
all components of the frame should have a rigidness which is superior it would seem. Even the top rejection.

This is an example of my first attempt. I did use wood on the bottom. It never worked of course.

(http://webhome.idirect.com/~mattihorn/DAVIDHAMEL/2.GIF)

This is my latest attempt: Notice that the entire thing is all metal. The rings are thick. The frame is very rigid. I haven't got it to work just yet, and yet so far, I am quite sure that this arrangement will help.

(http://webhome.idirect.com/~mattihorn/DAVIDHAMEL/1.GIF)

All for the practice! Hey Steve!

Matt

Wasn't the 3-cone device also a proof of concept device?
What I recall from some years ago, when I was still lurking in the Hameltech group ,
is that the actual device Hamel built after his 3-cone prototype was a much more
flattened version...
Of course that was the engine for his granite spaceship...

Anyway, what exactly is the goal here?
To replicate Hamels engine?
Or to try to build an altered version of his engine prototype and try to use it as a generator?

@Steven: What the old Hamel guys told me, as is what
I recall from Hamels account of the event, is that the first
full scale 45GD "3 cone device" Hamel built went active after
he put the lid on, and after a day or so it had built up a bluish
aura around it, made a humming/vibrating noise, and at some point
just shot up into the air, straight through his roof, and was never
seen again.
This according to Hamel was proof unquestionable, and after that
he started building the flattened-out engine version.

But then again, I can only tell you what I was told about that, as I
never spoke to Hamel personally.

Interesting factoid is that the "Hamel Spinning Top" was investigated by
a couple of MIT students who analysed it quite recently (year or two ago),
and concluded that it is not only a funky setup but most interestingly that
such a setup has the ability to transduce thermal noise from the environment
into ballistic transport (of the ball and magnet) very efficiently.
In other words: Hamels "spinner" can work and thermal noise can power it.

Well in any case, it is nice to see people actually seriously looking at the Hamel tech again.

Oh, und Entschuldigung das ich kein Deutsch spreche... mein ?nglisch ist so viel besser.

@Steven: What the old Hamel guys told me, as is what
I recall from Hamels account of the event, is that the first
full scale 45GD "3 cone device" Hamel built went active after
he put the lid on, and after a day or so it had built up a bluish
aura around it, made a humming/vibrating noise, and at some point
just shot up into the air, straight through his roof, and was never
seen again.
This according to Hamel was proof unquestionable, and after that
he started building the flattened-out engine version.
But then again, I can only tell you what I was told about that, as I
never spoke to Hamel personally.

No offense intended, but I think you're misremembering it, probably remembering a mix of things (45GD+Hamel's engine that did fly away+Schauberger's device that went through the roof?). I'm sure if you go to the hameltech group right now and ask you'll find the Hamel's 45GD didn't lift off. That it imploded is what he told me. Quoting from Jeanne Manning's "The Granite Man & the Butterfly" as told to her by David Hamel:

"Working in the garage attached to their house [this was back in Maple Ridge, BC, Canada], he placed the apparatus inside a 45-gallon black steel barrel ringed on the inside with magnets. The barrel would be the shell of the device.
  Everything lined up. Then he screwed down the cover. This compressed the apparatus forcing the isotope line to break into three parts and starting the tumbling motion passed on from one to the other The rings of magnets repelling each other caused the cones to float one over the other. They swung in a constant wobbling circling motion, faster and faster. After they reached a certain speed the vibration somewhat stabilized.
  David was pleased that his model operated. He went into the house to share his success and attend to Nora's needs, leaving the experimental device running. As he shut the French doors between the garage and the living room, he was unconcerned that the device was wobbling away in the barrel with its cap on. He was certain that the relatively small apparatus would not produce an energy effect, and he expected that it might soon stop its wobbling. He wanted to see how long it would run. If the motion continued until morning, he would be very surprised, he thought.
  "It'll never fly. But maybe I can learn from it," he told Nora.
  The couple went to bed and slept until they were awakened by an extremely loud bang. "Fire!" Nora said.
  David jumped out of bed and looked toward the attached garage. A red glow came from that direction through the French doors and lit the living room. From the bedroom, it did look as if the garage was on fire!
  Inside the garage, he encountered a dismaying sight. His carefully-built device had exploded out of the drum and was scattered in pieces all over the room. Apparently the red glow had been from a buildup of energy of some type as the device operated. There was no fire, fortunately, but his investment of thousands of dollars in magnets was destroyed.
  The mess of metal and the broken roofing shakes on the top of the building were not as discouraging to David as the loss of all those ceramic magnets. However, he had the satisfaction of seeing that he could build something which demonstrated the power of the magnetic repulsion coupled with the arrangement of the "breaking lines"."

Oh, and David gave me the actual magnets he used in the top of the drum and top cone as well as a few of the actual magnets he used in the bicycle rims, so they certainly didn't shoot up never to be seen again. You can see them again here :-):
 http://rimstar.org/sdprop/haml45gd/h45gdavd/h45gdavd.htm

Interesting factoid is that the "Hamel Spinning Top" was investigated by
a couple of MIT students who analysed it quite recently (year or two ago),
and concluded that it is not only a funky setup but most interestingly that
such a setup has the ability to transduce thermal noise from the environment
into ballistic transport (of the ball and magnet) very efficiently.
In other words: Hamels "spinner" can work and thermal noise can power it.

Sounds very interesting. Do you have a reference? I couldn't find anything.

Well in any case, it is nice to see people actually seriously looking at the Hamel tech again.

Oh, und Entschuldigung das ich kein Deutsch spreche... mein ?nglisch ist so viel besser.

Und meine Entschuldigungen zu sprechen Englisch auf dieser deutschen Sektion des Forums. Ich wei? nur etwa zwei Dutzend deutschen W?rtern.
-Steve
http://rimstar.org

Hey Steve! (& all),

Mr. Hamel tried to rebuild or replicate his 45 gallon "drum experiment" many years ago and did not succeed.

Why do you think Mr. Hamel used CONES to make the broken-line-movement or as Hamel called it the "Isotope" line of movement.
Why 3 cones and not 3 anything else?

It is because of AIR movement to form the positive and negative flows.
When the cones wobble they will fan or push air in a CIRCLE (the cones wobble or oscillate in a circle)
Hello... are we paying attention now!

People have real balls to try and think they know the technology, but they are children playing with toys.
It's sad...I wish it was different.

Regards,

Dan


P.S. 
Back at ya Steve.  Nice to hear from you.

No offense intended, but I think you're misremembering it, probably remembering a mix of things (45GD+Hamel's engine that did fly away+Schauberger's device that went through the roof?). I'm sure if you go to the hameltech group right now and ask you'll find the Hamel's 45GD didn't lift off. That it imploded is what he told me.

Well I must indeed be misremembering. Haven't really kept up with it for some time now, I just saw this thread and jumped in.
Sorry for the mixup! Hope nobody's offended...

I was quite impressed with mr Hamels proof-of-concept gadgets (spinner, WIS, 45GD) and his theory (even though I must admit I still didn't follow all of it),
and most impressed by his engine and craft design as well as his perseverence. The man actually built a large part of a granite saucercraft,
for Bobs sake! Damn. And a flippin cool engine to power it. Now there's an inventor for ya.

As for the spinner reference, I'll see if I can find it for you. I read the article about half a year ago or so so I'll have to search a bit.

@Dan: Of course the 45GD and the engine used air... Was that a matter of discussion? The engine design included intake, outlet, and feedback
conduits and the engine "wings" (the flattened wobbling plates that are the cones in the 45GD) would 'wobble' in such a way that they would
move a large volume of air around the engine 'chamber'... right? Outflow was controlled and guided along the outer surface of the hull stages from
the top down, cylindrical intake centered at the bottom, right?
Or am I mixing stuff up horribly again?  Hope not...

Regards!

Well I must indeed be misremembering. Haven't really kept up with it for some time now, I just saw this thread and jumped in.
Sorry for the mixup! Hope nobody's offended...

No reason anyone should be. We all do the best we can. What would be bad is if someone didn't correct us or at least give their alternate point of view. That I hate. How many of my own experiments would have gone better if someone with more expertise had spoken up?

As for the spinner reference, I'll see if I can find it for you. I read the article about half a year ago or so so I'll have to search a bit.

Thanks.

-Steve
http://rimstar.org