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

Custom Search

Author Topic: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant  (Read 823272 times)

Cherryman

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 642
Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
« Reply #675 on: April 14, 2009, 03:41:13 PM »
New simulation about the Abeling wheel from the
ab-az-cm-2.wm2d file.

I removed the motor and applied just a force onto the wheel for 400 frames to speed it up.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rM8SmU9pjcI

But also this does not work.
Just elliptical pathes in a wheel do not work to get a gravity wheel working.

This animation has a force applied for the first 400 frames, to help speed it up.
After the 400 frames it must work by itsself and you see, how it slows down and then stops


I tried several of those designs, but it lacks the "extra" to give it additional force..

Same principal, little different look but that doesn't matter.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nSaKQEn0Wwc&feature=channel_page

The one i did found most promising was this one:

Notice how the ball fly's UP the ramp due to its own speed. On that moment the ball goes up the ramp, it is faster and detaches itself from the spoke..   So the wheel is not bothered by the ball in the upmovement.. 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GBygA2vOHx4&feature=channel

mindsweeper

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 138
Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
« Reply #676 on: April 14, 2009, 03:41:19 PM »
Again the rigid joint problem.
I just fixed this using 2 pin joints.
Then it behaves normal.

Never use RIGID JOINTs in WM2D.

Stefan, that totally changed the way the forces work on the model. Canceling the desired effect of CF acting in the rear of the model. So it will not work that way, study the way the bar is attached and the forces that act. Placing the pin where you have just balances out the force.

EDIT: and if the rigid pin joint is a known bug I wonder why it has never been addressed by the software developers?

mondrasek

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1301
Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
« Reply #677 on: April 14, 2009, 03:53:09 PM »
The more tweakable things the better, but wm2d lacks a single real world switch which normalizes all variables to real world settings including air, gravity and integrator settings...

Very true.  WM2D is just a tool.  For our purposes it must be used correctly.

The ability to lower Integration Error, Animation Step, Air Resistance, Friction, etc., is very useful when testing different configuration.  But in the end you need to keep your focus on the goal.  Do you want a simulation of something that will work when built in the real world, or just a neat trick? 

These are the reasons I have been trying to gently nudge the modelers to use the program correctly (as I know how) for the end purpose of an accurate sim of Abeling's device.  Suggestions like, model in the proper scale, and increase Integration Error, etc.

I work in robotics, where the motion is always an iterative process.  The controller calculates where each robot axis should be in the future after a given period of time (time step).  The controller then drives the motors with the appropriate current to try and get to the new position.  But before it gets there we are calculating the next point.  So we are never where we want to be and are always correcting our current positional error.  That is how the robot moves and is a very similar process to how the WM2D software must operate.  Our robots never follow exactly the perfect motion path that is programmed.  There is always a slight error, especially near fast sharp turns.  We can minimise this path deviation by shortening the time step (Integration Error, and for robots: which is limited by the controller CPU and amount of I/O you have in the system), or by slowing the robot down (Animation Step).

M.

Cherryman

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 642
Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
« Reply #678 on: April 14, 2009, 04:00:28 PM »
Talking about strange behaviour...  Why is this going the wrong side???


Omnibus

  • elite_member
  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 5330
Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
« Reply #679 on: April 14, 2009, 04:07:18 PM »
@mondrasek,

How do you explain the rigid joint problem? Also, do you think parallel processing would improve matters and maybe somehow the object-oriented programming would be a palliative solution? Sorry to get into these software issues and detract from the discussion at hand but do you know what language was used to program this and any other details you've come across? Just curious.

3decimal14

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 14
Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
« Reply #680 on: April 14, 2009, 04:15:57 PM »
New simulation about the Abeling wheel from the
ab-az-cm-2.wm2d file.

I removed the motor and applied just a force onto the wheel for 400 frames to speed it up.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rM8SmU9pjcI

But also this does not work.
Just elliptical pathes in a wheel do not work to get a gravity wheel working.

This animation has a force applied for the first 400 frames, to help speed it up.
After the 400 frames it must work by itsself and you see, how it slows down and then stops


Hi, don´t you need more than 2 balls/weights in the wheel simulation?
To me it looks difficult to get more weight on one side than the other.

Just my thoughts.

Omnibus

  • elite_member
  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 5330
Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
« Reply #681 on: April 14, 2009, 04:22:58 PM »
Talking about strange behaviour...  Why is this going the wrong side???



Now, this is the winner so far.

mondrasek

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1301
Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
« Reply #682 on: April 14, 2009, 04:30:08 PM »
@mondrasek,

How do you explain the rigid joint problem? Also, do you think parallel processing would improve matters and maybe somehow the object-oriented programming would be a palliative solution? Sorry to get into these software issues and detract from the discussion at hand but do you know what language was used to program this and any other details you've come across? Just curious.

Stefan's revelation of the issues with rigid joints was news to me.  Thanks for the hint Stefan!  I haven't played around with it yet, but my guess is this:  In WM2D we are working with three degrees of freedom, linear translation in X, linear translation in Y, and rotation around Z.  With the rigid joint you constrain all three degrees of freedom at one location.  With a pin joint you constrain only the X and Y translation.  Now I believe you can calculate the X and Y translation within one cycle of an iteration.  But you would need a second cycle (different formula) to calculate the rotation.  So, which do you calculate first, and what position of the other (current or future) do you use when doing so?  Similar to a spring, you have two different equations to solve for the rigid joint, and each is dependant on the other.  So you must approximate one and induce extra error in the other.  Unless the time step and integration errors are small, this can cause an error larger than the scale of the models can handle and the sim to blow up.

I'm not a (current) computer programmer, so I don't know how this could be programmed other than the iterative method that is simplest to use that I would use if doing it by hand (unimaginable).  I am also just a casual user of the program and have no details about how it was written.

M.

Omnibus

  • elite_member
  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 5330
Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
« Reply #683 on: April 14, 2009, 04:35:28 PM »
But, see, Stefan suggested to use double pin joint instead of rigid joint and that also constrains the three degrees of freedom while fixing the error.

Cherryman

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 642
Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
« Reply #684 on: April 14, 2009, 04:50:51 PM »
Oke, forget Abeling, i went back to my basic design,

Look at this one, i can bring back the ball up to a height, and i can lift a ball from that height over the middle point..     

Now find a way to combine it..  And at higher speeds it would be easier, then you can skip the low pickup


mondrasek

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1301
Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
« Reply #685 on: April 14, 2009, 05:01:36 PM »
But, see, Stefan suggested to use double pin joint instead of rigid joint and that also constrains the three degrees of freedom while fixing the error.

Think through the process of translating the object held by two pins.  You calculate the X and Y positional shift of one pin and its object.  And then the free rotation of the object around that pin.  But wait...  There is a second pin so there cannot be any free rotation.  Calculate the X and Y positional shift of the second pin and align the "rotation" around the first pin.  No extra error was induced.

Yes the two pins also constrain all three axis of freedom.  But it does it with several independant equations, not two interdependant ones (I think).

M.

mindsweeper

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 138
Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
« Reply #686 on: April 14, 2009, 05:21:20 PM »
Talking about strange behaviour...  Why is this going the wrong side???



The mass of poly 2 was incorrect, I set it to 6 and it worked as it should.

Cherryman

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 642
Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
« Reply #687 on: April 14, 2009, 05:25:11 PM »
Tnx, i repaired it myself also.

Here you can see the flying path of the ball...  I think this is the force we seek......

"may the force be with you"  ;D

hartiberlin

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8154
    • free energy research OverUnity.com
Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
« Reply #688 on: April 14, 2009, 06:52:04 PM »
Talking about strange behaviour...  Why is this going the wrong side???


* KAD Wip.wm2d (50.92 KB - downloaded 3 times.)
* KAD Wip2.wm2d (28.66 KB - downloaded 2 times.)

Because you made the see-saw bar about 6.4 tons of weight.

Just change it to a real value of 1 to 10 Kg and it works
the way it should.

Watch out for the weights you are applying.
If you use a different tool other than WM2D to design your polygons and
things you have to edit out the weight in WM2D.

Hope this helps.

Regards, Stefan.

mrsean2k

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 173
Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
« Reply #689 on: April 14, 2009, 07:16:36 PM »
@mondrasek,

How do you explain the rigid joint problem? Also, do you think parallel processing would improve matters and maybe somehow the object-oriented programming would be a palliative solution? Sorry to get into these software issues and detract from the discussion at hand but do you know what language was used to program this and any other details you've come across? Just curious.

Excuse me for stepping in, but:

Object orientation will help only in that it provides a language in which concepts can be expressed and state capture in a relatively easy to maintain way. For some projects it is an excellent fit, reducing the apparent complexity and consequently the possibility that bugs are introduced. Although most implementations of OO incur an overhead when it comes to execution, this is usually more than made up for by the fact that better algorithms can be more elegantly expressed and developed. A better algorithm trumps shaving a few cycles off 99 times out of 100.

So there is nothing that makes OO intrinsically more accurate as a candidate for making simulations more accurate, other than the fact it can foster some good development practices compared to older methods.

Parallel processing is a bit of the same. Parallel processing improves accuracy only as a result of being able to execute the same algorithm more efficiently. In terms of your simulation application, you have the opportunity to decrease the interval and increase the number of iterations performed in a given time period, but other than that, no intrinsic advantage over a beefier single processor.

The nature of the problem really stems from the fact that computation is discrete and reality is continuous. It doesn't matter how brief the tick or short the distance you use when calculating the next frame of the simulation, it's a coarse approximation of what actually happens. The current speculation is that the ticks and lengths the universe operate on, the Planck Time and Planck Length, are 1.3546 * 10-43 sec and 4.0610 * 10-35 m respectively. Comparing the resolution of simulations to those two figures is like comparing the results of a commercial colour printer to a daisywheel, and that's vastly understating the case.

That's not to say that the simulation can't be good enough for your purposes, but unless the effect is pronounced and easily replicated, you won't know if it's a breakthrough or a rounding error.