Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Gravity powered devices => Gravity powered devices => Topic started by: AquariuZ on April 03, 2009, 07:17:07 PM

Title: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: AquariuZ on April 03, 2009, 07:17:07 PM
Greetings.

I was surprised to see a search on Abeling receiving "0" hits.

So, long overdue as he is about to go ballistic. (I think)

In November of 2007, an unknown dutch inventor made the rather outlandish claim he had found a way to rotate and accelerate a large wheel by using twin weights and earths gravity as only propulsion. At the time this was merely ruled a hoax.

See the dutch media (local) coverage here: Noord TV Report on Abeling device (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A_0kYz4LhHw) Edit: added Broli´s version with subs

After that it has been very quiet around Sjack, until a few months back he created a company Abeling Beheer B.V. and started a website which explains his intentions:

"The construction of the first Weight Power Plant is expected in May 2009. The location for the construction of the first Weight Power Plant is probably going to be the province of Groningen, the Netherlands."


and

"The Fall and Lift control system. The invention of the "Fall and Lift control system" was done towards the end of 2006. The system transports, controls and transmits mass/weight to (for instance) a drive shaft. This system was the foundation for a machine that can work on weights/mass only, without adding any form of energy. It's purpose is to drive other objects."


Abeling claims he now partners with reputable businesses like Henkel and has all the approvals needed to go ahead with the project.

Link to the bi-lingual webpage: http://mooieenergie.nl (http://mooieenergie.nl)

He appears to be a cool customer, not at all media hungry, and has quietly filed his patents, raised capital and signed partner agreements.

Time will tell if he is 100% legit, his claim is that he will be able to provide power to the general public with at least a 50% discount against current regular provider rates. I think that still is too high, 95% would be better.

My questions to all in here are:

1) What do you think?
2) Have you heard anything about this?
3) If this is a "scam" why pursue it further now that he has all he needs?

My thoughts are that he truly has found a way to generate acceleration using weights and gravity only, or at least HE is 100% convinced.

I have sent him a message of encouragement, warning and a plea for full publication as soon as possible.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: broli on April 03, 2009, 07:27:02 PM
I believe him. But his method of selling it is beyond belief. He deserves the wealth but not like this.
What kind of bullshit change is this...50% cheaper LOL  ::). God some people are unbelievably greedy.

Edit: Just read his website at

http://mooieenergie.nl

Where it was planned to publish the theory behind it in mid march but looks like that got postponed. At least he's willing to share the knowledge so I have to take back what I just said.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: AquariuZ on April 03, 2009, 07:36:22 PM
I believe him. But his method of selling it is beyond belief. He deserves the wealth but not like this.
What kind of bullshit change is this...50% cheaper LOL  ::). God some people are unbelievably greedy.

I think he was just being "conservative" and yes ofcourse in a monetary based economy everyone will want to make a "buck".

But I tell you what, he (from what I understand) is about to disclose his theory -hopefully in full- so nothing stands in our way to replicate the wheel for ourselves and benefit from it. There will be tons and tons of green waiting so he will not lose anything by disclosing.

The major theorum disclosure is overdue for about five days now, reminds me a bit of Steorn... But in fairness I value him higher than Sean McCarthy at this moment in time. I cannot explain it, but there is something about him that makes me (want to) believe...

Adding: appearantly the core system will be made out of glass. How interesting...
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: broli on April 03, 2009, 09:09:08 PM
Oke I went through the trouble of adding subtitles to the video so other can understand it. Even though little of use is said.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A_0kYz4LhHw
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: ramset on April 03, 2009, 10:36:17 PM
Broli
Thanks for taking the time to do that

Chet
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: AquariuZ on April 03, 2009, 11:18:00 PM
Oke I went through the trouble of adding subtitles to the video so other can understand it. Even though little of use is said.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A_0kYz4LhHw

Well done Broli, I wasn´t aware of the fact you are dutch too..

Thanks
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: broli on April 03, 2009, 11:24:01 PM
Well done Broli, I wasn´t aware of the fact you are dutch too..

Thanks

Thanks, and I'm not dutch  ;).
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: hartiberlin on April 03, 2009, 11:36:20 PM
Many thanks for the translation Broli.
Looks very interesting.

But it already sucks, that he wants first to patent it.

Probably the delay comes from the patent process and I guess
he will not get any patent on it,cause it will be stamped Perpetual Motion Machine,
which will not get him any patent.

So it would be much wiser just to publish it all freely and make
money with selling books about the invention.

Regards, Stefan.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: AquariuZ on April 03, 2009, 11:37:38 PM
Thanks, and I'm not dutch  ;).

Which makes it even more impressive...  ;D

One thing though: at 01:09 he says:
"Deze ontdekking had in mijn ogen 200 jaar geleden of misschien al eerder plaats kunnen vinden"

Which translates to:
"This discovery could have been made 200 years ago or maybe even earlier"

Not to:
"Some 200 years ago this invention has been found as well"

Just to be exact... I have modified my initial post to refer to your posting, thanks again.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: AquariuZ on April 03, 2009, 11:43:53 PM
But it already sucks, that he wants first to patent it.

Probably the delay comes from the patent process and I guess
he will not get any patent on it,cause it will be stamped Perpetual Motion Machine,
which will not get him any patent.

So it would be much wiser just to publish it all freely and make
money with selling books about the invention.

Regards, Stefan.

From what I understood he is patenting several things, one of them being the "Fall and Lift control system"...

Quote
With the development of the "Dual Lift System" in 2008, a disturbance in the system's balance was removed by adjusting the trajectory of the bodies in the system. This made it possible to produce a system with the following advantages:

    *
      Placement below the ground / sealevel
    *
      Technically easy to understand
    * Independent of any energy source
    * Versatile
    * Reliable, manageable
    * Multiple units can be linked

Some applications for this system:

    * Generators
    * Driving systems (e.g. for ships)
    * Transport systems  (e.g. for water)
    * Weight Power Plant

The current objective is to produce power/energy with a new company by building and managing Weight Power Plants.
The Weight Power Plants will be located in closed bunkers wherever power is needed. It is easy to adapt the output of the system to local needs. States, cities and towns can all have their own power plant.

The advantages of this system are:

    * No air- or waterpolution
    * No horizon polution: placement undergrond possible
    * No disturbing noise
    * No blackouts during maintenance
    * Safe

From what I understand his intentions are indeed to release the complete theory, I would be highly surprised if he would not release it because of patent failure, seeing as he already secured several. (need to research to find them in which case I wil post them).

Quote
Progress in launching the Weight Power Plant:

    * We have permission to construct and exploit Weight Power Plants in The Netherlands. We can use the existing infrastructure.
    * There is foreign interest in the Weight Power Plant and the watermanagement of Sjack Abeling .
    * Patents have been filed or are pending.
    * Applied techniques are currently being tested at Henkel's.
    * A test system is being prepared.

How can they deny him a patent if the thing works? He should go ahead anyway as he appearantly has convinced a legion of partners and is on the eve of building his first plant in Groningen.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: khabe on April 04, 2009, 12:02:10 AM
Hm,
Well - big garage and eery plywood wheels again and again ...
But have you seen it works?
Nimble mind speaks - it does not - just no way 8)
Show us at least one working unit,
No cheap tricks, no tawdry art of cinematography - just a working machine,
cheers,
khabe
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: infringer on April 04, 2009, 12:16:09 AM
Yes indeed very hot topic as of late these gravitational do dads...

I would sure like to see one with my own two eyes functioning as well.

But... either way I am sure in some way we can increase wind turbine efficiency with the study of gravity wheels so whats the worse that can come of these claims ...

Gimme wind and solar or else I'll second guess the method for power generation for now and until proven otherwise that is where I am investing strictly wind and solar.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: AquariuZ on April 04, 2009, 12:29:53 AM
I think I found the particular patent, but do not know how to access to actual data. (maybe subscribers only)

If someone has access to patents, here the info I have:

Quote
  Energie-omzettingsinrichting.       
        Uitvinder:  ABELING JACOBUS JOHANNES [NL]      Aanvrager:  ABELING BEHEER B V [NL]
        EC:      IPC:   F03G7/10; F03G7/00
        
Informatie over publicatie:      NL1034252  (C1)  —  2009-02-16

Octrooinummer:      NL1034252 (C1)
Publicatiedatum:    2009-02-16
Uitvinder(s):    ABELING JACOBUS JOHANNES [NL]
Aanvrager(s):    ABELING BEHEER B V [NL]
Classificatie:    
- internationaal:    F03G7/10; F03G7/00
- europees:    
Aanvraagnummer:    NL20071034252 20070813
Prioriteitsnummer(s):    NL20071034252 20070813

filed 16/02/09, I have no idea how to access the actual application though

edit: (C1) stands for third level application initial was filed on 13/08/2007

Anyway, there you have it. Not much more to say but wait and see how it turns out. I hope he answers my emails.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: broli on April 04, 2009, 12:52:40 AM
The patent is indeed not digitized yet.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: ramset on April 04, 2009, 12:54:09 AM
Aqauariuz

User Pese has many skills in this patent research ,why don't you send him a PM
Chet
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Alexioco on April 04, 2009, 01:19:55 AM
This is really interesting, but its anoying how these things always get posponed, couldnt he show footage of it turning with the mechanism hidden? I'm taking this with a pinch of salt i think...

Alex
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: hartiberlin on April 04, 2009, 02:09:29 AM
The patent is indeed not digitized yet.

Yes, it seems it is not yet published, only this :

http://v3.espacenet.com/publicationDetails/biblio?CC=NL&NR=1034252C1&KC=C1&FT=D&date=20090216&DB=EPODOC&locale=en_EP

Regards. Stefan.
Title: A dutch contest...
Post by: iacob alex on April 04, 2009, 04:33:53 AM

   ...between a past time thought-experiment(Simon Stevin -1586) and a present time real-experiment(Abeling Johannes-2008).

      The one and the other,as Dutchmen,play the same game with a serial of spheres in a loop-file.

      Long time ago(1586,"The Art of Weighting"),Stevin expressed with a concise design( a triangle/two different slopes+a "wreath of spheres") ,the unthinkable,unrealizable possibility to get a self-motion from gravity.

      Just now (2008,"Dual Lift System"),Abeling announces with a similar concise design,we can see on the front page of his web-site(a coronal,loop,wreath of spheres),the contrary:a possibility to get self-motion from the gravity power.

      So,here is an  idealistic-match between the past and the present.

                    All the Bests! / Alex
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: AB Hammer on April 04, 2009, 04:58:19 AM
Greetings All

 Unless some proof is shown. Even with a covered wheel. I see nothing to get excited about at this time. For there is no evidence for or against it. It could be someone taking a lead from another from Ireland. Allot of talk and no proof.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: persume on April 04, 2009, 06:50:38 AM
Several people need to contact the companies he says he is partnering with and ask them in emails if they are really in business negotiations with him.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: khabe on April 04, 2009, 09:00:47 AM
http://peswiki.com/energy/Directory:Gravity_Motors
What is happend with this one?
G Force Rotational machine demo video posted - Since 1993, an Armenian inventor has been demonstrating his patented machine that harnesses static gravitational energy to turn a 3 meter diameter wheel that turns a 300KVA electric generator. Just release the brake, and off it goes. Commercial version expected in about a year. (PESWiki; Jan. 4, 2008)
or this:
Karra Green Energy's Gravitational Power Generation - Company from Syria has a patented static gravity motor design that they say could address the world's renewable energy needs, providing 24/7 energy up to 4 megawatts in size. We found out about them through their booth at the WIREC conference in DC last week. (PESWiki; Mar. 14, 2008)
Every time the same scenario - allot of promisings mixed with caginess ... and then? - NOTHING!
I do not make bones about - I dont believe any GravityWheel will ever work without external collaborative - it is just impossible,
but I believe that some another significant discovery will rise up from, like some kind of selfbalancing system ... or like useful gizmo for another machines.
When someone is building gravity machine then at least by my opinion it must to be built as finest mechanical art, as precise as possible, used the best of materials, as low as possible friction,.
the best of bearings, no slack somewhere, no flutterings, no crooked shafts ...  not from plywood and furniture fixtures ...
regards,
khabe
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: AquariuZ on April 04, 2009, 10:27:45 AM
Every time the same scenario - allot of promisings mixed with caginess ... and then? - NOTHING!

My biggest fear is the "sell out", the most common of cop (no pun) outs where a holding buys up a patent for a large sum of money, like has been happening with almost all innovative battery patents to prevent true electric transportation (can't stop it anyway)...

If left a choice I think almost anyone would choose money & life over fame & possible death. Look what happened to Jan Sloot, another dutchman. He created a new code base for compression purposes which was not based on the binary system (but could interface with it) and was able to compress digital media almost infinitly, fitting 16 dvd films on a single 64Kb chipcard with a single repository base of 370Mb, which could be used for any DVD. He died of a cardiac arrest one day before divulging the coding system. Needless to say he would have instantly obsoleted most established IT technology with this new code base, such a shame. Maybe a scam, maybe not.

If it makes you feel better I think Abeling is onto something, he is a real inventor who has worked on commission for many large companies like Shell & Philips, and holds several (non energy related) patents as inventor to his name. I can see no reason whatsoever why he lie about his weight system, unless he found out in a later stage that he or his measurements were wrong and he is now doing damage control.

As stated, this is a cool customer, anyone from the Netherlands will tell you that people from where he is from are not the screaming claims type but rather moderate and introvert.

I believe he believes he has something and for now that is good enough.

If anyone has ties to Henkel (German company?) they might try dropping a line and asking about a partnership with Abeling Beheer B.V. but honestly I do not see the point as they will not be allowed to talk about it under a standard non disclosure agreement or NDA.

I will try and get Abeling online in here but he is probably rather busy right now...
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: AB Hammer on April 04, 2009, 02:37:03 PM

If it makes you feel better I think Abeling is onto something, he is a real inventor who has worked on commission for many large companies like Shell & Philips, and holds several (non energy related) patents as inventor to his name.



AquariuZ

Large OIL companies like Shell & Philips?   "BIG RED FLAG"!!  ::)
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: persume on April 04, 2009, 08:46:02 PM
"As stated, this is a cool customer, anyone from the Netherlands will tell you that people from where he is from are not the screaming claims type but rather moderate and introvert."

Yeah I don't know where your getting that from but people are people no matter where they are from. I've worked for a Dutchman for a few years, he was anything but what you are saying and had no problem pulling some dirty moves in his younger days.

Also I did a patent check using his name and the only thing that comes up is that one patent that is still in standby status. If anyone has found anything different please post.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: AquariuZ on April 04, 2009, 08:48:09 PM

AquariuZ

Large OIL companies like Shell & Philips?   "BIG RED FLAG"!!  ::)

I really find no reason to hold that against him... on the contrary, it validates his expertise.
Again, why fake all this if you are a (appearantly) reputable inventor?

No response from Abeling Beheer as of yet by the way.
Found his phonenumber but not sure if he would appreciate my invasion of privacy.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: AquariuZ on April 04, 2009, 08:55:39 PM
Yeah I don't know where your getting that from but people are people no matter where they are from. I've worked for a Dutchman for a few years, he was anything but what you are saying and had no problem pulling some dirty moves in his younger days.

I am refering to people like Sjack Abeling who are from the province of Friesland, in the north of the Netherlands. Sjack is from Ter Apel, which is to the north-east of Hoogeveen.

As a dutchman I will allow myself to presume to know the typically accepted type casting for people from that area plus I have worked with several of them in the past.

Friezen are cool customers.

The typical dutchman who is the opposite of a "Fries" would probably be from the Zuid- or Noord-Holland provinces or the "Randstad", with some examples being, The Hague, Amsterdam & Rotterdam.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: persume on April 04, 2009, 09:11:53 PM
And I will tell AquariuZ "the Dutchman" that yes, the person I did work for did at one time live in Amsterdam, where he was originally from I don't know, but again, people are people and there is always someone in some location trying to pull a move. Always. So how about some links to those other patents you said he has because I haven't found any.

Here's some questions in the meantime. Why is he the only one who has seen the machine working, ( that's what the video says) and why does he say, we, and he says it several times when he talks about the power output and the fear of trying to contol it? So on the one hand it states only he, but he contradicts that by saying we.
Why hasn't he posted a covered up version just to show it moving?
And asking those companies only if the've heard of him is in no way hurting any supposed NDA they might have signed with him. I'll also point you to the fact that his wording in association with those companies has in no way made him liable for anything should he be a fake. He does not say those companies have a signed agreement with him, he does not say they know of his invention. All he says is they are the companies that will supply such and such methods and parts. He also says the one company is looking into tecniques, which is so vague it could mean anything. Like Steorn he has links that have nothing to do with the tecnology, and has a section where you can link your organization to him if you want. This suspicious because it can make him look more valid with other real companies and organizations seemingly holding his hand.

AquariuZ can you please post up the original website that video came from?
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: broli on April 04, 2009, 09:25:57 PM
Here's some questions in the meantime. Why is he the only one who has seen the machine working, ( that's what the video says) and why does he say, we, and he says it several times when he talks about the power output and the fear of trying to contol it? So on the one hand it states only he, but he contradicts that by saying we.


The translations is correct. This bothered me as well.

Your other questions are a bit useless.Why do you think we should justify his claim. His email is known please send those questions to him and if he responds share it  ;).
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: persume on April 04, 2009, 09:40:19 PM
No question is useless Broli. I want to know, I am asking. Simply questions, should be simple answers, unless they really aren't so simple. The answers or lack of answers will reveil a lot
Do you know where the original source for the video is? And where the other patents that I can't find are?
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: broli on April 04, 2009, 09:42:52 PM
No question is useless Broli. I want to know, I am asking. Simply questions, should be simple answers, unless they really aren't so simple.
Do you know where the original source for the video is?

Here's the source:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NjSFjfWy1h4

You are allowed to know but you are asking these questions to the wrong people. We are not his associates. We know as much as you.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: persume on April 04, 2009, 09:45:58 PM
Actually Broli it is AquariuZ who said he had other patents, I think it is up to AquariuZ to answer.
 8)
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: broli on April 04, 2009, 09:50:09 PM
http://v3.espacenet.com/searchResults?locale=en_EP&ST=quick&IA=ABELING+JACOBUS+JOHANNES&compact=false&DB=EPODOC

If I can do it in less than a minute then you sure can as well? But I guess ignorance will never dissapear  ;D.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: persume on April 04, 2009, 10:10:13 PM
No need for a cheap remark Broli. Thanks though, I did try by using his last name several times and nothing came up.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: persume on April 04, 2009, 10:17:20 PM
Okay then can you show me how it was discovered that he did commercial work for Shell and Phillips?
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: AquariuZ on April 04, 2009, 10:37:57 PM
Okay then can you show me how it was discovered that he did commercial work for Shell and Phillips?

You know what you are probably right. I just tried finding the complete list and could not find it, I made a mistake while looking for JACOBUS and got hits for SHELL INT and PHILIPS ELECTR. an oversight, sorry.

Here now the complete list of worldwide patents where JOHANNES JACOBUS ABELING is the inventor:

Quote
1                Energie-omzettingsinrichting.         in mijn octrooilijst   
        Uitvinder:  ABELING JACOBUS JOHANNES [NL]      Aanvrager:  ABELING BEHEER B V [NL]
        EC:      IPC:   F03G7/10; F03G7/00
        
Informatie over publicatie:      NL1034252  (C1)  —  2009-02-16
2       Light guide plate for e.g. LCD screen, has two patterns of V shaped light reflecting grooves in its front side    in mijn octrooilijst 
        Uitvinder:  ABELING JACOBUS JOHANNES [NL]      Aanvrager:  PPWS B V [NL]
        EC:   G02B6/00L    IPC:   G02B6/00; G02B6/00; (IPC1-7): G02B6/00
        
Informatie over publicatie:      NL1027958  (C2)  —  2006-07-06
3       LIGHT BOX AND METHOD FOR PLACING A LIGHT BOX IN A PORTABLE POSITION    in mijn octrooilijst 
        Uitvinder:  ABELING JACOBUS JOHANNES [NL]      Aanvrager:  VBF GROEP B V [NL] ; ABELING JACOBUS JOHANNES [NL]
        EC:   G09F13/04    IPC:   G09F13/04; G09F13/04; (IPC1-7): G09F13/04
        
Informatie over publicatie:      WO0209078  (A1)  —  2002-01-31
4       Arrangement for positioning a picture to be shown against a background    in mijn octrooilijst 
        Uitvinder:  ABELING JACOBUS JOHANNES [NL]      Aanvrager:  JACOBUS JOHANNES ABELING [NL]
        EC:   G09F21/04    IPC:   G09F21/04; G09F21/00; (IPC1-7): G09F21/04
        
Informatie over publicatie:      NL9400707  (A)  —  1995-12-01

Four patents, including the Energy Conversion Method.

I remind you that that patent has a C1 classification which is a third stage status meaning that there were two previous stages of which the initially filed patent was in 2007. Hope this now settles it. This does not diminish any of the claims made nor negates them.

I understand the frustration but as Broli said you know as much as I do with regards to this project. The fact he used "we" does not really mean anything, come on now guys, he probably worked on this with an assistant or his family for all we know. The generalization of "noone has seen it but him" should not exclude the & his own.

Do not shoot the messenger, please be patient, I am as impatient as anyone else for him to put up.

I am glad I posted the initial thread because clearly noone has even heard of this.

The original source of the Youtube video is TV Noord, a local news media channel based near Amsterdam.

Waiting for response, or someone in here with more knowledge about the project or an affiliation to one of the claimed partners on the site mooieenergie.nl for verification.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: AquariuZ on April 04, 2009, 11:06:40 PM
For what it is worth, I have just sent the following message to Henkel Benelux:

Quote
Goodday,

Mr. Sjack Abeling of Abeling Beheer B.V. has referred on his website mooieenergie.nl to Henkel as partner in relation to the "Weight Power Plant" project of Abeling Beheer in the Netherlands.

On this website the following claim is made:

"The construction of the first "Weight Power Plant" is expected to commence in May 2009.
The location of the first Weight Power Plant is probably going to be the province of Groningen

Partners:

    * Abeling Beheer B.V. partners with Henkel B.V. http://www.henkel.com/. The system is mainly constructed out of glass. In colloboration with Henkel the Glas AanHecht company will provide innovative glueing methods for the building of the power plant."

Can you please confirm this?

I am trying to determine if this project is some kind of joke or if it is a serious project.

Thank you in advance for your attention.

With kind regards,

(signed)

I will post any replies here.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: AB Hammer on April 05, 2009, 03:40:52 AM
You know what you are probably right. I just tried finding the complete list and could not find it, I made a mistake while looking for JACOBUS and got hits for SHELL INT and PHILIPS ELECTR. an oversight, sorry.

Here now the complete list of worldwide patents where JOHANNES JACOBUS ABELING is the inventor:

Four patents, including the Energy Conversion Method.

I remind you that that patent has a C1 classification which is a third stage status meaning that there were two previous stages of which the initially filed patent was in 2007. Hope this now settles it. This does not diminish any of the claims made nor negates them.

I understand the frustration but as Broli said you know as much as I do with regards to this project. The fact he used "we" does not really mean anything, come on now guys, he probably worked on this with an assistant or his family for all we know. The generalization of "noone has seen it but him" should not exclude the & his own.

Do not shoot the messenger, please be patient, I am as impatient as anyone else for him to put up.

I am glad I posted the initial thread because clearly noone has even heard of this.

The original source of the Youtube video is TV Noord, a local news media channel based near Amsterdam.

Waiting for response, or someone in here with more knowledge about the project or an affiliation to one of the claimed partners on the site mooieenergie.nl for verification.

AquariuZ

 So this seems like he is trying to get patent without a competed design? This would be another red flag to me. Or there should be some design to look at if completed, I would think.

Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: ramset on April 05, 2009, 04:05:01 AM
AB
Your first red flag was hauled down above,, Shell etc...B S

Your second seems to not follow the evolution and additions to patents ,ie  a work improved or expounded upon by the inventor

Whom as I understand will be sharing this info publicly

Chet
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: hansvonlieven on April 05, 2009, 10:48:26 AM
As a New Yorker would say: The Dutchman is pulling his putz.

Hans von Lieven
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: AB Hammer on April 05, 2009, 01:32:01 PM
AB
Your first red flag was hauled down above,, Shell etc...B S

Your second seems to not follow the evolution and additions to patents ,ie  a work improved or expounded upon by the inventor

Whom as I understand will be sharing this info publicly

Chet

Chet

Well that's fine with me. But when things are uncertain when people say things without red flagging People fall into things like hype and fraud. For instance there have been thousands of frauds and no runners. This whole string looks to be a setup for possible fraud. Just to much hype and no evidence. Not even a covered wheel either started on its own or a slight push with an acceleration. Without this there is nothing to even consider if a working device even exist. I await the public and proper evidence. 

PS in the US shell is a gas co.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: dutchy1966 on April 05, 2009, 03:06:57 PM
Hi everyone,

On Abelings website i found a short description of the principle he uses. Seems like is harnessing the centrifugal force that the weights are creating. I've translated the part below.
I hope it helps.

From his website:

V: Waar komt de extra energie vandaan in uw systeem?
Q: Where does the excess energy in your system come from?

A: De gewichten worden per twee toegepast, een vallend/duw gewicht en een gewicht dat omhoog gebracht moet worden. Door de vinding van het duo hefkrachtsysteem ondervindt het vallend/duw gewicht nagenoeg geen hinder van het gewicht dat omhooggebracht moet worden.
Linksboven in het systeem ontstaat een versnelling van het gewicht (zoals bij kogel stoten). Het gewicht verplaatst zich hier sneller dan het systeem waarin het zich bevind, waardoor het systeem op deze plaats (rechtsboven in het systeem) een duw krijgt, want het systeem vangt het gewicht weer op. De route van de gebruikte gewichten in het systeem wordt vooraf bepaald. Daardoor bevinden de gewichten zich altijd in een vaste positie ten opzichte van elkaar, zodat het gewicht dat omhoog gebracht moet worden minder weerstand uitoefend op het vallend/duw gewicht. Dit zorgt ervoor dat het systeem vanuit iedere stand/positie begint te draaien. De extra kracht wordt linksonder in het systeem gerealiseerd en bovenin het systeem overgebracht op het systeem zelf waardoor versnelling (extra energie) ontstaat. Wanneer het systeem het gewicht niet zou opvangen dan zou het gewicht met hoge snelheid wegvliegen.

A: The weights are applied in pairs, one falling/pushing weight and a weight that has to be lifted. Because of the invention of the "twin liftingsystem" the falling/pushing weight is hardly hindered by the weight that has to be lifted.
In the upperleft of the system an acceleration of the weight is created (like with shot put). At this popint the weight moves faster than the system it is part of. The system gets pushed in this area (upper right area) because it has to 'catch' the accelerated weight. The route the weights take in the system is predetermined, that way the weights are always aligned with eachother in a way that the weight that has to be raised, puts less resistance onto the falling/pushing weight. This accomplishes that the system starts rotating from any position. The excess power is realised in the bottom left end of the system and in the top system transferred to the system itself, by which acceleration (= excess energy) is created.
If the system wouldn't 'catch' the weight it would leave the system at high velocity.     


Regards,

Dutchy  (and yes... I'm Dutch. )
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: broli on April 05, 2009, 05:24:15 PM
Dutchy your effort is appreciated but his website is already translated to English  ;D.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: AquariuZ on April 05, 2009, 06:11:03 PM
Dutchy your effort is appreciated but his website is already translated to English  ;D.

Great translation though, so thanks  ;)
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Mark69 on April 05, 2009, 06:15:32 PM
That sounds like it is possible then.  If you think of an aircraft wing, it is also somewhat "D" shaped, this allows the air on the top of the wing to have to speed up to flow as fast as the air on the bottom (since the distance is greater).  The faster flow causes the pressure to be reduced on top allowing the air on the bottom to push up on the wing to generate lift.  I am not saying his weights are generating lift, up if using the same principle with the speed sounds feasible.

Mark
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: AquariuZ on April 05, 2009, 06:17:01 PM
Chet

This whole string looks to be a setup for possible fraud. Just to much hype and no evidence. Not even a covered wheel either started on its own or a slight push with an acceleration. Without this there is nothing to even consider if a working device even exist. I await the public and proper evidence. 

AB, I would not call it hype at all, it is just a website. There are no link farms, no media coverage, nothing. I found it by accident Googling Abeling. Not much Hype, he just gives a current status report.

If he has not contacted me by tomorrow night I will call his company on Tuesday, because I feel like a child who was promised some candy and is then told "maybe tomorrow".

I want my candy.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: AquariuZ on April 05, 2009, 06:31:18 PM
Just another interesting thing to note: The water management application.

Quote
The invention of the Weight Power Plant (In Dutch: "Gewicht Energie Centrale") provides us with a system for the generation of ultra durable energy. As physicists claim there is no such thing as "free energy", we have to assume that the power/energy generated by the system is provided by the earth's gravity. The system can be used to generate electricity by driving a generator, but it can also be used, for example, to transport huge amounts of water to elevated terrain.

Abeling Beheer has been given permission by the Dutch government to construct Weight Power Plants in The Netherlands, and it has been given permission to connect these plants to the current infrastructure. The system does not cause any damage to the environment so there is a major chance that Abeling Beheer will become the largest producer of energy both inside and outside Europe. Abeling Beheer will use the name "Mooie Energie" (Beautiful Energy). We hope to establish a solid base for sustained growth in 2009!

Water management comes second. Sjack Abeling considers:

    * Fresh water management, e.g. for producing fresh water out of sea water (desalination).
    * Seawater management, e.g. for moving huge amounts of water.
    * Groundwater management, e.g. to manage the water table.

So sure this is kinda hypie when he claims that there is a major chance that he becomes the largest producer of energy in Europe. But if the Fall & Lift works like he describes he will be unless he is stopped.

 ENERGY  from  GRAVITY 

Let it be true
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: ramset on April 05, 2009, 06:35:07 PM
Aqua
he makes reference to having Gov't approval [seems very hard to get]
Perhaps like in the USA [gov't approval]this is public knowledge,  an EPA or DEC ETC... equivalent in the Netherlands
More likely to make some phone calls for an article /research  you are writing [may be Jib guy or Esaroucho [writers of articles for the FE movement[ESA is in Finland]should get involved
 
Chet
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: AquariuZ on April 05, 2009, 06:49:27 PM
Aqua
he makes reference to having Gov't approval [seems very hard to get]
Perhaps like in the USA [gov't approval]this is public knowledge,  an EPA or DEC ETC... equivalent in the Netherlands
More likely to make some phone calls for an article /research  you are writing [may be Jib guy or Esaroucho [writers of articles for the FE movement[ESA is in Finland]should get involved
 
Chet


Yeah, good point. In this case he would need approval from VROM (The Ministry of Housing, Spatial Planning and the Environment (Ministerie van Volkshuisvesting, Ruimtelijke Ordening en Milieu).

On it, will ask the same question as Henkel.

Edit: Done. I have launched an official request to VROM. If they deny I can launch a Wob which is comparable to a FOIA request.

We will know in a few days either way.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: ramset on April 05, 2009, 07:32:05 PM
Aqua
very nice ,its hard to work with Gov't and perpetrate a fraud [unless you an inside guy/crook}
you could also querie the local building dept and get in touch with the inspecter /engineering firm overseeing the project

Chet
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Grimer on April 05, 2009, 08:44:42 PM
I think this is entirely possible. Mass (inertia) is a property of matter, not matter itself. If you speed up a body its mass (inertia) increases, not the number of atoms, the amount of matter in the body.

Also consider rotation. If you fill a black box with running gyros then by fixing them or allowing them to be free within gimbals you can make enormous changes to the rotational inertia - and if you didn't know what was inside the box and thought of it as a inert lump you would think that its "mass" had increased.

When I was in British Government Scientific Civil Service I wrote a paper which pointed this out.Needless to say it got me into a heap of trouble ::) - as you would expect. My appeal against being suppressed went all the way up to the head of the Home Civil Service, Sir Robin Butler, (now Lord Butler) and I'm probably breaking the Official Secrets Act by telling you this - but I'm past caring.  8)
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: ramset on April 05, 2009, 08:50:00 PM
GRIMER

Seems you are not alone in your feeling

Chet

Noord TV Report on Abeling device

http://mooieenergie.nl    
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Grimer on April 05, 2009, 09:12:00 PM
GRIMER

Seems you are not alone in your feeling

Chet

Noord TV Report on Abeling device

http://mooieenergie.nl    

Thanks for the link, very interesting - and as he says, it could have been discovered hundreds of years ago - but wasn't. Bit like my discovery of the equations of state for water vapour.

http://www.lsbu.ac.uk/water/strange.html (http://www.lsbu.ac.uk/water/strange.html)

They could have been discovered early in the last century. All the data was freely available in the International Critical Tables but no one looked at it in the right way cos they where hogtied by erroneous theories.

Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Grimer on April 05, 2009, 09:34:07 PM
Below are a couple of relevant paragraphs I've copied from
Iterative Hierarchical Mechanics N103/87

==============================================================
These equations may be interpreted as folows. Increase in the speed of an inertial body relative to its environment  (characterized by an environmental speed) is accompanied by a tranformation of the internal velocity, v, into an external velocity u. In other words the external kinestic energy is derived from the internal kinetic energy, or in simpler hierarchical terms, exteranl motion is derived from internal motion. Clearly this is a more mundane and intelligible explanation with the change in inertia with increasing speed than that normally given, an explanation moreover that is fully in accordance with the behaviour of a substance at a higher scale as exempified by the kinetic theory of heat.

In effect inertial substances are seen as active, not passive; as containing servo-mechanisms, force amplifiers. The energy put into accelerating a body is merely a control energy which is proportional to, but at non-relativistic speeds, a minute fraction of the total energy needed to overcome inertial effects. As the speed of the body reaches speeds comparable with the characteristic field speed the servo-mechanisms become less and less effective until at the speed of light all the energy has to be applied from external sources.
==============================================================

Cheeky? No 'alf. If true it tears the guts out of modern physics.

But a gravity mill will do that on its own.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: infringer on April 06, 2009, 03:32:43 AM
all that I can say is if you take a look at this picture

http://mooieenergie.nl/images/stories/ab3.png

And you remember the sword of god and what we were trying to accomplish with the rods ...

This is the same exact pattern that Archer Quinn was trying to show us so if you believe this deal or if it comes true then Archer Quinn is not such a quack after all cause this was the design in which Dusty, redriderno22, and a few others were working on....

Done with just weights well... There you have it  it should work with the rods then as well or I would think a slight modification would provide the same results.

I'll stick to solar and wind power for now but keep pluggin away for those not interested in tried and true technology.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: AquariuZ on April 06, 2009, 05:31:16 AM
Done with just weights well... There you have it  it should work with the rods then as well or I would think a slight modification would provide the same results.

Not just weights, the pairs are part of an encapsulating system.

From the FAQ:

"The weights are applied two by two: one weight is pushing/falling, the other one has to be lifted. Due to the invention of the dual lifting system , the falling/pushing weight will hardly be hindered by the weight that has to be lifted.

In the top left of the system the weight is accelerated (like with shot put). The weight is moving faster than the system, and as the system catches the weight it is propelled forward. The path of the weights in the system is determined up front so the weights are always in a fixed position relative to each other and that will reduce the drag of the lifted weight on the falling/pushing weight. The system will start rotating from any position. Extra force is generated in the lower left of the system and on top it is transferred to the system itself, generating the extra energy. If the system would fail to catch the propelled weight, the weight would be ejected from the system with force."
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Grimer on April 06, 2009, 07:06:09 AM
I think he was just being "conservative" and yes of course in a monetary based economy everyone will want to make a "buck".

But I tell you what, he (from what I understand) is about to disclose his theory -hopefully in full- so nothing stands in our way to replicate the wheel for ourselves and benefit from it. There will be tons and tons of green waiting so he will not lose anything by disclosing.

The major theorem disclosure is overdue for about five days now, reminds me a bit of Steorn... But in fairness I value him higher than Sean McCarthy at this moment in time. I cannot explain it, but there is something about him that makes me (want to) believe...

Adding: apparently the core system will be made out of glass. How interesting...

I had to search all the way back through the thread to find this reference to glass.

Why glass?

Well, if you are polarizing inertia (=mass) with big flywheels then you have to make them out of something strong. Glass fibre is strong and that would explain the presence of Henkel on this project cos they make the adhesives that would be the other component of the flywheel.

Also, glass is an insulator so you don't have electrons sloshing about wasting energy

Some Australian did some work on rotating metal spheres falling under gravity but the results he got were barely significant. I shall have to look him up.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: hansvonlieven on April 06, 2009, 07:32:56 AM
Henkel is a German company primarily a manufacturer of washing powder (Persil) and detergents with glue and fibreglass manufacturing companies bought in over the years. Sales €13.07 billion (2007)

I seriously doubt their involvement with a backyard enterprise of this sort and the ramshackle prototypes shown in the video.

The guy's approach is clearly visible, it is an old approach towards a Bessler wheel that has never worked.

Just another scam I'm afraid, I will be most surprised if it is more than that.

Hans von Lieven
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: hansvonlieven on April 06, 2009, 07:36:23 AM

Some Australian did some work on rotating metal spheres falling under gravity but the results he got were barely significant. I shall have to look him up.

@ Grimer,

I think you are referring to Bruce de Palma, an American, who did work in that area in New Zealand.

Hans von Lieven
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Grimer on April 06, 2009, 07:44:05 AM
@ Grimer,

I think you are referring to Bruce de Palma, an American, who did work in that area in New Zealand.

Hans von Lieven

http://www.angelfire.com/on/GEAR2000/DePalma1.html

Well done. You beat me to it. ;D

Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Grimer on April 06, 2009, 07:50:27 AM
Henkel is a German company primarily a manufacturer of washing powder (Persil) and detergents with glue and fibreglass manufacturing companies bought in over the years. Sales €13.07 billion (2007)

I seriously doubt their involvement with a backyard enterprise of this sort and the ramshackle prototypes shown in the video.

The guy's approach is clearly visible, it is an old approach towards a Bessler wheel that has never worked.

Just another scam I'm afraid, I will be most surprised if it is more than that.

Hans von Lieven

I agree that the video is not encouraging - but let's not be snobbish. Mylow wasn't very encouraging either but he had obviously done his homework on HJ.

As far as Henkel being involved I thought I read somewhere in this thread or the links that they were.
I'll have to see if I can find it.

http://mooieenergie.nl/index.php/en/home/1-bedrijfsinformatie/5-glasaanhecht

Found it. :)
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: hansvonlieven on April 06, 2009, 11:15:27 AM
That's what he is claiming. I think that is crap too.

Hans von Lieven
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: spinner on April 06, 2009, 01:18:40 PM
"Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant"
Hmm, it sounds like "A Sky Captain and the World of Tomorrow"... Nice!

It would be wonderful if it's true. If we forget about all the theoretical problems which make such a discovery very ... questionable.
Ah, never mind. It's just a conventional stuff mantra, not very usefull on the sites like this... Who really cares...
...
As always, the real proof is still missing, no? Something which undoubtedly works, or at least shows a real possibility...

It's good to see that inventor speaks very optimistically about his invention. How all the energy problems will be solved, how his company  will be soon the biggest provider of energy, how the prices for electricity will drop for at least 50%(lol), etc, ...

I'd say - good luck! We all hope that this will indeed be a successful project!
.....

But (as usually), there are some things which makes me "a little suspicious" wrt this claim...

For instance,
Quote
Abeling Beheer has been given permission by the Dutch government to construct Weight Power Plants in The Netherlands,
and it has been given permission to connect these plants to the current infrastructure.
The system does not cause any damage to the environment so there is a major chance that Abeling Beheer will become
the largest producer of energy both inside and outside Europe. Abeling Beheer will use the name "Mooie Energie" (Beautiful Energy).
We hope to establish a solid base for sustained growth in 2009!

How is it that the Dutch government already issued a permission for building/implementing the "Weight Power Plants" ??? Supposedly, inventor is the only one who knows how his invention works. This is a revolutionary concept, with unknown consequences...
What if it somehow affects the Earth gravity/spinning? What if it drains some other, unknown energy source? What if it's making a trans-dimensional breach, a gate, wormhole.. A tiny black hole (gravity condensation) on the other site of our planet? (Close to where Hans lives?)  ;D

So, how is the government so sure, that this gravitational plant isn't going to cause some weird events? Giving a permission without any serious (scientific, official) tests being made? That would be something unimaginable....
...

According to the inventor, there are "enormous forces" involved in the process... So, what kind of glass (weights, structure?) is suitable for such tasks?
Any gravity wheel inventor normally uses strong - dense and cheap materials... As high as possible specific weight together with as low as possible price...
It's up to you whether you'll use rocks,.. canisters filled with water,sand.. concrete,.. glass,.. brass,.. iron,.. lead,.. or even gold, platinum (depends how big investments you got),.. osmium, tungsten...

I'd use glass (and other transparent plastic materials) for building a proof of a concept (demo) device..
Small power, no hiding,... As transparent as possible... Either way, it would never satisfy the skeptics... Hehe...
....

Ah yes, "one of the 10 devices will power 17,000 homes" (i hope i got this right?)....  This means 17000? Uau...
(btw, comma is a decimal sign in Europe, does that means "only" 17 homes)? Still impressed!
With 1kW/home (a very optimistic estimate) average power, it means +20 MW power plant.
( it's actually more like a 50MW power plant considering the normal/average el. consumption data...).
Yep, no more big hydro, no pollution caused by fossil fuel thermal plants, and no more fission nuclear, no radioactive/toxic waste problems....

Yep, another candidate for a close encounter with "MiB".. (we all know that MiB's and similar pest somehow always find out and stop any FE achievement )...
 
Who would really need a cheap, clean, abundant,...  energy source? Really...
...

Oh, dear... If this is true, the Human race has at least one of a big problems solved...


I'll keep my eye on this invention... Who knows? Maybe...

Cheers!
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: AquariuZ on April 06, 2009, 02:40:12 PM
I couldn´t stand it anymore and called his home and got his father on the phone.

I apologized for the intrusion and asked if I could speak to Sjack. "No he is working. Back at around six."

Please do not start callng him en masse I will try once more in about 4 hours and post reaction.

Thanks for your opinions, I do not share the idea that this is somehow an elaborate hoax. There is simply no reason for that. A hoax would only destroy the inventors credibility and ability to continue working in this field.

Maybe one of the reasons he has not proactively sought media attention is exactly what we are seeing here: ridicule. Was I wrong in posting about him? Time will tell. No answers from Henkel or the Ministry of VROM as of yet. I have confirmation of my inquiry from VROM and a ref#. Claim is repsonse within two working days so Tuesday afternoon deadline.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Alexioco on April 06, 2009, 02:50:26 PM
I couldn´t stand it anymore and called his home and got his father on the phone.

I apologized for the intrusion and asked if I could speak to Sjack. "No he is working. Back at around six."

Please do not start callng him en masse I will try once more in about 4 hours and post reaction.

Thanks for your opinions, I do not share the idea that this is somehow an elaborate hoax. There is simply no reason for that. A hoax would only destroy the inventors credibility and ability to continue working in this field.

Maybe one of the reasons he has not proactively sought media attention is exactly what we are seeing here: ridicule. Was I wrong in posting about him? Time will tell. No answers from Henkel or the Ministry of VROM as of yet. I have confirmation of my inquiry from VROM and a ref#. Claim is repsonse within two working days so Tuesday afternoon deadline.

Hey thats interesting, wander what he will say to you? If his wheel really work, is it the same as Besslers? Did Bessler mention anything about a fall and lift mechanism?

Alex
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: ramset on April 06, 2009, 03:09:25 PM
The video is what ,one year old?
he has been busy!!

Chet
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: AquariuZ on April 06, 2009, 03:12:09 PM
Hey thats interesting, wander what he will say to you? If his wheel really work, is it the same as Besslers? Did Bessler mention anything about a fall and lift mechanism?

Alex

Alex, I really do not know. If I knew how Bessler did it I would be in my workshop right now...

lol sorry i'm getting carried away, cant wait to see what he says when u next ring

Alex
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: AquariuZ on April 06, 2009, 03:15:45 PM
The video is what ,one year old?
he has been busy!!

Chet

He sure has been quietly planning & gathering support, which makes it all the more interesting. (As opposed to the hello world approach).
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: AquariuZ on April 06, 2009, 03:46:38 PM
all that I can say is if you take a look at this picture

http://mooieenergie.nl/images/stories/ab3.png

Newsflash: the white circle represents the axle.

Title: Update: CONTACT WITH SJACK ABELING
Post by: AquariuZ on April 06, 2009, 07:42:45 PM
Just gotten off the (mobile) phone with Sjack Abeling, he was calm, very polite and informative.

Where to start:

IT IS REAL

He has a partnership with Henkel for the glue techniques and Erik (Engine/Turbines/Generators) has the commission for the generators.

Money is not the real issue, he has core investors.The Patent(s) are handled by a commercial company, and he is confident they will be accepted. The word Perpetuum Mobile or infinity is not used and should not be desired.A basic agreement is made with the Ministry of Economic affairs.

It is all exactly as stated. The core of the system is the Dual Leverage System as described. He says it works with an incredible acceleration from stand still and the main engineering issue is the correct way to keep the system from destroying itself, in other words containment via some form of advanced braking system. He said that is what is he spending most of his time on right now.

He was sorry he could not divulge any information yet, but the investors will not allow him to present anything as a stipulation of their providing Venture Capital. He said however that the moment he gets the ok he will start a tour across schools for starters. He mentioned that he would update the site with what he could, but in the short term (weeks) no full disclosure is to be expected.

In closing I asked if he would want to say anything to the members on this forum:

"Volhouden, het is zeker mogelijk" which means:

"Persevere, it is indeed possible".

I do not know if I should laugh or cry because on the one hand after having spoken to him I am convinced he is for real and on the other hand I really fear his invention will be bought & suppressed by a some corporation...

It is too early to tell.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: dutchy1966 on April 06, 2009, 08:00:11 PM
Hi Aquariuz,

Thanks for ringing him! I have one question: Did he somehow release any indication about the source he's tapping. My personal guess is the centrifugal force, which accelerates the weight outward. (he states that as well!)
It might be that the weights accelerates outward through a curved pathway and then later on drops down the second half of the pathway. But how does he get it to return to the starting position?

regards Dutchy. 
Title: Re: Update: CONTACT WITH SJACK ABELING
Post by: Alexioco on April 06, 2009, 08:02:01 PM
Just gotten off the (mobile) phone with Sjack Abeling, he was calm, very polite and informative.

Where to start:

IT IS REAL

He has a partnership with Henkel for the glue techniques and Erik (Engine/Turbines/Generators) has the commission for the generators.

Money is not the real issue, he has core investors.The Patent(s) are handled by a commercial company, and he is confident they will be accepted. The word Perpetuum Mobile or infinity is not used and should not be desired.A basic agreement is made with the Ministry of Economic affairs.

It is all exactly as stated. The core of the system is the Dual Leverage System as described. He says it works with an incredible acceleration from stand still and the main engineering issue is the correct way to keep the system from destroying itself, in other words containment via some form of advanced braking system. He said that is what is he spending most of his time on right now.

He was sorry he could not divulge any information yet, but the investors will not allow him to present anything as a stipulation of their providing Venture Capital. He said however that the moment he gets the ok he will start a tour across schools for starters. He mentioned that he would update the site with what he could, but in the short term (weeks) no full disclosure is to be expected.

In closing I asked if he would want to say anything to the members on this forum:

"Volhouden, het is zeker mogelijk" which means:

"Persevere, it is indeed possible".

I do not know if I should laugh or cry because on the one hand after having spoken to him I am convinced he is for real and on the other hand I really fear his invention will be bought & suppressed by a some corporation...

It is too early to tell.

wow, sounds promising, it would be interesting to find a way to let it keep spinning, getting faster and faster without it destroying itself. I'm really looking forward to this, I cant help but dream of letting the wheel spin, go to bed, get up the next morning to still see it spinning :D

Alex

Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: AquariuZ on April 06, 2009, 08:09:08 PM
Hi Aquariuz,

Thanks for ringing him! I have one question: Did he somehow release any indication about the source he's tapping. My personal guess is the centrifugal force, which accelerates the weight outward. (he states that as well!)
It might be that the weights accelerates outward through a curved pathway and then later on drops down the second half of the pathway. But how does he get it to return to the starting position?

regards Dutchy. 

That is exactly it... Cannot disclose sigh...  :-X :-X :-X

Eventually someone is bound to come up with something workable using the acceleration path as a starting point.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: dutchy1966 on April 06, 2009, 08:17:47 PM
That is exactly it... Cannot disclose sigh...  :-X :-X :-X

Eventually someone is bound to come up with something workable using the acceleration path as a starting point.

Hi again,

Just had a look again at the video on youtube and noticed something strange. At first when he walks into the shed you can see the wooden wheel in the background. You can see alot of slots (like spokes) going from the center outward. So I thought the weights have to take that path......  BUT ...later on in the same video, when they show the wheel being moved by hand, I can see completely different slots in the wheel.....????

Have a look... Are these two different wheels????

Second thing I noticed is that there are basically two discs making up this system..... Could it be that the paired weights are not in the same disc but somehow transfer the gained energy from one disc to the adjacent one?
Like...two disc, two weights paired, one in each wheel.....

Regards,

Dutchy
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: AquariuZ on April 06, 2009, 08:21:00 PM
Hi again,

Just had a look again at the video on youtube and noticed something strange. At first when he walks into the shed you can see the wooden wheel in the background. You can see alot of slots (like spokes) going from the center outward. So I thought the weights have to take that path......  BUT ...later on in the same video, when they show the wheel being moved by hand, I can see completely different slots in the wheel.....????

Have a look... Are these two different wheels????

Second thing I noticed is that there are basically two discs making up this system..... Could it be that the paired weights are not in the same disc but somehow transfer the gained energy from one disc to the adjacent one?
Like...two disc, two weights paired, one in each wheel.....

Regards,

Dutchy

Look again, there are THREE discs with different slots carved in, I have counted 16 slots (look at the numbers). Somehow he manages to let weights freefall into the slots and ride up on the other side through momentum.

I would love to start building, but I have no idea what to do...
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: dutchy1966 on April 06, 2009, 08:33:49 PM
Look again, there are THREE discs with different slots carved in, I have counted 16 slots (look at the numbers). Somehow he manages to let weights freefall into the slots and ride up on the other side through momentum.

I would love to start building, but I have no idea what to do...

Sorry, I cant seem to make out three discs.... I see two discs in the beginning of the video (having likely 16 slots indeed). Later on there definately is another setup and I can see lots of cup size holes aswell.....

Can you tell me at how many minues:seconds into the video you clearly see three discs?

Title: Re: Update: CONTACT WITH SJACK ABELING
Post by: spinner on April 06, 2009, 08:46:53 PM
Just gotten off the (mobile) phone with Sjack Abeling, he was calm, very polite and informative.

Where to start:

IT IS REAL
Excellent! Let's all hope it really is...

Quote
He has a partnership with Henkel for the glue techniques and Erik (Engine/Turbines/Generators) has the commission for the generators.
OK, good for the generator firm... I can't understand the Henkel's glue techniques involvement...

Quote
Money is not the real issue, he has core investors.The Patent(s) are handled by a commercial company, and he is confident they will be accepted. The word Perpetuum Mobile or infinity is not used and should not be desired.A basic agreement is made with the Ministry of Economic affairs.
Sounds reasonable & possible...

Quote
It is all exactly as stated. The core of the system is the Dual Leverage System as described. He says it works with an incredible acceleration from stand still and the main engineering issue is the correct way to keep the system from destroying itself, in other words containment via some form of advanced braking system. He said that is what is he spending most of his time on right now.
OK, the "way to keep the system from destroying itself" - this sentence is a total nonsense.
If we're really talking about a gravity(+inertia+CF+other known rotational dynamics forces) wheel , It will absolutely be self-limiting in performance (rpm, torque, all the forces..).
No self destruction... Unless if the thing is made out of a fragile materials, like glass (why would anyone wants to build it from glass???)....

Quote
He was sorry he could not divulge any information yet, but the investors will not allow him to present anything as a stipulation of their providing Venture Capital. He said however that the moment he gets the ok he will start a tour across schools for starters. He mentioned that he would update the site with what he could, but in the short term (weeks) no full disclosure is to be expected.
Sounds fair... If he really has at least a working prototype...

Quote
....

I do not know if I should laugh or cry because on the one hand after having spoken to him I am convinced he is for real and on the other hand I really fear his invention will be bought & suppressed by a some corporation...

It is too early to tell.

Yes, we'll see.
BTW, thanks for your research, I hope you'll find more about this invention!
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: X00013 on April 06, 2009, 09:18:50 PM
Hi all, its alot easier for myself to make a quick vid on some tid bits from the news clip rather than type it all out, http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MiDGQJ0ASgw
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: dutchy1966 on April 06, 2009, 09:26:30 PM
Hi X00013,

Have you got an opinion about the round holes in the discs later on in the video? I dont see them in the bit you pointed out....

regards,

Dutchy
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: AquariuZ on April 06, 2009, 10:17:35 PM
Dutch you are right it is two not three, it was a cover from the side.

I have just send a lenghty SMS to Sjack expressing my concerns and basically stating that I fear that once the concept is out of his hands it will never see the light of day in a commercial environment. Sure, he will be a rich man, but this will not benefit mankind or the environment. However that, if he chooses to go public he will certainly gain more income and fame -not to mention even the possibility of a Nobel Prize- than he ever would in just selling the invention. (The standard Corporate tactic). Furthermore if he publishes under his own name he will get 100% credit, replications can be made worldwide and full implementation of the system will follow shortly after. Just a thought.

Lastly I reminded him of the option of securing all plans with a notary if an unexpected calamity would occur so that at least the plans are secure. I urged him as well to come and have a look here on overunity.com and hopefully provide some updates.

I will not contact or "harass" him again until he contacts me, I gave him my phone number.
Title: Re: Update: CONTACT WITH SJACK ABELING
Post by: AquariuZ on April 06, 2009, 10:28:13 PM
OK, the "way to keep the system from destroying itself" - this sentence is a total nonsense.
If we're really talking about a gravity(+inertia+CF+other known rotational dynamics forces) wheel , It will absolutely be self-limiting in performance (rpm, torque, all the forces..).

In theory it would be limited by the (freefall) speed of the weight i.e. until the speed of the wheel matches the freefall speed of the weights. A large wheel spinning at those speeds? what are we talking here, 30000 Rpm? What do you think will happen to such a wheel? Can it be contained?

This is the issue why there needs to be a failsafe throttling system.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: lostcauses10x on April 06, 2009, 10:49:54 PM
So again with no proof we are supposedly to accept. Right....
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: AquariuZ on April 06, 2009, 11:00:03 PM
So again with no proof we are supposedly to accept. Right....

I feel your pain. All I ask you to accept is that he exists, that he has found something, and that he is on the level. It is frustrating nevertheless. At least he is Googleable now.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: X00013 on April 06, 2009, 11:09:52 PM
@ Dutchy, yea, looks like five holes, maybe to balance?, just a guess. I would love to get my hands on some more video or pictures.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: AquariuZ on April 06, 2009, 11:28:08 PM
@ Dutchy, yea, looks like five holes, maybe to balance?, just a guess. I would love to get my hands on some more video or pictures.

Maybe insertion points for the weights?
Title: Re: Update: CONTACT WITH SJACK ABELING
Post by: spinner on April 06, 2009, 11:32:08 PM

In theory it would be limited by the (freefall) speed of the weight i.e. until the speed of the wheel matches the freefall speed of the weights.
Hmm, if speed of the wheel equalizes with the free-falling weight,  then where the driving torque comes from? What drives the wheel to that speed?
And how big that wheel should really be?

Quote
A large wheel spinning at those speeds? what are we talking here, 30000 Rpm? What do you think will happen to such a wheel? Can it be contained?

This is the issue why there needs to be a failsafe throttling system.

A LARGE (heavy) unbalanced wheel spinning at 30kRPM? No, thanks... (not made of glass, i hope?)

Well, that would certainly not be a gravity driven wheel... ;)


Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on April 07, 2009, 12:35:49 AM
@AquariuZ,

Quote
All I ask you to accept is ... that he has found something, and that he is on the level.

On what grounds are you asking us to accept that he has found something let alone that whatever you think he has found is remotely noteworthy?
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: ramset on April 07, 2009, 02:18:09 AM
Aquariuz
Thank you for bringing this to our attention

Big names involved
 
Dutch gov't involved

Thanks for researching and sharing

looking forward to more news on this

Chet


Title: CONCEPT GUESS NUMBER ONE
Post by: AquariuZ on April 07, 2009, 02:48:33 AM
I might as well start guessing.

Racking my brain reading the clues over the past few days this is my initial try... The weights are connected via bars like the things used in weightlifting (Dutch: "Halter"). The wheel consists of two layers with slots. The halters effectively connect the two wheel layers... To get the "D" type action, some form of static barrier must be placed between the two wheel layers, which will stop the bars connecting the weights from going past the six o clock position, effectively pushing the welter in an upward motion, shot putting the halter (two weights connected with a steel bar) from the six o clock position into the twelve o clock position on the other side. Pow. The halter lands between twelve and one o clock and falls into place where gravity takes a hold.

There are 16 slots on each wheel, each "Tube" has two slots, one halter per tube so a total of 8 halters for the system.

Here a quick wm2d model I made, yes, it is full of errors but hopefully you will see what I am trying to say. This is the view from one side, you should see the spheres as only one part of the halter. I have made only 8 slots, as the full 16 would be too intensive for now. Funny thing is that the slots look somewhat like boots (as in the video).

Model download http://www.gigasize.com/get.php?d=yz59m4y7wqd

It is 1.34Mb zipped.

Needless to say the barrier stops the weights in this model whereas in the real model the bar connecting the weights would be stopped. For motion display purposes I use a motor at -0.20 rad I would not dare to presume to create an entire working model of the actual system because this is simply not possible with this software.

Hopefully I will be able to make a more complete view soon. Looking forward to suggestions.

Edit: this is what I mean with halter, it is a dumbbell weight
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on April 07, 2009, 07:05:57 AM
Aside from the fact that the video provides no information as to the essence of the claim, it contains something else curious. There’s an expert invited to assess the claim who ends his statement quite accommodatingly with “we physicists never say never”. This caught my attention, as an unusually soft statement – this is in front of a tv camera after all -- from the viciously adversarial world of the physics community towards anything remotely resembling perpetuum mobile (some may recall the report on my visit to the physics department in Oslo university after seeing Reidar Finsrud’s perpetuum mobile).

So, the apparent air of open-mindedness made me decide to see if it would be possible to set up a meeting with this honorable colleague and I looked up in a search engine to find out who prof. Eric Bergshoeff is. As it turns out, appropriately so from societal point of view, the tv station had invited an university professor whose main scientific interest has been, in essence, the nature of gravity, as can be seen from the list of his 135 peer-reviewed publications: http://www.bergshoeff.fmns.rug.nl/publ.pdf . So far so good. A closer inspection of the papers, however, reveals that all prof. Bergshoeff has dealt with during obviously all his career has been to apply the general theory of relativity (GTR).

I don’t know what Sjack Abeling has done and prof. Bergshoeff doesn’t know either. Therefore, we wouldn’t be able to discuss anything regarding Sjack Abeling perpetuum mobile should the good professor agrees to a meeting with me.

However, I know very well that general theory of relativity is an invalid theory because the theory which it is a continuation of, the special theory of relativity, is a categorical failure. Thus, what would really make sense to talk about during a meeting with prof. Bergshoeff is to show him that he has wasted all his time up until now in pursuing chimeras in physics. And that will be true even if there are contributions in prof. Bergshoeff’s papers to pure mathematics because pure mathematics as an end in itself is not a subject matter of pursuit in a physics department. This would be even worse to tell a professor in academia concerned about his career than trying to persuade him that perpetuum mobile is real (which it is, regardless of the outcome from Sjack Abeling experiment).

On the other hand, no matter how polite I would be during such a meeting it would be immoral if I did not state clearly what I stated above. Maybe even add that he should probably go back to the tv station and apologize that his expertise on gravity is based on a bogus theory which he has believed all his life but now has found is fallacious. That would be the day! Such behavior is only up to exceptional people of historical significance and I really don’t know how close to that prof. Bergshoeff is.

So, we are in a bad shape. On the one hand we have a whole department (center): http://www.rug.nl/natuurkunde/onderzoek/instituten/ctn/organisatie/index full of bright people who with full certainty are wasting their time 100% while the society perceives them as reliable scientists. On the other hand we have the likes of Sjack Abeling, more of a gold-digger than anything else (why otherwise the games he is playing), who may be onto something while hiding in his barn. The former is institutionalized provable nonsense, the latter a betting game. We are really in a bad shape.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Grimer on April 07, 2009, 07:17:11 AM
...
However, I know very well that general theory of relativity is an invalid theory because the theory which it is a continuation of, the special theory of relativity, is a categorical failure. Thus, what would really make sense to talk about during a meeting with prof. Bergshoeff is to show him that he has wasted all his time up until now in pursuing chimeras in physics. And that will be true even if there are contributions in prof. Bergshoeff’s papers to pure mathematics because pure mathematics as an end in itself is not a subject matter of pursuit in a physics department. This would be even worse to tell a professor in academia concerned about his career than trying to persuade him that perpetuum mobile is real (which it is, regardless of the outcome from Sjack Abeling experiment).
...

That's fighting talk Omnibus - Give to 'em, hot and strong.  ;D
(Needless to say, I agree with you Babcat's 110%  :o )
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on April 07, 2009, 07:25:01 AM
@Grimer,

Academics are comfortable in their theory of relativity swamp while society has to rely on truck drivers to come up with something sensible. We’re living in tragic times. Real dead-end.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: hansvonlieven on April 07, 2009, 09:13:25 AM
All that our good Professor did was hedging his bets. That is what academia does. Ask them for a definitive statement on something controversial and all you get is weasel talk.

Hans von Lieven
Title: Re: Update: CONTACT WITH SJACK ABELING
Post by: Grimer on April 07, 2009, 09:40:10 AM
Just gotten off the (mobile) phone with Sjack Abeling, he was calm, very polite and informative.

Where to start:

IT IS REAL

He has a partnership with Henkel for the glue techniques and Erik (Engine/Turbines/Generators) has the commission for the generators.

Money is not the real issue, he has core investors.The Patent(s) are handled by a commercial company, and he is confident they will be accepted. The word Perpetuum Mobile or infinity is not used and should not be desired.A basic agreement is made with the Ministry of Economic affairs.

It is all exactly as stated. The core of the system is the Dual Leverage System as described. He says it works with an incredible acceleration from stand still and the main engineering issue is the correct way to keep the system from destroying itself, in other words containment via some form of advanced braking system. He said that is what is he spending most of his time on right now.

He was sorry he could not divulge any information yet, but the investors will not allow him to present anything as a stipulation of their providing Venture Capital. He said however that the moment he gets the ok he will start a tour across schools for starters. He mentioned that he would update the site with what he could, but in the short term (weeks) no full disclosure is to be expected.

In closing I asked if he would want to say anything to the members on this forum:

"Volhouden, het is zeker mogelijk" which means:

"Persevere, it is indeed possible".

I do not know if I should laugh or cry because on the one hand after having spoken to him I am convinced he is for real and on the other hand I really fear his invention will be bought & suppressed by a some corporation...

It is too early to tell.

Cheer up AquariuZ. I think it's real too cos I can understand what is going on. At first I thought it must be an extension of the work of that New Zealander, Bruce de Palma. But I now see that Sjack is probably invoking a higher derivative than acceleration, i.e. rate of change of acceleration. This will really unhinge the internal gyros (http://www.overunity.com/index.php?topic=7150.msg168610#msg168610)..

After all, Sjack isn't the first is he. There was that fat bloke, Bob, a few years ago - and though that one has never seen the full light of day, it hasn't been disproved either.

I realise it is very difficult for people to believe that when they push against an object to accelerate it, they are only doing the equivalent of turning their steering wheel (in a modern car) but nature has evidently developed servo-mechanisms long before we thought of them. Not surprising really is it?
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Grimer on April 07, 2009, 10:05:41 AM
The way one can be received by internal servos can easily be demonstrated in the case of rotational inertia by filling a black box with free running gyros in gimbals. If the gimbals are free then it is easy to rotate the box. Lock the gimbals and the rotational inertia (mass if you didn't understand what mass really is and didn't know what was going on) increases enormously.

Likewise, any decent engineer could devise a railway waggon where if you pushed against it with a force of 1 pound, release of gyro energy would drive the wheels with a force of 1000 pounds.
The human pusher would be deceived into thinking that the mass of the carriage was far less than in reality since he would judge the mass from the acceleration produced by the force he applied. He would  not realise that the energy he was putting in was merely a control energy which was being multiplied a thousand times by the machinery inside the waggon.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Grimer on April 07, 2009, 10:35:59 AM
All that our good Professor did was hedging his bets. That is what academia does. Ask them for a definitive statement on something controversial and all you get is weasel talk.

Hans von Lieven

Not only that, but if you confront them with a totally heretical idea together with substantial evidence all you will get is silence. In short if you challenge them to fight, they back off and slink away. Early in my career I realised it made far more sense to see materials as held together from without rather than from within - with all the implications as to the existence of the aether that this implied. In short, that internal tensions were merely negations, reduction in external pressure.

An international conference was coming up in which we had to present our experimental work. I realised that to be true to myself I must put forward this heretical view. I wasn't looking forward to it and expected to be lynched (metaphorically speaking). To my amazement the only comment we got was some chap who came up after the conference dinner looking very worried and said,

"That paper of yours. It was a hoax, wasn't it?"

We fell about laughing and assured him that we were deadly serious. I don't think he believed us.

To be quite honest I came to the conclusion that people only go to those conferences for the beer.

Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: AquariuZ on April 07, 2009, 11:01:45 AM
So, we are in a bad shape. On the one hand we have a whole department (center): http://www.rug.nl/natuurkunde/onderzoek/instituten/ctn/organisatie/index full of bright people who with full certainty are wasting their time 100% while the society perceives them as reliable scientists. On the other hand we have the likes of Sjack Abeling, more of a gold-digger than anything else (why otherwise the games he is playing), who may be onto something while hiding in his barn. The former is institutionalized provable nonsense, the latter a betting game. We are really in a bad shape.

If you really want to get involved why not pay Sjack a visit instead of the professor.

He is not "hiding" in his barn. His data is publically available. I even spoke to him over the phone. I would visit him myself but I am 1600 miles away from Ter Apel.
Title: CONCEPT GUESS 1
Post by: AquariuZ on April 07, 2009, 11:03:47 AM
NO COMMENTS ON MY THEORY?

Is it that bad?

Racking my brain reading the clues over the past few days this is my initial try... The weights are connected via bars like the things used in weightlifting (Dutch: "Halter"). The wheel consists of two layers with slots. The halters effectively connect the two wheel layers... To get the "D" type action, some form of static barrier must be placed between the two wheel layers, which will stop the bars connecting the weights from going past the six o clock position, effectively pushing the welter in an upward motion, shot putting the halter (two weights connected with a steel bar) from the six o clock position into the twelve o clock position on the other side. Pow. The halter lands between twelve and one o clock and falls into place where gravity takes a hold.

There are 16 slots on each wheel, each "Tube" has two slots, one halter per tube so a total of 8 halters for the system.

Here a quick wm2d model I made, yes, it is full of errors but hopefully you will see what I am trying to say. This is the view from one side, you should see the spheres as only one part of the halter. I have made only 8 slots, as the full 16 would be too intensive for now. Funny thing is that the slots look somewhat like boots (as in the video).

Model download http://www.gigasize.com/get.php?d=yz59m4y7wqd

It is 1.34Mb zipped.

Needless to say the barrier stops the weights in this model whereas in the real model the bar connecting the weights would be stopped. For motion display purposes I use a motor at -0.20 rad I would not dare to presume to create an entire working model of the actual system because this is simply not possible with this software.

Hopefully I will be able to make a more complete view soon. Looking forward to suggestions.

Edit: this is what I mean with halter, it is a dumbbell weight

Second picture: The dumbbell path viewed from the side with the white circle being the axle of the wheel, the right side being the fixed acceleration path and the left side being the lifting or dumbbell shot-put path.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Philip Hardcastle on April 07, 2009, 11:23:20 AM
@Aquariuz

I do not normally post strong views about ideas as I do not wish to upset anyone... but a device generating power from weights, in whatever arrangement, is rubbish. I only say this so that those people listening to those people pushing such ideas and talking investors know to be wary (run in fact).

Phyics is physics, sometimes slightly wrong, sometimes yet to be discovered but wheels and weights hold no possible surprises.

Regards

Phil
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: AquariuZ on April 07, 2009, 12:24:03 PM
but a device generating power from weights, in whatever arrangement, is rubbish. I only say this so that those people listening to those people pushing such ideas and talking investors know to be wary (run in fact).

Everything that can be invented has been invented.
    Charles H. Duell, Commissioner, U.S. patent office, 1899 (attributed)


Without further comment.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: spinner on April 07, 2009, 01:28:53 PM
Everything that can be invented has been invented.
    Charles H. Duell, Commissioner, U.S. patent office, 1899 (attributed)


Without further comment.
Lol, why no comment? I'd like to hear your thoughts about that...

Yes, this was one of those "historical" statements which is still widely used by the "FE" proponents as a "proof how science is blind".... I suggest you explore the background of this famous statement, it certainly is interesting...

Surely, you don't believe that some clerk opinion could represent a general scientific opinion of that time? Why did you pick the minority opinion? Because it suits you at the moment?

Shall we start with the flat Earth, Heliocentric stuff,..  Alchemy, Phlogiston..
Continuing with Tesla, Edison,... Wright brothers, flight,... tectonic plates,.. .. rockets,.. the bumblebee story, genetics,..etc...? Pick one...

People always make mistakes. Me, You, ... and everyone else...

Just reread this thread of yours, and list all the false statements made by anyone participating so far....

The results?
Cheers!
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Grimer on April 07, 2009, 02:08:44 PM
@Aquariuz
...

Phyics is physics, sometimes slightly wrong, sometimes yet to be discovered but wheels and weights hold no possible surprises.

If it works then you will be in for a nice treat, the nicest surprise of all, an impossible surprise.

I do envy you, ;D
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: spinner on April 07, 2009, 02:28:00 PM
The way one can be received by internal servos can easily be demonstrated in the case of rotational inertia by filling a black box with free running gyros in gimbals. If the gimbals are free then it is easy to rotate the box. Lock the gimbals and the rotational inertia (mass if you didn't understand what mass really is and didn't know what was going on) increases enormously.

OK.

Quote
Likewise, any decent engineer could devise a railway waggon where if you pushed against it with a force of 1 pound, release of gyro energy would drive the wheels with a force of 1000 pounds.
The human pusher would be deceived into thinking that the mass of the carriage was far less than in reality since he would judge the mass from the acceleration produced by the force he applied. He would  not realise that the energy he was putting in was merely a control energy which was being multiplied a thousand times by the machinery inside the waggon.

Frank, you're a "decent engineer", so you can "devise" that wagon of yours all by yourself..
Or, at least provide some serious data to back up this experiment...

You can use a "gyro fairy" to spinn all the gyros which will then propell (tricky mechanism, but as Grimer says, any engineer can solve this...) the wagon only by a slight push of some external force.... No need for a locomotive? If I understand this correctly, i could push the wagon (?) all by myself? As long as the gyros are spinning? 1000:1 "gain"?
That would be something...

Either I don't understand what you're saying here, or your "wagon case" is simply wrong...
Cheers!
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: oscar on April 07, 2009, 02:31:30 PM
Hi AquariuZ,
thanks for getting involved and thanks for posting your wm2d file.
I also think that Sjack has designed his logo for a reason and I think it depicts the path of the weights in his system.

I think that the dots in his logo should be interpreted as parts of a chain (= links of a chain).

Obviously the weights (= links of the chain) which are pulled up through the middle of the wheel, do not create torque whereas the weights on the rim of the wheel create torque and lead to rotation of the wheel.

The problem where I am stuck in my mind, is how to create a 'mechanical interface' which pulls/puts the chain onto the rim of the wheel at 12 o' clock.

I wish you success with your next simulation.

PS: if Sjack wants to slow down the wheel, it may be a good idea to do it with a pendulum which he can link to the wheel as Bessler did.
see right side of
http://www.orffyre.com/Weissenstein1.jpg
In this way he can force the rotation of the wheel into a fixed rhythm.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Cherryman on April 07, 2009, 02:45:02 PM
I Think slowing the wheel down is a minor problem, just increase the load.  Connect more generatos or a gearbox .. So when it wants to spin out of control you increase the resistance, wich will also supply more energy or heat.. So that is a win-win situation.

( Or am i missing something?)
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Philip Hardcastle on April 07, 2009, 02:57:33 PM
@aquariuz

Reality check required.

The search for alternate energy must at least have some logic.

If someone calims to have a working device and claims the energy comes from, say, zero point energy, then it deserves looking at.

If it might come from thermal, or some 22 dimensional vortex then we should try to see if it might be so, even if it does not easily gel in our minds.

But this device does not give any hint of any claim of it coming from a theoretical source, just a claim it comes from common, everyday gravity........

Logic says 1=1 and for gravity (weights) potential enerrgy is m x g x h. Nothing magical here, simple arithmetic. So whatever you do you simply transfer potential energy to kinetic and back to potential with frictional losses slowly bringing things to a halt.

If there is no logic or hope then why do people want to make FE look like mumbo jumbo.

Let us search for real ideas / theories and investigate claims based upon common sense.

Phil
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Grimer on April 07, 2009, 03:08:05 PM
OK.

Either I don't understand what you're saying here, or your "wagon case" is simply wrong...
Cheers!
Correct. You don't understand what I am saying. You don't understand how much energy can be stored in spinning gyros (flywheels) and you don't understand the principles of servo-mechanics. I suggest you get yourself an education in these matters.  ;)
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on April 07, 2009, 03:47:39 PM
@Grimer,

Quote
At first I thought it must be an extension of the work of that New Zealander, Bruce de Palma.

What work of Bruce de Palma do you have in mind? I visited Bruce couple of times in Santa Barbara and he showed me some very interesting experiments, including the homopolar generator but no gravity driven machine. Maybe you mean his experiments w/ falling objects? Speaking of the Faraday generator, after visiting de Palma I spoke with prof. Kincheloe at Stanford university who showed me in his office data with telltale signs for Lentz’ law violation. Unfortunately, Bruce had been uncooperative and prof. Kincheloe wasn’t able to complete his independent studies of the motor. He told me he was trying to build one himself so that he can further study this violation (as you probably know a Colorado religious sect helped Bruce financially to build two of these one of which he kept). Unfortunately, after prof. Kincheloe retired in Oregon I could never get in touch with him despite my many attempts to do so.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on April 07, 2009, 03:49:05 PM
@AquariuZ,

Quote
f you really want to get involved why not pay Sjack a visit instead of the professor.

I wrote him an e-mail to that effect but never got an answer. I sent a pm to @broli123 who posted the video on youtube. Never got an answer either. Also, as far as I understand from his website his investors are reluctant to have the details about the machine revealed. So, what good will it do to just meet with the guy and talk. This reminds me of a meeting I had at Oxford university at the center for quantum computing where I expected to see experiments but we ended up just discussing the theoretical background (very clever, by the way, if one believes that Hilbert space is indeed endowed with the physical meaning ascribed to it).
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on April 07, 2009, 03:49:44 PM
@Philip Hardcastle,

Quote
Phyics is physics, sometimes slightly wrong ...

Not slightly wrong. In the case of what prof. Bergshoeff is doing it is very, very wrong; completely wrong. Einstein’s theory of relativity and anything connected with it (string theories, cosmology etc.) should be abandoned in its entirety, without a trace.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on April 07, 2009, 03:55:54 PM
@Philip Hardcastle,

I don't want to get into details now but it can be shown that there can be cases when energy produced need not come from a pre-existing energy reservoir. Colloquially speaking one may say that's "energy created from nothing". Of course, it isn't from nothing because the energy in question appears due to the opportunity created (through a proper construction of the machine) for conservative forces to induce displacement. Thus, while the "transformation" part of CoE can never be violated, there are instances whereby the "conservation" aspect of CoE can be violated.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: spinner on April 07, 2009, 04:08:18 PM
Correct. You don't understand what I am saying.
Obviously..!

Quote
You don't understand how much energy can be stored in spinning gyros (flywheels) and you don't understand the principles of servo-mechanics....
Now this can is debatable... As far as I know, I can handle the (simple) equation for flywheel energy storage...
(I'm not so sure about you?)
Servo-mechanics? What about?  Physics/Mechanics, feedbacks/regulations? What exactly? Be specific.

Quote
I suggest you get yourself an education in these matters.  ;)

That's not nice, Frank... I'll hold my respond to this ... For now....
 >:(

So, are you going to answer what is going on with your "wagon case", or you'll just try to wiggling out?

I suggest you read your "waggon" case again, and then tell me where the energy comes from?
Then you'll probably demonstrate how a 10 ton wagon, full of spinning flywheels, can be pushed with a "one pound force". Is that your OverUnity?

(forget about the "gyro fairy" which spinned the gyros at the beginning...).
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: mondrasek on April 07, 2009, 05:55:36 PM
A while back I made a CAD drawing so I could visualize the acceleration vectors in a spinning wheel.  For this exercise I assumed a 12 ft. diameter wheel spinning at 26 RPM (go figure).  I drew a grid and summed the accelerations due to gravity and centrifugal force at each point on this grid.

It is interesting to me to look at the D shaped logo on http://mooieenergie.nl/ and mentally superimpose it over the acceleration vector map.  If the symbols near the middle of that D with the circle and arrow are representative of a weight and the direction of the "shot put" throw, it could show a weight being launched from around 9 o'clock, close to the axle, towards 1 o'clock, out by the rim.  And depending on the speed of the wheel, this path could send it through the null point, where gravity and centrifugal force are canceling and the mass is weightless.  Also, the path could be such that the acceleration vectors at the beginning and end of this trajectory are equal and opposite.

Thanks,

M.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Grimer on April 07, 2009, 05:56:17 PM
...
That's not nice, Frank...
...
Fair enough. I was rude. I apologise. And I'm only too happy to explain - at length.

So you cover the inner side of the wagon walls with strain gauges. Remember this isn't meant to be a practical blueprint but an explanation of principle.

The strain gauges pick up the amount of pressure and the length of time that pressure is applied.
This information is transmitted to a controller which instructs the flywheels/gyros to power the wagon wheels by the appropriate amount. So the wagon accelerates. When the person takes his hand away the acceleration stops and the wagon carries on rolling forward at the speed it reached at the end of the push, the end of the acceleration. It would seem to the man pushing as though he had accelerated the wagon cos the machinery inside is so well made that there in no vibration and no sound.

If the man continues to push the wagon to higher and higher speeds the internal gyros will eventually become polarised and it would seem to the man the the inertia, the mass of the wagon was increasing. In fact it would merely be the efficiency of the servos which was decreasing.

Now this works for a wagon cos one can transmit forces through the wheels to the track.

But how about a body in outer space? That manifests the same inertia. Surely, it has nothing for its internal gyros to grip on. Mmmmmm......

Yes it has. It grips on the same thing that electromagnetic wave grips on. The very dense aether that is supposed not to exist. Sound waves require a atmosphere full of stuff. EM waves require an atmosphere much fuller of stuff - much, much, much fuller of stuff. The Victorians knew it. We refuse to think about it cos science has been usurped by mathematical physicists as Omnibus points out correctly, vigorously and at length. It's time engineers manned the barricades and took it back. And I predict that is shortly going to happen.

You see the trouble is, understanding the nature of mass, the nature of inertia is like taking a sip of the bar spittoon. Take one sip and you find you have to swallow the lot cos it's all in one piece.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------

As for the "gyro fairies" that keep the fundamental bits of matter spinning, you tell me. The fact is they are spinning that is a given, They possess motion just like Brownian particles possess motion, presumably for the same kind of reason. As Leibniz said, motion can only come from motion - and if it doesn't move it doesn't exist - or something like that.  :)
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: AquariuZ on April 07, 2009, 09:29:04 PM
A while back I made a CAD drawing so I could visualize the acceleration vectors in a spinning wheel.  For this exercise I assumed a 12 ft. diameter wheel spinning at 26 RPM (go figure).  I drew a grid and summed the accelerations due to gravity and centrifugal force at each point on this grid.

It is interesting to me to look at the D shaped logo on http://mooieenergie.nl/ and mentally superimpose it over the acceleration vector map.  If the symbols near the middle of that D with the circle and arrow are representative of a weight and the direction of the "shot put" throw, it could show a weight being launched from around 9 o'clock, close to the axle, towards 1 o'clock, out by the rim.  And depending on the speed of the wheel, this path could send it through the null point, where gravity and centrifugal force are canceling and the mass is weightless.  Also, the path could be such that the acceleration vectors at the beginning and end of this trajectory are equal and opposite.

mondrasek this is really nice, thanks...

I am almost at a point where I need to build a small model with dumbbells and all because I suck at maths. If you superimpose the "D" path you will find two things:

1) The optimal torque pull is in the "belly" of the D
2) At the six o clock position something spectacular needs to happen to bring the dumbells up to half past 12.

I say that spectacular thing is some kind of steel barrier which abruptly stops the dumbell bar, effectively launching the dumbbell violently upwards.

If it works as I think this is a violent wheel which makes lots of noise while it turns. The neighbours must love him...
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: mondrasek on April 07, 2009, 09:54:19 PM

1) The optimal torque pull is in the "belly" of the D
2) At the six o clock position something spectacular needs to happen to bring the dumbells up to half past 12.


AquariuZ, just some food for thought:  You are right that the weights generate the most clockwise torque when at three o'clock.  But they are also generating the most force (F = ma) at six o'clock.  This is where you say something spectacular needs to happen.  Unfortunately that Force is also in the wrong direction (down).

Enjoy,

M.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: AquariuZ on April 07, 2009, 10:16:11 PM
AquariuZ, just some food for thought:  You are right that the weights generate the most clockwise torque when at three o'clock.  But they are also generating the most force (F = ma) at six o'clock.  This is where you say something spectacular needs to happen.  Unfortunately that Force is also in the wrong direction (down).

Exactly, spectacular because the dumbbell needs to rise straight against the full force of gravity at six o clock.

One thing I am almost certain of now: the weights are not on the wheel between the six and twelve o clock position

The "D" acceleration path gives away more than Sjack would have liked if I am correct. It must be dumbbells the way he describes them and the way the wheel looks from the side. Looking at 0:08 of the video the stopper might very well be a wooden beam as well. I measure about two fists room between the two parts, so that would be around 33 cm or some 10 inches.

Looking at the floor under the wheel there indeed seems to be some sort of placeholder (for a beam?) there, but the quality of the video is simply too poor to be sure.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: mondrasek on April 07, 2009, 10:43:47 PM

One thing I am almost certain of now: the weights are not on the wheel between the six and twelve o clock position


Well, still *in* the wheel, just no longer at the end of the slots by the rim, right?  Those slots go towards the center of the wheel and would act like a cam, forcing the weights to rise and move inward towards the axle if the weights ran into an obstruction just past six o'clock (back side of the D).  The weights could be accelerated upwards by the slots until at the mid-line of the wheel, to nine o'clock, right beside the axle.  Lifting the weight to there would use up 1/2 the momentum the weight produced while falling down from 12 to six on the torque producing portion of the cycle.  Then from this position the spectacular event must take place.  I get that from the website FAQs where he says, "In the topleft of the system the weight is accelerated (like a shot put)."  I take topleft to mean from nine to 12 o'clock.

He also says that the extra force is generated in the lower left of the system.  If this is between six and nine o'clock I think it must come from changing the path of the rotating weight so they begin their upward climb.  This changing of path must allow for the release of some of the kinetic energy to be used to launch a weight already at the nine o'clock position spectacularly (violently) upwards, and slightly to the right, or clockwise, like the arrow in his logo again?

M.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: AquariuZ on April 07, 2009, 10:48:58 PM
I think the weights at six move straight up and pass over the axle and lock right into a position between twelve and one o clock. I am trying to draw that right now just to see if that is at all possible...
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: khabe on April 07, 2009, 11:34:03 PM
Hereby the only really working gravity machine I have seen,
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oVqKluBjcag&feature=related
Selfrunning one :o
Very Over Unity 8)
cheers,
khabe
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: AquariuZ on April 07, 2009, 11:49:32 PM
Hereby the only really working gravity machine I have seen,
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oVqKluBjcag&feature=related
Selfrunning one :o
Very Over Unity 8)
cheers,
khabe

You know, that was very entertaining, even though it is well off topic. The way he gets up and walks away is classic in every sense of the word.

 8)

Now back to the drawing board...
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Cherryman on April 08, 2009, 02:06:49 AM
Not sure if i understand it correctly, but could it be something like this?

http://www.overunity.com/index.php?topic=7175.msg169167#msg169167 (http://www.overunity.com/index.php?topic=7175.msg169167#msg169167)
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on April 08, 2009, 06:59:04 AM
@mondrasek and @Cherryman,

There is, intuitively, something very interesting in your idea (I use singular since it appears to be basically the same idea in both). Thus, trivially, as @mr_bojangles says:

Quote
even if all the energy is used by the momentum of the ball falling, it will still only be able to return to the same height it was dropped from

However, if properly timed, it seems that for a moment, when the ball passes through the neutral point the ball is excluded from the system of interest to us, that is the rotating wheel, and the pull of gravity on the system of interest to us will differ from the pull on that system with the ball as part of it. That asymmetry may be thought of as what would keep the setup turning on its own only due to the existence of gravity and not due to an energy supply from a pre-existing energy reservoir. Again, this is only on an intuitive level. It has to be shown, however, how the conservation of momentum isn’t standing in the way; if violation of conservation of momentum is claimed then it has to be demonstrated experimentally.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Philip Hardcastle on April 08, 2009, 07:12:24 AM
@omnibus,

LOL

Aaaagh, you have converted to the flat earthers!.

As there is no energy in claimed, then Coe says it is just not a goer anyway you rig it.

Phil.

ps talking of asymmetry what did you think of my curled ballistic idea posted on the site (somewhere). No one has claimed the $1,000 I offered.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on April 08, 2009, 07:38:47 AM
@Philip Hardcastle,

Quote
As there is no energy in claimed, then Coe says it is just not a goer anyway you rig it.

Not always so. There are instances where energy appears only due to a proper construction of the machine enabling displacement under the action of a conservative force without the involvement of a pre-existing energy reservoir. Discontinuous production of such "energy out of nothing" can be readily demonstrated (this is violation of the "conservation" aspect of CoE, not of its "transformation" aspect which can never be violated). So far, however, I haven't seen experimentally demonstrated continuous production of "energy out of noting" (that is, continuous displacement caused by a conservative force only due to proper construction without pre-existing energy reservoir involved) because of various energy losses hindering closing the loop. Closing the loop is a very difficult purely engineering problem, still unresolved. What I said in my earlier posting concerning continuous production of excess energy is only a speculation, something on an intuitive level. Turning it into a working model in flesh and blood is something very, very difficult constructively, something that has never been achieved so far, as far as I know (The claims of that Bob in Canada, Sjack Abeling and several others are still unconfirmed and I'm not counting them at present as anything else but just pure noise)
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Philip Hardcastle on April 08, 2009, 07:46:28 AM
@omni,

I am intrigued, give me an example of an instance, please

Phil
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on April 08, 2009, 07:53:09 AM
@omni,

I am intrigued, give me an example of an instance, please

Phil

No, I'm not willing to discuss this again. This is a settled issue, discussed in numerous threads and forums. Not again. I'm all set with it and I'm looking forward to these new claims. As you can imagine, I would have paid exactly zero attention to these claims had I not been convinced energy "out of nothing" can be produced even if it's only discontinuously so far.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Philip Hardcastle on April 08, 2009, 08:00:28 AM
@Omni,

I was not attacking or being rude.

Hope I have not struck a bad note with you.

If you can tell me where I should look then that would be good.

Tell me what you think of Curled Ballistics. In fact have a few shots at me if you want, I need a bit of fire today to make the time go faster.

Regards Phil
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Grimer on April 08, 2009, 08:06:53 AM
@ spinner (continued)

It is easy to demonstrate that inertia (mass) can be polarized. If you have a black box full of gyros randomly oriented and in fixed gimbals then the rotational inertia around any axis is the same. If one now points half of the gyros north south and the other half south north so that all axis of rotation are parallel then the rotational inertia perpendicular the axis will be much less than the rotation inertial for planes parallel to the axes.

Also it is possible to demonstrate that one can get energy out of the gravitational field, that one can create a gravitational mill in principle, albeit not one that is economically sensible

You simply have the left side of a vertical annular tube filled with hydrogen and the right hemisphere with the same number of moles of helium. Both have the same number of nucleons but the hydrogen weighs more than the helium therefore the mill will accelerate until the gravitational energy released balances frictional losses at which point it will rotate at constant rpm.

At bottom dead centre you trigger the fusion reaction to turn the hydrogen into helium. You collect the energy from this and return it to the tube at top dead centre.  Energy inputs and outputs are equal. So the left side is always filled with hydrogen and the right with helium.

Now, obviously, such a machine is not a practical proposition. It is merely meant to illustrate the point the mass (inertia) and matter are not indissolubly coupled. Matter is conserved, mass isn't. Mass is a property of matter just like temperature. It's an accident not a substance to use the philosophical terms.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on April 08, 2009, 08:15:24 AM
@Philip Hardcastle,

I've written papers on that violation, I have a site with detailed argumentation and so on but I'm reluctant to get into this now. We'll talk about it when the time comes. At present I'd like to see whether or not these several claims for continuous production of excess energy are real. The closest so far that I've seen personally is Reidar Finsrud's but there are still some questions to be answered regarding his contraption. Of course, there cannot be anything more interesting than a gravity "powered" wheel, as advertised in this instance. Too bad everything is shrouded in such secrecy. They think they can make money off of it somehow, that is, off of something inherently free. If these constructors really care about their best interest, instead of hiding it, they should disclose it as soon as possible to as many people as they can possibly reach. This ill-conceived secrecy only hurts their cause, let alone the true interests of society.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: AquariuZ on April 08, 2009, 10:59:16 AM
Not sure if i understand it correctly, but could it be something like this?

http://www.overunity.com/index.php?topic=7175.msg169167#msg169167 (http://www.overunity.com/index.php?topic=7175.msg169167#msg169167)

Use the energy in the ball (Gravitational and rotary) to lift it independently from the main wheel, Slingshot it and reuse it whit gravity.
So you have the ball force only helping turning the wheel, taking the load off (or minimizing)  the wheel on the way up.


This just about sums it up. I think Abelings wheel is based on this principle and he uses dumbbells.

Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Cherryman on April 08, 2009, 11:04:17 AM
This just about sums it up. I think Abelings wheel is based on this principle and he uses dumbbells.



Ohhhh... Then I have to hurry  ;D

I was playing with this and simular setups for a month now, had made a prototype with an old harddisk and some "knickers" but the timing and curvature is very difficult. The drawings i posted are just one of the many different setups i tried..  But i keep on trying and will post it in my half baked idears topic.

Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: AquariuZ on April 08, 2009, 11:04:30 AM
The claims of that Bob in Canada, Sjack Abeling and several others are still unconfirmed and I'm not counting them at present as anything else but just pure noise)

Statement retracted with apologies.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on April 08, 2009, 11:35:29 AM
As I understand it you are in Groningen yourself.

How can you claim Abeling as "noise" when you are not even willing to find his number, contact him, and make an appointment. That is just thick headed and unless you are really willing to add to this project and do something in the real world you are losing whatever respect I had for you to start with.

Fast.

No, I'm not in Groningen at all (I'm not even in Europe). Nevertheless, as I told you, I'm more than willing to visit the guy. I wrote to him telling him that I'd like to visit him and see the device working. Unfortunately, I got no response. I think I told you that. What more can I do? Also, I tried to arrange a visit to the inventor Bob in Canada, I guess, a year ago or so. No luck there either. If you have any ideas just let me know. Mind you, until I see these devices personally or hear from other independent parties whom I trust that they have verified and, even better, reproduced these claims I'll continue to consider them as just noise, like I said.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: AquariuZ on April 08, 2009, 12:02:24 PM
No, I'm not in Groningen at all (I'm not even in Europe).

Then I must have mis interpreted your statement you were a collegue of Eric Bergshoeff at the RUG (Rijks Universiteit Groningen). My apologies.

I know you tried contact via email, but that simply does not work because Sjack is working in his shop almost fulltime. His home number is available on the Internet (make the company address link to the name to the town), please remember timezone is EST+6. If you are really unable to find it I will send you a link via PM. I have his mobile but I cannot give that to you. It may help if you mention where you are calling from to get his attention. Best time to call is around 19:45 his time. Country code is 0031.

He is quite relaxed so you should get an interview or maybe even a visit, in any case I commend your willingness to travel that far.

Please check PM
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: AquariuZ on April 08, 2009, 12:20:30 PM
Ohhhh... Then I have to hurry  ;D

The axle area poses a major hurdle.

I have no idea how to get from six to axle to twelve (full "D") unless the sleeve runs all the way through the wheel. If it does it will intersect with the axle.

 ???
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Cherryman on April 08, 2009, 12:37:52 PM
The axle area poses a major hurdle.

I have no idea how to get from six to axle to twelve (full "D") unless the sleeve runs all the way through the wheel. If it does it will intersect with the axle.

 ???

With the slingshot you will go around te axle

And with the level lifting you wil go over the axle

I Have a short movie made with WM2D but it is to large to post here and i only have the demo version so i can't save the WM2D file.

Not that i have it working, but hey.. two knows more then one

Isn't it wise to continue this in a different topic, this one is about Sjack and we can only guess here about his setup untill we know more. Now you have "research" and comnments mixed up over here.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on April 08, 2009, 12:50:26 PM
@AquariuZ,

Thanks a lot for the phone number. Will call him asap and will let you know of the outcome.

@Cherryman,

Please, continue the discussion here. It'll be very messy and choppy otherwise. As for the WM2D file, maybe you can ask Stefan to reformat it. As far as I know he's an expert in using WM2D. It would be interesting to see it.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Cherryman on April 08, 2009, 12:58:53 PM
Oke, I will try to show to two princeples i am working on.

This movie is about the slingshot, it is only a setup to see if  what happens

The next movie will be the positioning of the ball to get picked up by the swing arm, the difficulty will be to combine those together. I think maybe a 3D movement is needed.. not there yet. But that is hard to simulate.

Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Cherryman on April 08, 2009, 01:12:16 PM
This one is about getting the ball into position, in this little example it is done by its own weight. So if you ad rotation to it , it will only go faster and easier.

Hope i make sense.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QYH1G6ewGRc
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Cherryman on April 08, 2009, 01:26:15 PM
Now the trick is to combine movie one and two.

Unfortunatly this will not work in WM2D ( At least not with my knoledge)

I do have a somewhat different setup with is more fixed..  I will see if i van make a little movie about that to.

Edit:

This is one wheel, i think you will need at least two (with the ball at the oposite  place) or more so you can overcome the dead points.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: AquariuZ on April 08, 2009, 01:35:45 PM
Cherryman is looking good

Here a snapshot of abeling's D The green line represents the path of the weights in the wheel, an almost perfect D shape

I can get the dual weights (I am positive it is a dumbbell system) from A to B without any problem whatsoever, but what gets me is the leap from B to C.

Please notice the gaps between the weights just after 18:00 and at 23:50. The "something spectacular" is a jumping dumbbell (I think).
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: AquariuZ on April 08, 2009, 01:41:58 PM
This one is about getting the ball into position, in this little example it is done by its own weight. So if you ad rotation to it , it will only go faster and easier.

Hope i make sense.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QYH1G6ewGRc

I love the spiral. Now if somehow you can stetch it past the axle towards one o clock you may be in business.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Cherryman on April 08, 2009, 01:44:56 PM
The use of dumbbells could very good be, because it's bar shape will allow you to disconnect them from the wheels as well, as seem as the rail in my drawing.. Hmm I'm studdying the picture you posted..  and in the meantime i will show you another "concept" based on the same principle , i hope within the next half hour.

I do think however he uses also the radial? force and acceleration  (i should learn some more technical English i suppose)
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Cherryman on April 08, 2009, 01:47:21 PM
I love the spiral. Now if somehow you can stetch it past the axle towards one o clock you may be in business.

Not sure what u are saying, can you be a little more specifick?
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: sushimoto on April 08, 2009, 02:00:47 PM
I love the spiral. Now if somehow you can stetch it past the axle towards one o clock you may be in business.

... And i love the creativity which is ongoing here.
Hope you guys keep on going the good work.
Maybe some devils will come to desroy your positive thinking,
but you can tell them that a Nuclear-Reactor is in fact a giant Waterboiler to drive a steam engine.
That CAN NOT BE the best possible answer of well educated engineers and academics
for  the energy demands of the world. ....
Since hundreds or maybe thousands of years of creative findings and
maybe sometimes infantle experiments, creativity and merit is the
only thing which counts at the very end...

:)

Best regards,
sushimoto
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Cherryman on April 08, 2009, 02:24:21 PM
OK, here is the next one.

This time i used an enclosed rod to make the process more under control.

Notice that the ball going up the ramp is actually going faster then the rod, so it will not bother the movement of the wheel, and will hit the wheel again after 1200 hour with an accelerated force.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GBygA2vOHx4
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Cherryman on April 08, 2009, 02:28:26 PM
It's not perfect yet, but i do think there could be some possibilities, i have tried al kinds of different shapes.

At one time i pushed in a rotation force of 4 and i got a return of 4.004  ;D  (Without wind drag)   Unfortunatly i cannot save the WM2D files, but i'm still learning.


Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on April 08, 2009, 02:36:01 PM
@sushimoto, very well put:

Quote
but you can tell them that a Nuclear-Reactor is in fact a giant Waterboiler to drive a steam engine.
That CAN NOT BE the best possible answer of well educated engineers and academics
for  the energy demands of the world. ....
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: AquariuZ on April 08, 2009, 02:48:22 PM
OK, here is the next one.

This time i used an enclosed rod to make the process more under control.

Notice that the ball going up the ramp is actually going faster then the rod, so it will not bother the movement of the wheel, and will hit the wheel again after 1200 hour with an accelerated force.

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

This is great!  Maybe the barrier in the Abeling wheel is indeed curved, but then again the path of the weights would no longer fit the "D" pattern.

I can try and recreate this in wm2d, I would first make a few arms more and see what happens if you take the motor out

You have exactly visualized my thoughts on stretching the spiral in your previous video, keep up the good work
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Cherryman on April 08, 2009, 02:50:53 PM
This is great!  Maybe the barrier in the Abeling wheel is indeed curved, but then again the path of the weights would no longer fit the "D" pattern.

You have exactly visualized my thoughts on stretching the spiral in your previous video, keep up the good work

Well i'm not visualizing you'rs or Sjacks idear.  This is work i dit past month.  I have a few more setups, but because I cannot save the WM2D files i have to create everything again from startover.

But i'm glad you like it. 
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: AquariuZ on April 08, 2009, 02:57:15 PM
Well i'm not visualizing you'rs or Sjacks idear.  This is work i dit past month.  I have a few more setups, but because I cannot save the WM2D files i have to create everything again from startover.

But i'm glad you like it. 

I like it because I see serious overlaps in the way I think the Abeling Wheel works...

Just thought of this: canyou try and make the barrier straight with a slight curve to the right past the axle and see what happens?

I am just starting a new model. Did you see my previous wm2d model? Thoughts?

Here it is again the first try at the shot-put principle in wm2d: http://www.gigasize.com/get.php?d=yz59m4y7wqd
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Cherryman on April 08, 2009, 03:00:08 PM
I like it because I see serious overlaps in the way I think the Abeling Wheel works...

Just thought of this: canyou try and make the barrier straight with a slight curve to the right past the axle and see what happens?

I am just starting a new model. Did you see my previous wm2d model? Thoughts?

I'm sorry but i cannot open WM2D files, because i only have the demo version. So i did not see them, would like to, do you have a movie ?

And i can do something you like, but you have to be more specifick.. a drawing maybe?

Or did you mean something like this?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d8QK8w2sw8Y&feature=channel_page
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: AquariuZ on April 08, 2009, 03:11:21 PM
I'm sorry but i cannot open WM2D files, because i only have the demo version. So i did not see them, would like to, do you have a movie ?

And i can do something you like, but you have to be more specifick.. a drawing maybe?

Or did you mean something like this?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d8QK8w2sw8Y&feature=channel_page

Yes this is what I mean, try and see what happens without the motor driving the wheel (just pin it). And a straight barrier which curves to the right past the axle.

I do not know how to make a movie from a running wm2d model unfortunatly.

How do you create the arms? Are those polygons? I find it difficult to work with hollows in wm2d
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Cherryman on April 08, 2009, 03:23:08 PM
Yes this is what I mean, try and see what happens without the motor driving the wheel (just pin it). And a straight barrier which curves to the right past the axle.

I do not know how to make a movie from a running wm2d model unfortunately.

How do you create the arms? Are those polygons? I find it difficult to work with hollows in wm2d

I Created the movies with a free and simple screen capture program:

http://www.nchsoftware.com/capture/index.html

I use Rhino3D to design the structure and then import it in WM2D.  I have found a workaround for the hollows , i make a tiny opening in the loop so it is a polygon.

Try to make the opening as small as possible and if possible in a place where you will not have contact with the ball so it will not influence the setup.

Here is a picture to show the concept:


Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Cherryman on April 08, 2009, 03:30:44 PM
I got some requests about sharing the files..

I have no problem with that...  But i don't like it being called Abeling  >:(  I haven't heard or seen from him untill yesterday... And just apart from a few vague pictures we don't know anything about that machine.



So as i'm not trying to keep this for myself, i do have some vanity..  So i call it the K.A.D. system!   ;D
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: hartiberlin on April 08, 2009, 03:38:15 PM
Great designs !

Okay, let the WM2D files coming, so we all can work on it.

Maybe we just call it some kind of modified Bessler wheel.

It seems this
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d8QK8w2sw8Y

will work the best , when it is using the centrifugal forces,
so it needs at least a good speed.
Running too slow and it will not work.

Does anybody see a reason, why this should not work ?

Regards, Stefan.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Cherryman on April 08, 2009, 03:52:55 PM
I Will do that shortly, have to install something first  ;)

I do have a version also with a more stable ball

K.A.D. ;D demo 5 :

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nSaKQEn0Wwc
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Cherryman on April 08, 2009, 04:29:33 PM
Great designs !

Okay, let the WM2D files coming, so we all can work on it.

Maybe we just call it some kind of modified Bessler wheel.

It seems this
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d8QK8w2sw8Y

will work the best , when it is using the centrifugal forces,
so it needs at least a good speed.
Running too slow and it will not work.

Does anybody see a reason, why this should not work ?

Regards, Stefan.

Well for now i think to much energy is still lost by the "bouncing" of the ball, I'm working on a refinement for that.

I will rebuilt the K.A.D. model you liked, (Because i couldn't save it before)  and will post it for you guys to play with,

And call me hardheaded, but i give you my designs without any restrictions.. besides the name~!  I think that's fare enough! 
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Cherryman on April 08, 2009, 05:11:13 PM
Okey, i quickly rebuilt two models Of the K.A.D.  ;D design for you guys to play with, lets hope we find something nice!

- Remark.  I noticed the ramp is a little steep in the beginning, i should make the curve better.  (working on that)


PS.  I don't claim this works.. It's just a way i see potention in.

Good luck and share the results!
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Cherryman on April 08, 2009, 05:17:10 PM
I like it because I see serious overlaps in the way I think the Abeling Wheel works...

Just thought of this: canyou try and make the barrier straight with a slight curve to the right past the axle and see what happens?

I am just starting a new model. Did you see my previous wm2d model? Thoughts?

Here it is again the first try at the shot-put principle in wm2d: http://www.gigasize.com/get.php?d=yz59m4y7wqd

Wow! I  :o can open it now, it looks great!   I will studie it some more! 
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on April 08, 2009, 08:16:08 PM
@AquariuZ,

I just spoke with Sjack Abeling. He told me something to the effect that he is bound by a contract with his investors which does not allow him to show the motor to the outside world. All the information about his motor at this point can be obtained only from his website. He said that he's expecting to say more about the project in the coming months. I was curious as to whether his machine can be scaled down to a laboratory model but as far as I understand they only have the powerful ones geared toward industrial production. I wished him success in his undertaking and he agreed to give him a call in a month or two when he'll probably be allowed to say more about the project.

That was in essence our conversation and, as you see, investors are again standing in the way of science. A similar situation occurred with Mike Brady (Perendev) a couple years ago. I had several conversations with him to arrange a visit but in the end his lawyers decided the motor shouldn't be shown to anyone. If you remember he canceled a scheduled presentation. Same thing happened with Steorn -- I actually went to London to see the demo at Kinetica museum only to find out it's been canceled. One other place, except for Finsrud's machine in Oslo, where I saw a demonstration was in Novi Sad where Veljko Milkovic.showed me his device which isn't a self-runner unfortunately. Wonder what happened to Bob in Canada. His was the first modern gravity driven motor claimed to be demonstrable. I think Stefan was in contact with him but don't know if there's any development there.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: AquariuZ on April 08, 2009, 09:27:59 PM
Great designs !

Okay, let the WM2D files coming, so we all can work on it.

Maybe we just call it some kind of modified Bessler wheel.

It seems this
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d8QK8w2sw8Y

will work the best , when it is using the centrifugal forces,
so it needs at least a good speed.
Running too slow and it will not work.

Does anybody see a reason, why this should not work ?

Regards, Stefan.

Hi Stefan, can you please comment on my concept guess (page 7 I believe) it includes a crude wm2d model.

Even though this thread is about the Abeling Wheel, the possible overlaps with Cherryman's KAD and the core principle (the barrier) seem to be the only way to get the "D" shape as discussed on the previous page.

I think we should take that very specific path of the weight as it rotates with the wheel and gets "shot-putted" (Term: Abeling) and concentrate on that in trying to reproduce the Abeling Wheel.

I really like cherrymans models, and am working on another abeling concept guess using some of cherryman's ideas.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: AquariuZ on April 08, 2009, 09:33:49 PM
@AquariuZ,

I just spoke with Sjack Abeling. He told me something to the effect that he is bound by a contract with his investors which does not allow him to show the motor to the outside world. All the information about his motor at this point can be obtained only from his website. He said that he's expecting to say more about the project in the coming months. I was curious as to whether his machine can be scaled down to a laboratory model but as far as I understand they only have the powerful ones geared toward industrial production. I wished him success in his undertaking and he agreed to give him a call in a month or two when he'll probably be allowed to say more about the project.

That was in essence our conversation and, as you see, investors are again standing in the way of science. A similar situation occurred with Mike Brady (Perendev) a couple years ago. I had several conversations with him to arrange a visit but in the end his lawyers decided the motor shouldn't be shown to anyone. If you remember he canceled a scheduled presentation. Same thing happened with Steorn -- I actually went to London to see the demo at Kinetica museum only to find out it's been canceled. One other place, except for Finsrud's machine in Oslo, where I saw a demonstration was in Novi Sad where Veljko Milkovic.showed me his device which isn't a self-runner unfortunately. Wonder what happened to Bob in Canada. His was the first modern gravity driven motor claimed to be demonstrable. I think Stefan was in contact with him but don't know if there's any development there.

Thanks for that, I hope you have gotten a better picture of him at least.

And ofcourse we will lose the invention to Corporate unless we work together and reproduce, even though there is not much to go on but the words on the site and the scarse video footage.

I believe we can do it though, even if that seems wishful thinking. Abeling has left a lot of clues, the major one being the path of the weights.

With that:
"D" path
Dumbbells (unless someone has a better idea)
Barrier (Curved or not)
16 slots consisting of two types which look like boots
wheel consisting of two identical layers

We can go far. Have another look at the path (Taken from the video and overlaid with text by me)
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Cherryman on April 08, 2009, 09:39:59 PM
Thanks for that, I hope you have gotten a better picture of him at least.

And of course we will lose the invention to Corporate unless we work together and reproduce, even though there is not much to go on but the words on the site and the scarce video footage.

I believe we can do it though, even if that seems wishful thinking. Abeling has left a lot of clues, the major one being the path of the weights.

With that:
"D" path
Dumbbells (unless someone has a better idea)
Barrier (Curved or not)
16 slots consisting of two types which look like boots
wheel consisting of two identical layers

We can go far

Hey Aquarius,

From what i can make of you're model.. I think in your design the friction and the weight to get the dumbbell upwards the steep path is maybe too much.  On the other hand.. i do like the concept..  It rises fast and straight..  But with large weights..   This would be a brutal machine...  How can you make that from glass??

So i guess the solution must be in a smoother path..  without to many "impact" moments.

Just my two cents

Keep up the good work!
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Cherryman on April 08, 2009, 09:44:31 PM
When i look at the video footage , and see that he has different "pockets" at the outside ..

Could it be that going upwards they weights are in the round "pockets" and downwards in the oval pockets?  Or vice versa?...

Maybe there is only a very small D-shape, but to contrast the principle they present it as a D ?

Wat do you think?
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Cherryman on April 08, 2009, 09:50:28 PM
The most interesting about the picture of Sjack is that he has 9 weights on the "going down" side and 7 at the "going up" side..     At first i did think it was just a simplified picture of the trajectory of the balls... But the 16 balls are equal to the number "16" on the video..

Puzzles , puzzles..   ;D
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Alexioco on April 08, 2009, 10:20:10 PM
also it seems to me that by having the weights rise up in a straight line rather than up to the axle and around, the weights are taking a shortcut to get to the top meaning less energy?
If the weights raised up at the same speed as the ascending side of the wheel, then i think the weights would be travling faster than the wheel when they lift because the wheel area by the axle is moving slower than the outside of the wheel...

Edit: Thinking about it, if the weights take that shortcut up (straight) then less weights rise as more weights fall

Alex
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Cherryman on April 08, 2009, 10:27:19 PM
also it seems to me that by having the weights rise up in a straight line rather than up to the axle and around, the weights are taking a shortcut to get to the top meaning less energy?
If the weights raised up at the same speed as the ascending side of the wheel, then i think the weights would be travling faster than the wheel when they lift because the wheel area by the axle is moving slower than the outside of the wheel...

Edit: Thinking about it, if the weights take that shortcut up (straight) then less weights rise as more weights fall

Alex

Yes Alex, that is true, you can see it in this video:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GBygA2vOHx4&feature=channel_page

As you can see the ball accelerates and leaves the bottom of the swing arm when it is going up the ramp = shorter route.

Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: AquariuZ on April 08, 2009, 11:06:08 PM
The most interesting about the picture of Sjack is that he has 9 weights on the "going down" side and 7 at the "going up" side..     At first i did think it was just a simplified picture of the trajectory of the balls... But the 16 balls are equal to the number "16" on the video..

Puzzles , puzzles..   ;D

Nice  :o
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: AquariuZ on April 08, 2009, 11:27:17 PM
BREAKTHROUGH

I have just realized something.

What if there are moving weights and static weights moving up into position ONE SHOT AT A TIME.

No need for explosive action all the way up, just kinetic transfer..

I´ll try and explain: Remember the little toy where you have 6 steel balls suspended from a wire and you take one, let it fall and the last one on the other side gets shot-putted?

THIS IS IT.

The holes on the side are to stack the weights inside a holding system which is placed just left of the axle. (Pre-start) The placeholder is for 7 dumbbells.
The other nine dumbbells are then loaded at the following positions

13:00 weight number 1 of 16
13:30 weight number 2 of 16
14:00 weight number 3 of 16
14:30 weight number 4 of 16
15:00 weight number 5 of 16
15:30 weight number 6 of 16
16:00 weight number 7 of 16
16:30 weight number 8 of 16
17:00 weight number 9 of 16

Now visualize 7 stacked dumbbells in a holder just to the left of the axle.

[WEIGHT NUMBER 16 OF 16] <-- TOP OF STACK
[WEIGHT NUMBER 15 OF 16]
[WEIGHT NUMBER 14 OF 16]
[WEIGHT NUMBER 13 OF 16]
[WEIGHT NUMBER 12 OF 16]
[WEIGHT NUMBER 11 OF 16]
[WEIGHT NUMBER 10 OF 16] <-- BOTTOM OF STACK

They are stacked and in direct contact with each other

Weight 10 is just up and to the left of the six o clock socket
Weight 16 is just below and to the left of the twelve o clock position

THIS IS EXACTLY WHERE HE DESCRIBES THE ACTION IN THE FAQ

Let go of the wheel or push it.

the 17:00 weight moves to 18:00, leaves its socket when it encounters the barrier/holder and then makes a direct hard contact with weight number ten, which is on the bottom of the stack. The kinetic energy is transferred all the way to weight number 16 which is on top of the stack and forces weight number 16 into the holding socket at around 12:30.

Weight number 16 becomes weight number one.

I just slapped my forehead, because he did say "Kogelstoten". Shot-put did not mean anything to me but you can compare "Kogelstoten" to a Jeux-de-boules ball violently displacing another ball and taking its place.

Cherryman your 7-9 remark just now removed the cogwebs from my brain, thank you my friend.

This I can indeed make a model of, I am getting excited now.

O, you noticed? (Clicking on WM.EXE)

 ;D
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Cherryman on April 08, 2009, 11:33:07 PM
BREAKTHROUGH

I have just realized something.

What if there are moving weights and static weights moving up into position ONE SHOT AT A TIME.

No need for explosive action all the way up, just kinetic transfer..

I´ll try and explain: Remember the little toy where you have 6 steel balls suspended from a wire and you take one, let it fall and the last one on the other side gets shot-putted?

THIS IS IT.

The holes on the side are to stack the weights inside a holding system which is placed just left of the axle. (Pre-start) The placeholder is for 7 dumbbells.
The other nine dumbbells are then loaded at the following positions

13:00 weight number 1 of 16
13:30 weight number 2 of 16
14:00 weight number 3 of 16
14:30 weight number 4 of 16
15:00 weight number 5 of 16
15:30 weight number 6 of 16
16:00 weight number 7 of 16
16:30 weight number 8 of 16
17:00 weight number 9 of 16

Now visualize 7 stacked dumbbells in a holder to the left.

[WEIGHT NUMBER 16 OF 16] <-- TOP OF STACK
[WEIGHT NUMBER 15 OF 16]
[WEIGHT NUMBER 14 OF 16]
[WEIGHT NUMBER 13 OF 16]
[WEIGHT NUMBER 12 OF 16]
[WEIGHT NUMBER 11 OF 16]
[WEIGHT NUMBER 10 OF 16] <-- BOTTOM OF STACK

They are stacked and in direct contact with each other

Weight 10 is just up and to the left of the six o clock socket
Weight 16 is just below and to the left of the twelve o clock position

THIS IS EXACTLY WHERE HE DESCRIBES THE ACTION IN THE FAQ

Let go of the wheel or push it.

the 17:00 weight moves to 18:00, leaves its socket when it encounters the barrier/holder and then makes a direct hard contact with weight number ten, which is on the bottom of the stack. The kinetic energy is transferred all the way to weight number 16 which is on top of the stack and forces weight number 16 into the holding socket at around 12:30.

Weight number 16 becomes weight number one.

I just slapped my forehead, because he did say "Kogelstoten". Shot-put did not mean anything to me but you can compare "Kogelstoten" to a Jeux-de-boules ball violently displacing another ball and taking its place.

Cherryman your 7-9 remark just now removed the cogwebs from my brain, thank you my friend.

This I can indeed make a model of, I am getting excited now.

O, you noticed? (Clicking on WM.EXE)

 ;D

Hey Aquariuz,

I tried the kenetic energie ting..  Just today... from you're D remark.  But i could not get it to simulate properly. 

I started to simulate indeed the little toy, that was already a problem.  Then i tried the same setup in D position, with a wheel but my problem was that there wasn't enough energy, AND the stack will try to move downwards...

So i hope you will found a solution for that! 
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Cherryman on April 08, 2009, 11:38:30 PM
Here is a screenshot:

Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: AquariuZ on April 08, 2009, 11:41:28 PM
I started to simulate indeed the little toy, that was already a problem.  Then i tried the same setup in D position, with a wheel but my problem was that there wasn't enough energy, AND the stack will try to move downwards...

The stack is held into place by the rotating arms wait and see so I can show you

The point where the balls touch created a powerful kinetic jolt moving just the top weight

Modelling now... Make sure to select "Steel" as your material for the spheres.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Alexioco on April 08, 2009, 11:44:41 PM
Dont know if this helps but I have studied the youtube video (the one without the subtitles) so I could see as much of the wheel as I could, I have drawn out the wheels frame work, you can check it with the video to make sure I havnt got somthing wrong but as far as I can see, it seems right...

On the footage, the is a straight piece of wood the runs diaganol along the wheel, I dont know what thats for, unless its just to support the wheel, so I have left that out for now.



Alex
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Cherryman on April 08, 2009, 11:44:48 PM
The stack is held into place by the rotating arms wait and see so I can show you

The point where the balls touch created a powerful kinetic jolt moving just the top weight

Modelling now... Make sure to select "Steel" as your material for the spheres.

It sounds good!  Maybe i did something wrong.  I hope you get it!

And steel.. Not sure.. what i used.. i Think default.

I'm curiuos to you're rotating arms. 

Hurry!  ;D
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: yaz on April 08, 2009, 11:45:50 PM
Here's some interesting stuff I found:

There is a popular toy consisting of five steel balls, all of the same size and mass, hanging side by side in a row (many people keep them on their desks). Pull out the end ball and drop it against the row, and one pops of the other end. If two balls are pulled aside and dropped together, two pop out from the other end. The balls seem to count! How do they accomplish this trick?


The Newton's Cradle demonstrates the principle of conservation of energy. When one ball is swung into the other four, nearly all the kinetic energy is transferred through all the others to the ball on the far side which then swings out away from the others. When TWO balls are swung out the energy is doubled. When that doubled energy is transferred through the other balls, it is large enough that it can propel both balls at the far end. The whole thing works because each ball weighs the same as its fellows. If you used balls of different weights all sorts of funny interactions would occur.[/b
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: AquariuZ on April 08, 2009, 11:57:05 PM
On the footage, the is a straight piece of wood the runs diaganol along the wheel, I dont know what thats for, unless its just to support the wheel, so I have left that out for now.

I missed that, do you mean inside the wheel or outside the halves?

Anyway wm2d is not behaving as expected with regards to the transfer of kinetic energy  >:(

The simple toy I described does not work as expected in wm2d as mentioned by cherryman as well.

I was hoping to simulate this, but looks like I cannot (at least not with this software).
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Cherryman on April 08, 2009, 11:58:44 PM
Good tip AquariuZ, I tried the steel and that works better, but i'm still curious about the moving beams.

Also, if you want to do this with dumbbells, you will have to have a super exact outline to let both sides collapse at the same time... 

Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: AquariuZ on April 08, 2009, 11:59:16 PM
Here's some interesting stuff I found:

There is a popular toy consisting of five steel balls, all of the same size and mass, hanging side by side in a row (many people keep them on their desks). Pull out the end ball and drop it against the row, and one pops of the other end. If two balls are pulled aside and dropped together, two pop out from the other end. The balls seem to count! How do they accomplish this trick?


Thats about exactly what I posted 10 minutes ago.  8)

Great minds think alike.

I did not know this was called a Newtons Cradle.

So, adding to the list of clues:

Possible Newtons Cradle holding the dumbbells in a semi-static configuration to the left of the axle.

Check.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Cherryman on April 09, 2009, 12:00:02 AM
I missed that, do you mean inside the wheel or outside the halves?

Anyway wm2d is not behaving as expected with regards to the transfer of kinetic energy  >:(

The simple toy I described does not work as expected in wm2d as mentioned by cherryman as well.

I was hoping to simulate this, but looks like I cannot (at least not with this software).

Hold on...  I might have something.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Alexioco on April 09, 2009, 12:00:26 AM
Now that is a very clever idea, i am impressed, that seems like it should work at the moment  :o well done :)

edit: just thought, what will lift the second from top weight up?


Alex
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Cherryman on April 09, 2009, 12:02:48 AM
Found this one on the WM2D website, it might help you. 


Could you in the meantime explane the "beam" idear that would regulate them? 
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: AquariuZ on April 09, 2009, 12:04:16 AM
Good tip AquariuZ, I tried the steel and that works better, but i'm still curious about the moving beams.

Also, if you want to do this with dumbbells, you will have to have a super exact outline to let both sides collapse at the same time... 



It all fits... It is workshop time unless I figure out how to make wm2d behave...
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Cherryman on April 09, 2009, 12:05:12 AM
It all fits... It is workshop time unless I figure out how to make wm2d behave...

See the attached file with my previous post.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: AquariuZ on April 09, 2009, 12:07:12 AM
edit: just thought, what will lift the second from top weight up?

The next weight in line. They will all change position in the "cradle".

Top becomes first in 12:30 socket, second becomes top and so on

I like that word: cradle.

Abelings Cradle
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Cherryman on April 09, 2009, 12:09:17 AM
The next weight in line. They will all change position in the "cradle".

Top becomes first in 12:30 socket, second becomes top and so on

I like that word: cradle.

Abelings Cradle

Good name! Ah well what's in a name  ;D

Could you post a drawing, i'm still curious about the setup. 
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Alexioco on April 09, 2009, 12:11:54 AM
Thats great thinking AquariuZ, So the end force of the falling weight pushes the next one off the edge and lifting the second one ready to be pushed off the edge, will the falling weight gather enough force to do that though, also, what keeps the bottom weight from sliding back due to the force of the above weights? Dont forget on newtons cradle, when one sphre is swung, only one lifts, two must swing, to lift two...

Keep it up, seems really good

Alex
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: AquariuZ on April 09, 2009, 12:12:12 AM
Found this one on the WM2D website, it might help you. 


Could you in the meantime explane the "beam" idear that would regulate them? 

So it is possible then, I need to check the specs in that model thanks.

I will try to explain, imagine the boot coming in at 18:00 with weight #9 lodged in the socket (same on the other side or the mirror). The weights are held together via a bar, hence dumbbell. The bar touches the center barrier and weight #9 is dislodged into the heel of the socket (same on the mirror side). The momentum pushes the bar along the barrier in an upwards motion until #9 makes contact with #10.

There is something holding the other weights in place in the cradle, but that should be easily found what that is once the concept is explored in full.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: hansvonlieven on April 09, 2009, 12:13:29 AM
If you have a look at Newton's cradle you will notice that only the first and the last ball move, the others stay where they are. In order to get motion of the wheel you must move the entire stack. This a Newton's cradle effect cannot do.

Hans von Lieven
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: AquariuZ on April 09, 2009, 12:25:52 AM
If you have a look at Newton's cradle you will notice that only the first and the last ball move, the others stay where they are. In order to get motion of the wheel you must move the entire stack. This a Newton's cradle effect cannot do.

Hans von Lieven

You are right, now what do you think those holes in the wheels are for between the sockets on the wheel.

WHAT IF THEY ARE HOLDERS SOMEHOW FOR "PEGS" PUSHING THE STACK

I´m almost sure it is a Newtons cradle, just not sure at this point how the stack is kept in place and displaced. One thing I can think of is that once the top one is catapulted away into position, the gap created on the top is filled with the second one when the whole stack moves up a notch.

Just do not know how, but I feel the holes in wheel itself between the "boots" are a factor.

I am looking at Alex´s picture and trying to figure it out
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: AquariuZ on April 09, 2009, 12:31:40 AM
Dont know if this helps but I have studied the youtube video (the one without the subtitles) so I could see as much of the wheel as I could, I have drawn out the wheels frame work, you can check it with the video to make sure I havnt got somthing wrong but as far as I can see, it seems right...

This should the the HQ version of that video:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NjSFjfWy1h4&fmt=18

Can you please check and see if you notice something else or anything you wish to alter to the picture?

One thing I wish to mention is that there are two types of sockets.

TYPE 1 looks like a tight fit with a toe and heel
TYPE 2 looks more open like wooden shoe "Klomp"

TYPE I:
Slots 1,3,5,7,9,11,13 & 15

TYPE II:
Slots 2,4,6,8,10,12,14 & 16

I´ll be damned if I know why...
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Alexioco on April 09, 2009, 12:32:27 AM
You are right, now what do you think those holes in the wheels are for between the sockets on the wheel.

WHAT IF THEY ARE HOLDERS SOMEHOW FOR "PEGS" PUSHING THE STACK

I´m almost sure it is a Newtons cradle, just not sure at this point how the stack is kept in place and displaced. One thing I can think of is that once the top one is catapulted away into position, the gap created on the top is filled with the second one when the whole stack moves up a notch.

Just do not know how, but I feel the holes in wheel itself between the "boots" are a factor.

I am looking at Alex´s picture and trying to figure it out


Maybe if the "D" shape was longer, but not higher, so that alot more weights are pushing down to lift the stak up causing one t roll down thus lifting the stack again, I think this a really good idea you came up  with

Alex
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Alexioco on April 09, 2009, 12:36:31 AM
On the footage, the is a straight piece of wood the runs diaganol along the wheel, I dont know what thats for, unless its just to support the wheel, so I have left that out for now.

Edit: Ok, I noticed something that needed changing, i shall continue to look at it, it seems now that its exactly the same, i cant see any difference now, but i will have another look just incase.


Alex
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: khabe on April 09, 2009, 12:51:03 AM
Wellknown Air Vane Motors - even when ball bearings installed on the top of vanes - no way it runs self ...
sad,
khabe
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: hansvonlieven on April 09, 2009, 12:51:42 AM
You are right, now what do you think those holes in the wheels are for between the sockets on the wheel.

WHAT IF THEY ARE HOLDERS SOMEHOW FOR "PEGS" PUSHING THE STACK



Pushing the stack with what? You have already expended any potential energy that was there on your Newton's cradle effect. That part is easy, it is also the part that requires the least energy. Moving the stack takes many times the energy required to bounce one ball. Where is that coming from?

The guy is another Chas Campbell.

Hans von Lieven
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Alexioco on April 09, 2009, 01:18:02 AM
Ok here is the wheel again, notice that the edges are now straight (except for the top round part) I have drawn one by the side of the wheel exactly how they should be just incase i have not drawn them all precisely.

As far as I know, it is exactly the same now, "if" there is anything different, then time will tell through watching the footage...

Edit: You probably know this but, the reason I have coloured them black is to indicate that they are cut outs.

There are two wheels side by side, both wheels have this "cut out" pattern on them, I'm wandering weather the weights roll inbetween the two wheels, like clindrical weights with poles each end so they can roll. Just a thought, might be wrong...

Alex
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: AquariuZ on April 09, 2009, 01:23:09 AM
Snapshot.

Things i cannot place marked in red.

This could very well be a construction which is supposed to go between the plates.

Look at the bottom one, rotate left, what do we see? Looks like a stopper barrier to me.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: AquariuZ on April 09, 2009, 01:26:09 AM
Pushing the stack with what? You have already expended any potential energy that was there on your Newton's cradle effect. That part is easy, it is also the part that requires the least energy. Moving the stack takes many times the energy required to bounce one ball. Where is that coming from?

The guy is another Chas Campbell.

Hans von Lieven

Sure...

Anything else you would like to constructively add, or is this the extent of your creativity?

Never mind.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Alexioco on April 09, 2009, 01:29:05 AM
if you look at my above post, you will see the changes, also, the picutre you posted are good, it looks like some bars near the bottom, run through the wheel, weights may be able to swing on them, dont quite know how that fits with the pattern though, hmm...

Alex
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: AquariuZ on April 09, 2009, 01:32:30 AM
If you see as I see, these two stands slide out, are pushed together and slid back in between the two halves to...

...form the cradle.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Alexioco on April 09, 2009, 01:38:22 AM
oh yes, i can see where it curves at the bottom, then going up. maybe i can get the shape of the two pieces each side which are pulled out, it curves at the bottom quarter (6 to 9 on the clock) then at 9 it seems to go straight into the axle.

Alex
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: AquariuZ on April 09, 2009, 01:54:53 AM
oh yes, i can see where it curves at the bottom, then going up. maybe i can get the shape of the two pieces each side which are pulled out, it curves at the bottom quarter (6 to 9 on the clock) then at 9 it seems to go straight into the axle.

Alex

Side view (more or less)

Red is just part of the regular wheel stand
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Cherryman on April 09, 2009, 02:00:25 AM
I Hope the kinetic thing works out,

in the meanwhile i am trying to get the K.A.D. system to work better. (Never bet on one horse  ;D )

Due to the restrictions of the WM2D program , i had to gear similar setups together because the program does not work (or i do not know how) work in 3D.

I keep you guys informed about the progress, but now i do need some sleep..   :o





Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Cherryman on April 09, 2009, 02:20:02 AM
When i look at the pictures from the movie, t seems that his "curve" is made out of two peaces with a gap between them, the only reason for that gap i can think of is that the upper "curve" can move......  flip, turn .. or something...

Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Alexioco on April 09, 2009, 02:20:31 AM
Seems ok, i cant quite put it all together though, i can't understand why those round holes are in the pattern, they must have some relation to the rest of the pattern, this one really has me stuck :P

ahhh I may aswel say it, I am currently working on a wheel of my own, its not finished yet, i was going to test it then post it on here to save people wating but, it wont be much longer now, i found a very simple yet effective way of making weights lift themselves up to the outer wheel, then back in to the axle all on their own without any thing to control them, they control themselves, while one weight it at the rim, the other is at the axle, they keep swapping places,... I'm wandering if this chap has found something similiar, i found this by mistake, dont know if it will work yet though, i dont like saying until i have tested it, i shall post it on here soon as its done, i'm sure we will benefit from it some how :)

Alex
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Cherryman on April 09, 2009, 02:23:03 AM
Seems ok, i cant quite put it all together though, i can't understand why those round holes are in the pattern, they must have some relation to the rest of the pattern, this one really has me stuck :P

ahhh I may aswel say it, I am currently working on a wheel of my own, its not finished yet, i was going to test it then post it on here to save people wating but, it wont be much longer now, i found a very simple yet effective way of making weights lift themselves up to the outer wheel, then back in to the axle all on their own without any thing to control them, they control themselves, while one weight it at the rim, the other is at the axle, they keep swapping places,... I'm wandering if this chap has found something similiar, i found this by mistake, dont know if it will work yet though, i dont like saying until i have tested it, i shall post it on here soon as its done, i'm sure we will benefit from it some how :)

Alex

Sounds good Alex!  Feel free to share it anytime   ;D
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Cherryman on April 09, 2009, 02:25:21 AM
Alex, sinds his setup at the picture is made out of wood...  It could be that those holes are to balance the wheels, it is not easy to saw completely balanced wheel out of wood..  So maybe they do not have a function in the system, but are just a way to balance it. 
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Alexioco on April 09, 2009, 02:31:01 AM
sounds quite reasonable, the last wheel i made, the axle was not centre so the wheel turned on it owns which was anoying, i hope it doesn do this on my new one, shouldnt be long to its done though, its simple enough lol

I wander if the holes are supposed to have weights in? at the beggining, its says that the weights have been removed due to security reasons... hmmm maybe its a kind of fly-wheel? which help the weights to take their path/movement?

Alex
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: hartiberlin on April 09, 2009, 02:34:57 AM
Hi ALL,
I changed the KAD 23 WM2D file into a wheel,
that just gets a push from a weight that falls on it and then
the wheels should keep spinning on,
but it just does not work.

3 slots are just too few to get it to work.
There is always too much drag from the weight which must be lifted from 6 to 11 o´clock.

Attached is the WM2D file and a screenshot.
I have already exported an AVI movie with the Export function of
WM2D via the XVID codec and will post this now on youtube.

Regards, Stefan.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Alexioco on April 09, 2009, 02:40:04 AM
nice one stefan, ill watch that when its uploaded.
Anyway, im off to bed all, im dog tired  :-\ lol


nighty night

Alex
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: AquariuZ on April 09, 2009, 02:41:05 AM
When i look at the pictures from the movie, t seems that his "curve" is made out of two peaces with a gap between them, the only reason for that gap i can think of is that the upper "curve" can move......  flip, turn .. or something...


I just slapped my forehead again....

Hint: Look at the kidney shaped piece of wood just above the "cradle" in the last picture...

Hint 2: what if the weights extend PAST the sockets out to the sides or at least have an extension bar which sticks out the side

That would mean they stay on the wheel until they start to fall out of the socket at 2100, roll down and to the right at 21:30 and hit the kidney at around 22:00, being pulled ever further upwards (yes because there are more weights pulling down on the right than on the left) and being led into the socket at 12:00 again...

Please note the extended dumbbells on the front view of a weight resting in its socket

More tomorrow, my wheel is @ 02:40am
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: hartiberlin on April 09, 2009, 02:41:58 AM
Here is the video file I made:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s-lKoQAx02A

Regards, Stefan.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Cherryman on April 09, 2009, 02:43:03 AM
Stefan, Maybe three is too little, or the curve is not perfect yet...

Keep on trying! 

As far as youre way to start it. Its one solution, i myself use the motor function to start it up with any desired speed for just half a second and let it then run free.

To do that:

- Select the motor
- Dubbelclick it
- In the bottom of the properties pop-up de-select "always on"
- In the empty field put in " T<0.5" 

This way when you start it , you will have a have second push to the speed you desire and after that it will run free as well.

It gives you a little more control over the push and easier to try out different speeds..


Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: hartiberlin on April 09, 2009, 02:58:07 AM
Hi Cherryman,
the problem with your motor model was, that the weight of the disc and
the round tracks was more than 2000 KGs all together,
so it had just too much inertial energy.

I just set it to all in all about 10 Kg only and then the discs slows down,
after the motor goes off after 0.5 seconds and comes to a stillstand
as well.
So please watch your weights in the properties box.
These were set wrongly.

Regards, Stefan.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Cherryman on April 09, 2009, 03:04:21 AM
Hi Cherryman,
the problem with your motor model was, that the weight of the disc and
the round tracks was more than 2000 KGs all together,
so it had just too much inertial energy.

I just set it to all in all about 10 Kg only and then the discs slows down,
after the motor goes off after 0.5 seconds and comes to a stillstand
as well.
So please watch your weights in the properties box.
These were set wrongly.

Regards, Stefan.


Aha, well then i have to study that carefully, because i usually do not change the weight, just use standard and set the balls to steel... 

Tnx! 

I'm still learning the program, i did not think the motor did still have any influence after the 0.5 sec. 

Tnx for the tip!   And i have to go back to the drawing board...  and the manual   ;D


Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: AquariuZ on April 09, 2009, 03:14:41 AM
Found it. No shifting stands, the wheel is as is.

Protruding weight gets stopped by the barrier at 6 o clock and starts moving away from the side of the wheel until it meets the end of the curved barrier. Weight then moves past the barrier and remains balanced at around nine o clock. Past nine o clock it starts moving right towards the center but meets a second barrier, this time from the outside. This is the "kidney" barrier". It then continues to move as the wheel rotates  along the edge of the "kidney" in a diagonal line towards one o clock until it reaches the end of the second barrier and falls into place into its socket again at which point the weight is at around the 12:30 position and the cycle continues.

No kinetics.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Grimer on April 09, 2009, 03:15:58 AM
@ AquariuZ
@ Cherryman
@ hartiberlin

I have been following this thread and have become more and more intrigued, especially when you start discussing the transfer of energy and momentum between different sized masses.

It reminded me of a paper I wrote when working as a Principal Scientific Officer in the Department of the Environment, UK.

The eight pages which you might find relevant to your analysis are as follows:

http://i136.photobucket.com/albums/q171/frank260332/IHMpage04.jpg
http://i136.photobucket.com/albums/q171/frank260332/IHMpage05.jpg
http://i136.photobucket.com/albums/q171/frank260332/IHMpage06.jpg
http://i136.photobucket.com/albums/q171/frank260332/IHMpage07.jpg
http://i136.photobucket.com/albums/q171/frank260332/IHMpage08.jpg
http://i136.photobucket.com/albums/q171/frank260332/IHMpage09.jpg
http://i136.photobucket.com/albums/q171/frank260332/IHMpage10.jpg
http://i136.photobucket.com/albums/q171/frank260332/IHMpage11.jpg

I have them as .jpegs because the symbols are quite complicated and are from a non-standard font.

Let me say that most people would regard attempting a Gravity Wheel, a classic perpetual motion machine, as absolutely crazy or a total scam.

Obviously I don't, for the reasons set out in the above pages.

Good luck. You seem to be getting your heads around the problem.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Cherryman on April 09, 2009, 03:23:35 AM
TNX Grimer, but i'm afraid that goes above my head  :o

@ AquariuZ.  Does the weight stop at 0900 or just moves on?

Because what you describe looks a bit like this?

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

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GBygA2vOHx4&feature=channel_page
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Cherryman on April 09, 2009, 03:40:02 AM
Now i really go to bed, but my latest test seams promissing..  And I'm curious about Aquariuz path.

Goodnight all.. The story continues.......   ;D
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Grimer on April 09, 2009, 05:26:12 AM
TNX Grimer, but I'm afraid that goes above my head  :o


Don't worry about it.

It's not the maths that the difficulty. It's the conceptual change involved.

I'll try and get my head round what you chaps are doing and explain the implications in terms you should understand.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Cherryman on April 09, 2009, 05:32:05 AM
Could'nt sleep..   :o

So here is an action shot of the K.A.D. :

 



Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Cherryman on April 09, 2009, 05:58:53 AM
Test 5
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Grimer on April 09, 2009, 09:17:28 AM
Couldn't sleep..   :o

So here is an action shot of the K.A.D. :

I'm not surprised you couldn't sleep.

Great diagrams. Virtually self explanatory.

One's got the third derivative (rate of change of acceleration d3x/dt3) on the up side and some higher derivative (dn>3x/dtn>3) on the down side.

Couldn't be better. In fact it's essentially the same as Mylow is getting with his motor (http://www.overunity.com/index.php?topic=7039.msg167325#msg167325) except that here the gravitation potential gradient is being mined whereas in his case it was the magnetic potential gradient.

In Mylow's case it was the second and third derivative which was giving the legs of the power cycle. In this case it is the third and higher derivatives.

Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: hartiberlin on April 09, 2009, 12:01:02 PM
Cherryman,
nice new design.
Could you please again post the WM2D file ?

Many thanks.

Regards, Stefan.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Philip Hardcastle on April 09, 2009, 12:03:11 PM
Sorry Guys,

You seem to be feverish about this, but I see nothing to get excited about.

No source of energy coming in simply guarantees that it will not (cannot) generate power.

Self explanatory, of what?

Phil
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: AquariuZ on April 09, 2009, 12:12:04 PM
Test 5

I have overlaid the barriers as I understand it from the video footage. Please check the screen shots I posted...

the red spheres represent the side view of the dumbbells. The green dot represents the extended axle which touches the barriers, the weights itself do not touch the barriers.

Now the KAD arms are a bit off and too short, but hopefully you will be able to see the path.

A) WEIGHT AXLE ENCOUNTERS LOWER BARRIER AT AROUND SIX O CLOCK FROM THE INSIDE
B) WEIGHT MOVES UP ALONG THE INSIDE OF THE LOWER BARRIER
C) WEIGHT PASSES LOWER BARRIER AND STAYS ALMOST MOTIONLESS FOR A MOMENT
D) THE WEIGHT MOVES RIGHT CAUSED BY THE MOMENTUM OF THE WHEEL
E) THE WEIGHT AXLE ENCOUNTERS THE UPPER BARRIER FROM THE OUTSIDE
F) WEIGHT MOVES UP ALONG THE UPPER BARRIER BY MOMENTUM
G) WEIGHT FINDS ITSELF IN THE SOCKET AGAIN AT 12:30, EXACTLY WHERE IT WAS AT 17:30

I hope you can now see what I mean...

AGAIN: SEVEN WEIGHTS ON THE LEFT - NINE ON THE RIGHT. HERE IS YOUR "D".
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Cherryman on April 09, 2009, 12:23:36 PM
I have overlaid the barriers as I understand it from the video footage. Please check the screen shots I posted...

the red spheres represent the side view of the dumbbells. The green dot represents the extended axle which touches the barriers, the weights itself do not touch the barriers.

Now the KAD arms are a bit off and too short, but hopefully you will be able to see the path.

A) WEIGHT AXLE ENCOUNTERS LOWER BARRIER AT AROUND SIX O CLOCK FROM THE INSIDE
B) WEIGHT MOVES UP ALONG THE INSIDE OF THE LOWER BARRIER
C) WEIGHT PASSES LOWER BARRIER AND STAYS ALMOST MOTIONLESS FOR A MOMENT
D) THE WEIGHT MOVES RIGHT CAUSED BY THE MOMENTUM OF THE WHEEL
E) THE WEIGHT AXLE ENCOUNTERS THE UPPER BARRIER FROM THE OUTSIDE
F) WEIGHT MOVES UP ALONG THE UPPER BARRIER BY MOMENTUM
G) WEIGHT FINDS ITSELF IN THE SOCKET AGAIN AT 12:30, EXACTLY WHERE IT WAS AT 17:30

I hope you can now see what I mean...

AGAIN: SEVEN WEIGHTS ON THE LEFT - NINE ON THE RIGHT. HERE IS YOUR "D".

Hmm intresting..

I haven't got time now..  So i give you guys some files to play with...  There are still some barriers left.

Maybe a stupid question, but should we consider the rotation of the earth?  Because a water whirl always wants to go in the same direction, maybe this can influence this as well...  (Not in the software, but IRL )  It might be of any influence to put it in a certain compass direction line-up.

Anyway here are the files.

Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Cherryman on April 09, 2009, 12:28:16 PM
Aquariuz, i was thinking of the dumbells again.. I think the principle is the same, he uses the dumbbells middle bar to lift and st ear them, i do this with the open rails...  Same effect different approach in my opinion.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: AquariuZ on April 09, 2009, 12:30:53 PM
Aquariuz, i was thinking of the dumbells again.. I think the principle is the same, he uses the dumbbells middle bar to lift and st ear them, i do this with the open rails...  Same effect different approach in my opinion.

The lift is on the OUTSIDE, this is the trick. Please check previous. No construction inside the two layers. I hope to finish a correctly scaled model today, preferably without a motor.

Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Cherryman on April 09, 2009, 12:37:34 PM
The lift is on the OUTSIDE, this is the trick. Please check previous. No construction inside the two layers. I hope to finish a correctly scaled model today, preferably without a motor.



I did try something similar, i made the ramp a closed path, so it stears the upcoming weights as well in the inside as the outside.. but that didn't work....

I do however see something in you're drawing.. that if you can skip an arm due to the shorter path then you would have indeed more weights on the long side then on the short side...  That needs some more investigation..

I'm looking forward to see you're model!

Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: AquariuZ on April 09, 2009, 12:38:37 PM
Here the snapshot again with adjusted lighting.

You can clearly see the two barriers or stoppers located between the wheel layer and the stand.

This leads me to believe that the weights are indeed extended axle dumbbells.

This also makes me think I have figured out the concept.

Time will tell!

PS: There is a very good reason why Abeling did not want the device filmed from the front near the axle area because you would clearly see the stoppers...

Sorry Sjack, but do not worry you will still get all the credit and be rich & alive.  8)
Title: HENKEL BENELUX HAS SENT A REPLY
Post by: AquariuZ on April 09, 2009, 02:16:28 PM
Geachte heer,

Naar aanleiding van uw aanvraag deel ik u hierbij mede, dat Henkel nauw betrokken is bij de "verlijmingsvraagstukken" van het project van de heer Abeling met betrekking tot de Gewicht Energie Centrale. Het betreft een serieus project. Voor verdere informatie verwijzen wij u graag door naar de heer Abeling.

Met vriendelijke groet / best regards,

Rom Rombouts
National Account Manager

Henkel Nederland B.V.
Adhesive Technologies
Building
T:  +31.(0)30.6073437
F:  +31.(0)30.6045271
M: +31.(0)6.43372124


TRANSLATION

Dear Sir,

With regards to your request for information we confirm that Henkel is closely involved with the "glue attachment challenges" of the project of Mr. Abeling with regards to the Weight Power Plant. It is indeed a serious project. For further information we refer you to Mr. Abeling.

With kind regards,

Rom Rombouts
National Account Manager

Henkel Nederland B.V.
Adhesive Technologies
Building
T:  +31.(0)30.6073437
F:  +31.(0)30.6045271
M: +31.(0)6.43372124


Good enough for me...
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: mondrasek on April 09, 2009, 02:46:29 PM
Gents,

The way to make the "Newton's Cradle" energy transfer work in WM2D has to do with the property "elastic".  You can wikipedia elasticity for the details.  But in layman's terms:  Lowering the elastic property makes an object absorb energy.  It becomes more like a ball of clay and will not bounce.  Raising the elasticity to it's maximum of 1 makes it return all of it's energy.  So it becomes super hard and will bounce forever, returning to the same height from which it is initially dropped.  Of course the surface you are dropping onto also needs to have an elasticity of 1.

Might be time to look up the elasticity of glass, though I am of the mind that this is actually a reference to fiberglass, which was also mentioned very early in this thread.

Great find with the external cam profiles in the video.  I had thought this must be a part of the whole so it's nice to see it in the pictures.

Now, where is the extra energy coming from that launches the weights up the ramp?  He says he gathers it in the lower left, or between 6 and 9 o'clock, right?

M.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: mondrasek on April 09, 2009, 03:05:47 PM
Food for thought attached.

M.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: i_ron on April 09, 2009, 04:43:13 PM
I have overlaid the barriers as I understand it from the video footage. Please check the screen shots I posted...
snip

I hope you can now see what I mean...

AGAIN: SEVEN WEIGHTS ON THE LEFT - NINE ON THE RIGHT. HERE IS YOUR "D".

Aquariuz,

Excellent deductions! This is a very good start. Thanks for posting as a screen shot as I can't read
the wm2d files.

My only quibble is that your pocket shape is not correct... the deep part of the pocket should end
just at transition point where the axle is handed over from the inner guide to the outer guide.

The other point is the two dissimilar pocket shapes... are there perhaps two different actions
taking place? Eight following one path and eight following a different path? With the dropping of
an inner path weight acting to 'lift' the other?

Ron




Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: mondrasek on April 09, 2009, 05:04:21 PM
I've considered from the start that the different slot profiles may have been due to trail and error testing.  The video shows what we believe to be prototype wheel(s).  They are roughly made so I think Abeling might have been trying things out.  He might have change the shape of only one slot to see how it performed.  So there could be 16 variations.  Or he might have tried pairs or multiples of pairs of slot profiles.  I think we might be seeing a wheel where half the slots are of one profile attempt and the other half is a second for evaluation purposes.  But I suppose the production machine would use all identical optimum profiles.

Again, just guesses.

M.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: AquariuZ on April 09, 2009, 05:39:34 PM
@ guys

Guys,

Newton Cradle is out
The wm2d model is by Cherryman I have used a snapshot to show the path via overlay.

I am making my own right now.

Update: Henkel is now asking ME questions  :o

Who am I?
Why am I interested in this project?


Hope I can finish the model before they kill me.  8)

PLEASE LOOK AT MY LAST TEN POSTS OR SO TO GET A THOROUGH UNDERSTANDING
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: lostcauses10x on April 09, 2009, 05:43:12 PM
tell them who you are and why you are interested.

@ guys

Guys,

Newton Cradle is out
The wm2d model is by Cherryman I have used a snapshot to show the path via overlay.

I am making my own right now.

Update: Henkel is now asking ME questions  :o

Who am I?
Why am I interested in this project?


Hope I can finish the model before they kill me.  8)
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: broli on April 09, 2009, 05:47:00 PM
I bet this thread will make Abeling sweat a bit. Did anyone so far had direct contact or a response with/of him?
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: AquariuZ on April 09, 2009, 05:52:24 PM
I bet this thread will make Abeling sweat a bit. Did anyone so far had direct contact or a response with/of him?

Omnibus called him yesterday I believe (page 17?)

And I don't think Sjack is watching, even though I have invited him to the forum.

I really think I have cracked it. If the model results are anywhere near what I expect I am building a mini wheel and will make some form of blueprints to share with you.

Hopefully by that time harti can help if I send the wm2d model because I have no decent software to create plans.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Grimer on April 09, 2009, 05:54:07 PM
Here the snapshot again with adjusted lighting.

You can clearly see the two barriers or stoppers located between the wheel layer and the stand.

This leads me to believe that the weights are indeed extended axle dumbbells.

This also makes me think I have figured out the concept.

Time will tell!

PS: There is a very good reason why Abeling did not want the device filmed from the front near the axle area because you would clearly see the stoppers...

Sorry Sjack, but do not worry you will still get all the credit and be rich & alive.  8)


Excellent deduction of what's going on from those crappy photos. It looks even simpler in principle than I thought. Second and third derivative - higher derivatives don't seem to be needed. Same derivatives as the Mylow Motor - Well that figures, eh!

Top marks for working it out, AquariuZ, or should I call you Alpha and Omega, the beginning and the ending.  ;)
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: AquariuZ on April 09, 2009, 05:54:09 PM
tell them who you are and why you are interested.

Who are you and why are you interested in me telling them who I am?

 ;D
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: AquariuZ on April 09, 2009, 05:59:53 PM
Top marks for working it out, AquariuZ, or should I call you Alpha and Omega, the beginning and the ending.  ;)

Thanks but I have not uncorked the bubblie yet...

I have been working for almost three hours straight now on a single polygon with all the captures I could make of the inner boot-shape to match almost 100% the curves. I will even make the "second type just to make sure I use the right one. What a pain but it is getting along...

It is clear that in the model the weight itself will touch the barrier and not its axle, but that is something I will have to accept for now.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Grimer on April 09, 2009, 06:08:02 PM
Who are you and why are you interested in me telling them who I am?

 ;D

Who am I? A man from the west who has been following a star across the desert for 40 years. When I see a handle which begins with alpha and ends with omega what else should I think but that perhaps I have met a fellow traveller on the same journey. As to specifics, that is no secret. Just google "Frank Grimer" or "Francis Joseph Grimer". 8)

And now I've told you who I am perhaps you can tell me who you are. You can use the private message facility if you're shy, or afraid the MIB will get you (they probably know all about you anyway  ::) )
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Tracker on April 09, 2009, 06:22:26 PM
Hi AquariuZ,

If you want a decent, very easy to learn, application to create plans (or any 2d/3d model) please use Google Sketchup.
http://sketchup.google.com/ (http://sketchup.google.com/)
I love this one.
You will need 30+ mins to learn basic techniques. (tutorials are built in)
Seeing is believing.

regards,

Tracker

Omnibus called him yesterday I believe (page 17?)

And I don't think Sjack is watching, even though I have invited him to the forum.

I really think I have cracked it. If the model results are anywhere near what I expect I am building a mini wheel and will make some form of blueprints to share with you.

Hopefully by that time harti can help if I send the wm2d model because I have no decent software to create plans.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: AquariuZ on April 09, 2009, 06:39:23 PM
Who am I? A man from the west who has been following a star across the desert for 40 years. When I see a handle which begins with alpha and ends with omega what else should I think but that perhaps I have met a fellow traveller on the same journey. As to specifics, that is no secret. Just google "Frank Grimer" or "Francis Joseph Grimer". 8)

And now I've told you who I am perhaps you can tell me who you are. You can use the private message facility if you're shy, or afraid the MIB will get you (they probably know all about you anyway  ::) )

My comment was directed @ lostcauses10x who asked me to tell them who I am.

But thanks for sharing.   ;D
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: AquariuZ on April 09, 2009, 06:41:12 PM
Hi AquariuZ,

If you want a decent, very easy to learn, application to create plans (or any 2d/3d model) please use Google Sketchup.
http://sketchup.google.com/ (http://sketchup.google.com/)
I love this one.
You will need 30+ mins to learn basic techniques. (tutorials are built in)
Seeing is believing.

regards,

Tracker


Wow  :o

Thank you sir
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Grimer on April 09, 2009, 07:29:09 PM
My comment was directed @ lostcauses10x who asked me to tell them who I am.

But thanks for sharing.   ;D

LOL. I should remember to read the quotes before answering.  ::)
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: X00013 on April 09, 2009, 07:40:56 PM
Hi AquariuZ,

If you want a decent, very easy to learn, application to create plans (or any 2d/3d model) please use Google Sketchup.
http://sketchup.google.com/ (http://sketchup.google.com/)
I love this one.
You will need 30+ mins to learn basic techniques. (tutorials are built in)
Seeing is believing.

regards,

Tracker



And sketchy has a physics plug in http://code.google.com/p/sketchyphysics2/

And Blender is a free gane physics engine that is pretty good  http://www.blender.org/

Heres some examples   http://www.youtube.com/results?search_type=videos&search_query=sketchyphysics&search_sort=video_date_uploaded

                                   http://www.youtube.com/results?search_type=videos&search_query=blender+physics&search_sort=video_view_count
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: i_ron on April 09, 2009, 07:49:23 PM
I've considered from the start that the different slot profiles may have been due to trail and error testing.  The video shows what we believe to be prototype wheel(s).  They are roughly made so I think Abeling might have been trying things out.  He might have change the shape of only one slot to see how it performed.  So there could be 16 variations.  Or he might have tried pairs or multiples of pairs of slot profiles.  I think we might be seeing a wheel where half the slots are of one profile attempt and the other half is a second for evaluation purposes.  But I suppose the production machine would use all identical optimum profiles.

Again, just guesses.

M.

mondrasek,

I think the slots are deliberately asymmetric...

"The weights are applied two by two: one weight is pushing/falling, the other one has to be lifted."

This is the key.

Ron
 


Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: mondrasek on April 09, 2009, 08:40:32 PM
mondrasek,

I think the slots are deliberately asymmetric...

"The weights are applied two by two: one weight is pushing/falling, the other one has to be lifted."

This is the key.

Ron

I believe that opposite slots must be identical.  The falling weight referred to is in the slot between 12 and 6.  The lifted one is at 180 degrees, on the 6 to 12 side.

In any one of these types of wheels they should be able to be made with just one pair of weights.  There must be a torque sum from just one pair:  the falling of one weight produces more torque than it takes to raise the other.  Then you add more pairs to increase the torque.  In a non running design where you have two weights and no output torque, adding more weight pairs further decreases the ability of that system to run e. g. rundown tests will be even slower with more pairs.

So it would be possible to test the design with just two identical slots 180 degrees apart and compare that to the output of another pair and so on, by running only one pair at a time and taking measurements.  The wheels in the video could show up to 8 different pairs of test designs looking for which slot profile provides the most output torque.

M.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Cherryman on April 09, 2009, 11:25:59 PM
Update:

Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: hartiberlin on April 10, 2009, 12:10:11 AM
Food for thought attached.

M.

Hi Mondrasek,
without the motor driving the wheel,
this design is not selfrunning.

Here is a screenshot.

Regards, Stefan.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: hartiberlin on April 10, 2009, 12:11:39 AM
@ guys

Guys,

Newton Cradle is out
The wm2d model is by Cherryman I have used a snapshot to show the path via overlay.

I am making my own right now.

Update: Henkel is now asking ME questions  :o

Who am I?
Why am I interested in this project?



Hi AquariuZ,
Please send them the exact URL for this thread, so they can have a look at this.
Many thanks.

Regards, Stefan.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: hartiberlin on April 10, 2009, 12:21:56 AM
Hmm intresting..

I haven't got time now..  So i give you guys some files to play with...  There are still some barriers left.

Maybe a stupid question, but should we consider the rotation of the earth?  Because a water whirl always wants to go in the same direction, maybe this can influence this as well...  (Not in the software, but IRL )  It might be of any influence to put it in a certain compass direction line-up.

Anyway here are the files.



Hi Cherryman,
the KAD7 file was only this.

Did you forget to post the file with the track-guides for the balls ?

By the way, what should the name KAD stand for ?
Did I miss this ?

Many thanks.
Regards, Stefan.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: hartiberlin on April 10, 2009, 12:26:30 AM
I have overlaid the barriers as I understand it from the video footage. Please check the screen shots I posted...

the red spheres represent the side view of the dumbbells. The green dot represents the extended axle which touches the barriers, the weights itself do not touch the barriers.

Now the KAD arms are a bit off and too short, but hopefully you will be able to see the path.

A) WEIGHT AXLE ENCOUNTERS LOWER BARRIER AT AROUND SIX O CLOCK FROM THE INSIDE
B) WEIGHT MOVES UP ALONG THE INSIDE OF THE LOWER BARRIER
C) WEIGHT PASSES LOWER BARRIER AND STAYS ALMOST MOTIONLESS FOR A MOMENT
D) THE WEIGHT MOVES RIGHT CAUSED BY THE MOMENTUM OF THE WHEEL
E) THE WEIGHT AXLE ENCOUNTERS THE UPPER BARRIER FROM THE OUTSIDE
F) WEIGHT MOVES UP ALONG THE UPPER BARRIER BY MOMENTUM
G) WEIGHT FINDS ITSELF IN THE SOCKET AGAIN AT 12:30, EXACTLY WHERE IT WAS AT 17:30

I hope you can now see what I mean...

AGAIN: SEVEN WEIGHTS ON THE LEFT - NINE ON THE RIGHT. HERE IS YOUR "D".

Hi AquariuZ ,

so you say, that this wheel does not work using centrifugal forces ?, cause
otherwise from 9 to 12 o´clock the weights would be pushed by the centrifugal forces
outwards to the rim and not going up your outer barrier in center...
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Cherryman on April 10, 2009, 12:58:24 AM
Hi Cherryman,
the KAD7 file was only this.

Did you forget to post the file with the track-guides for the balls ?

By the way, what should the name KAD stand for ?
Did I miss this ?

Many thanks.
Regards, Stefan.


Strange, the arms should be there too, i will repost it.

This for me started as a little fun project with my daughter ( 8 ), we decided to built a "Top Secret free energie machine"  . It seemd as a perfect time to test the swingarm idear. We needed a "secret" name name and it become K. (first letter our name) Automatisch (Automatic)  Ding (Thing)

So see it with a blink  ;), but i have no choice   ;D
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: mondrasek on April 10, 2009, 01:23:41 AM
Hi Mondrasek,
without the motor driving the wheel,
this design is not selfrunning.

Here is a screenshot.

Regards, Stefan.

Stefan,

You are 100% correct.

As I said, this was "food for thought."  I did not want to distract the others completely from the directions they were already trying.

The file I posted has to do with a concept for extracting energy from the lower left quadrant of the cycle and reintroducing it at the upper left quadrant.  It was not intended as a working solution, just "food for thought."

Conventional physics shows that we cannot move a weight around a wheel and gain energy from gravity.  I don't see anything so far in this idea with just ramps and guides that changes that.  But I also am not saying it is impossible.  I am looking at the other "facts" stated by Abeling on his site and trying to get the rest of this "team" to starting thinking of how to gather energy in the lower left and use it to launch the weights in the upper left.  This was one idea.

Thanks,

M.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Cherryman on April 10, 2009, 01:30:19 AM
Stefan,

As I said, this was "food for thought."  I did not want to distract the others completely from the directions they were already trying.

The file I posted has to do with a concept for extracting energy from the lower left quadrant of the cycle and reintroducing it at the upper left quadrant.  It was not intended as a working solution, just "food for thought."

Conventional physics shows that we cannot move a weight around a wheel and gain energy from gravity.  I don't see anything so far in this idea with ramps and guides that changes that.  But I also am not saying it is impossible.  I am looking at the other "facts" stated by Abeling on his site and trying to get the rest of this "team" to starting thinking of how to gather energy in the lower left and use it to launch the weights in the upper left.  This was one idea.

Thanks,

M.

Good! Keep them coming, i also post things i know dont't work , but i think that is the essence of this forum" Showing  progress and thinking, and  sharing. .
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: hartiberlin on April 10, 2009, 01:40:40 AM
Strange, the arms should be there too, i will repost it.

This for me started as a little fun project with my daughter ( 8 ), we decided to built a "Top Secret free energie machine"  . It seemd as a perfect time to test the swingarm idear. We needed a "secret" name name and it become K. (first letter our name) Automatisch (Automatic)  Ding (Thing)

So see it with a blink  ;), but i have no choice   ;D

Still the guidance tracks for the weights are missing.
I only see the weights, the disc and the left ramp.

Which version of WM2D do you use ?
I have installed over here 5.1.2.53

Regards, Stefan.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: hartiberlin on April 10, 2009, 01:47:28 AM
Hi,
I have tried to get this KAD design working with 4 guidance slots,
but this also does not work.
It seems the lifting of the balls at the left side causes just too much drag at the
ramp-wall.

Here is enclosed the WM2D file:

http://www.overunity.com/index.php?action=tpmod;dl=get260

and attached a picture.

I will upload a movie again to youtube now.

Regards, Stefan.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Cherryman on April 10, 2009, 01:52:07 AM
Hi,
I have tried to get this KAD design working with 4 guidance slots,
but this also does not work.
It seems the lifting of the balls at the left side causes just too much drag at the
ramp-wall.

Here is enclosed the WM2D file:

http://www.overunity.com/index.php?action=tpmod;dl=get260

and attached a picture.

I will upload a movie again to youtube now.

Regards, Stefan.

The Ramp is a rail with very little friction, you maybe you can change the friction level. But also the rotational force and the curvuture should "loosen" the ball from the rod so then the friction should not slow down the wheel..  At least.. that is the basic of what im trying.

So you combie the lifting from the different position and the moving mass and the accelaration from the curve combid.. Shoudl do the trick. 
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: hartiberlin on April 10, 2009, 01:58:07 AM
Well,
here is the video:

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

I guess I must install the newer version now and play
with the ramp materials to get less friction.
It was a real difference between using wood or
steel for the ramp.
In the above movie the balls are steel
and the ramp is wood.

When the ramp is steel too, the steel balls just
jump back and forth on the ramp, so not so good...
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Alexioco on April 10, 2009, 01:58:27 AM
Good! Keep them coming, i also post things i know dont't work , but i think that is the essence of this forum" Showing  progress and thinking, and  sharing. .

Hi Cherryman, I am completly with you on that, more brains are better than less :P

Alex
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Alexioco on April 10, 2009, 02:02:13 AM
Well,
here is the video:

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

I guess I must install the newer version now and play
with the ramp materials to get less friction.
It was a real difference between using wood or
steel for the ramp.
In the above movie the balls are steel
and the ramp is wood.

When the ramp is steel too, the steel balls just
jump back and forth on the ramp, so not so good...



Great video stefan, i always like your work :) I remember my old wheel designs you put on youtube  8)

edit: i may be giving you a new one soon to do for me  ::)

Alex
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: hallo on April 10, 2009, 02:05:06 AM
How to get the WM2D:

http://www.board4all.cz/showthread.php?t=88165

 :o
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: mondrasek on April 10, 2009, 02:08:04 AM
Guys,

In WM2D you can set the properties manually rather than choose the preset "steel", "wood", etc.  If you set the Static Friction and Dynamic Friction to zero, you eliminate friction from the equation (for testing purposes).  You can also set the Elastic property to zero if you want it to not bounce off of other objects like a ball of clay, or up to 1 if you want it to bounce off of other object with the same but opposite velocity.  Also, set the mass to whatever you want since your objects could be of any material density as well as extend into the page as far as you want.

Eliminating friction is a good test method.  If you cannot get a working system without friction, obviously it will not work in the real world either.

M.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Cherryman on April 10, 2009, 02:13:33 AM
Well,
here is the video:

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

I guess I must install the newer version now and play
with the ramp materials to get less friction.
It was a real difference between using wood or
steel for the ramp.
In the above movie the balls are steel
and the ramp is wood.

When the ramp is steel too, the steel balls just
jump back and forth on the ramp, so not so good...


Tnx that meterial thing is a good tip, i keep forgetting that!  ???

Stupid, because i think eventually result could be in the finetuning as Muchs as in the basic design.. But I'm to chaotic to do that systematically.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Cherryman on April 10, 2009, 02:27:29 AM
Timing and regulated feeding not yet under control

Video:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4xnwoafGoKI
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: 0c on April 10, 2009, 02:51:26 AM
Well,
here is the video:

Stefan, please hear me out.

With just the 4 arms in your video, no guides, if it spins fast enough, the balls will be stuck to the outer end due to centrifugal force, right.

Now add a trapdoor at the end of each arm, so if the trap door springs open, the ball will go flying out in the appropriate direction.

Now add an external curved ramp mechanism below the wheel, so that if the trapdoor opens above it, it will catch the ball and allow the ball's momenum to carry it back to the top.

You also need a trigger to unlatch the trapdoor near 6:00 so the ball will fly out at the correct time.

The trapdoor should stay open until that arm reaches the top, and should only close when a ball reenters the wheel at the top, then it should latch until it reaches bottom again.

The wheel will need to be spun up with all balls onboard until it reaches a speed where a ball escaping through the bottom of the wheel will have enough momentum to go up and around the ramp and reenter the wheel at the top. When the required speed is reached, the trapdoor latching/unlatching mechanism can be engaged.

The ramp length and wheel speed need to be synchronised so the ball reenters the same arm at the top it departed from at the bottom.

What you end up with, once it gets up to the required RPM, is a wheel with balls on one side and no balls on the other.

I'd be very interested in seeing a WM2D video of what I just described. If you don't understand what I said, just ask questions.

Thanx,
0c
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Cherryman on April 10, 2009, 02:56:55 AM
Its getting better..

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_VbxHhE3_7I&feature=channel
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: AquariuZ on April 10, 2009, 03:11:50 AM
Hi AquariuZ ,

so you say, that this wheel does not work using centrifugal forces ?, cause
otherwise from 9 to 12 o´clock the weights would be pushed by the centrifugal forces
outwards to the rim and not going up your outer barrier in center...


No, no I do not say this. The torque is on the right, the momentum pushes the weight out and up, past the lower barrier, where it will have lost its kinetic energy and gets pulled up by the momentum where gravity starts pulling it down and thus it meets the upper barrier on the outside and moves up that one to finally land in its own socket again at 12:30

Quite simple really.

Model is not done yet, it promise it is worth the wait as it seems to work exactly as I think it does.

Just do not want to post half baked
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: hartiberlin on April 10, 2009, 03:12:59 AM
Its getting better..

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_VbxHhE3_7I&feature=channel

Are you still running it via a motor or
is this already running itsself ?

Your KAD7 file under Version 8.x
has still inconsistences...
Just takes ages to render frame 1...
Can you please post your newer files please ?

Many thanks.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Cherryman on April 10, 2009, 03:25:42 AM
Here it is.

I Still use a motor, because of the testing. Curve, timing, catch&Hold..  I want it smoother and more natural.. 

well, it's fun!   8)

Here is the file:

http://www.overunity.com/index.php?action=tpmod;dl=item261

Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: hartiberlin on April 10, 2009, 03:35:39 AM
Stefan, please hear me out.

With just the 4 arms in your video, no guides, if it spins fast enough, the balls will be stuck to the outer end due to centrifugal force, right.

Now add a trapdoor at the end of each arm, so if the trap door springs open, the ball will go flying out in the appropriate direction.

Now add an external curved ramp mechanism below the wheel, so that if the trapdoor opens above it, it will catch the ball and allow the ball's momenum to carry it back to the top.

You also need a trigger to unlatch the trapdoor near 6:00 so the ball will fly out at the correct time.

The trapdoor should stay open until that arm reaches the top, and should only close when a ball reenters the wheel at the top, then it should latch until it reaches bottom again.

The wheel will need to be spun up with all balls onboard until it reaches a speed where a ball escaping through the bottom of the wheel will have enough momentum to go up and around the ramp and reenter the wheel at the top. When the required speed is reached, the trapdoor latching/unlatching mechanism can be engaged.

The ramp length and wheel speed need to be synchronised so the ball reenters the same arm at the top it departed from at the bottom.

What you end up with, once it gets up to the required RPM, is a wheel with balls on one side and no balls on the other.

I'd be very interested in seeing a WM2D video of what I just described. If you don't understand what I said, just ask questions.

Thanx,
0c

If I only would know, how to design such a system with WM2D.

I am no WM2D Pro, so I only can do basic things.

Regards, Stefan.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Alexioco on April 10, 2009, 04:19:50 AM
Here is my little contribution :P

Edit: wow I just had a good thought, if the weights raised like they do in my drawing (below) but straight under the axle and above the axle, the weights have no weight on the wheel, their weight is applied to the axle instead, so long as they raise in a straight line...

Alex
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Grimer on April 10, 2009, 09:38:56 AM
Well, I've worked out the power cycle for the Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel - and here it is.

http://i136.photobucket.com/albums/q171/frank260332/Sjackcycle.jpg

So it looks as though his gravity wheel really will work, though as he says, why someone didn't find this out a long time ago just by chance is a bit of a mystery.

Still, I suppose before knowledge of the Carnot cycle and the Leibniz calculus it would have been a bit of a mental stretch.

When I first recognised that the acceleration leg (d2x/dt2)and the rate of change of acceleration leg (the adiabatic leg - d3x/dt3) gave the potential for a power cycle I couldn't see where the other return legs were going to come from. But then I realised that cos everything is turning round the returning legs are the same as the outgoing legs. Tricky, eh!

But what on earth has this got to do with a Carnot cycle you may ask?

Well, think of the balls being thrown around as monster molecules and the structure enclosing them as the cylinder. The equivalent of the thermal potential change is the gravitational potential change and the adiabatic leg (the balls rising up) is where the motion energy is exchanged for gravitational energy.

If you don't understand what I'm on about (or even what I'm smoking  ;) ) I can't say I blame you.
And if you want to ask questions I'll do my best to answer them.

Oh, and one more think to note. The containing structure can be made as stiff as needs be so no significant power is lost to the structure.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on April 10, 2009, 01:20:54 PM
@Cherryman,

I’m looking at your KAD9.wm2d file. You had set the Torque on Polygon 5 to 1 on x and y1, as far as I can see. I reset it to zero on both axes and re-renedered it. It appears that it can still make full turns. There’s a problem with the fourth steel ball, however, which existed even with the original torque which I don’t know how to fix. Mind you I’ve never worked with WM2D before.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Cherryman on April 10, 2009, 01:24:19 PM
@Cherryman,

I’m looking at your KAD9.wm2d file. You had set the Torque on Polygon 5 to 1 on x and y1, as far as I can see. I reset it to zero on both axes and re-renedered it. It appears that it can still make full turns. There’s a problem with the fourth steel ball, however, which existed even with the original torque which I don’t know how to fix. Mind you I’ve never worked with WM2D before.

Neither do I  ;D

Untill i have a satisfying setup, i do not much with the parameters of WM2D, but feel free to try of finetuning it will help.  Good luck.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on April 10, 2009, 01:46:49 PM
When you change the material of the Body(5) - Polygon to Standard (whatever it means) from the initial Wood w/ steel balls weighing 100kg it makes 2 full rotations. During the third rotation there's a problem w/ the second to last ball. Nevertheless, if I'm doing it right, I think this is a notable achievement because it means that the wheel regains on its own what it has lost. It appears that it's now only a matter of fine tuning to have a working gravity wheel. Good job @Cherryman.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Cherryman on April 10, 2009, 01:49:42 PM
When you change the material of the Body(5) - Polygon to Standard (whatever it means) from the initial Wood w/ steel balls weighing 100kg it makes 2 full rotations. During the third rotation there's a problem w/ the second to last ball. Nevertheless, if I'm doing it right, I think this is a notable achievement because it means that the wheel regains on its own what it has lost. It appears that it's now only a matter of fine tuning to have a working gravity wheel.

Indeed, that's the basic of the  K.A.D. System. Althoug it should work also without the flying Ball, i'm testing that right now.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: AB Hammer on April 10, 2009, 02:19:35 PM
I keep looking and reading, but after so many builds, I think I will wait on a video or other proof. Simply put, ramps have always been tried and so far no proof of one working. If Sjack has it patented, why not show the working wheel?
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on April 10, 2009, 02:20:20 PM
With Custom (don't know what it means) material works even better. Unfortunately, don't know how to make a video out of it. Hope Stefan can help in that and have it uploaded to youtube for others to see. Of course, the way it is now with a wheel weighing almost 3tons and 100kg steel balls one can hardly call it a laboratory scale experiment. Wonder if it can be scaled down. Nevertheless, excellent idea, @Cherryman. Hope it will lead to a working model. Good luck.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on April 10, 2009, 03:01:07 PM
In fact, it seems I'm getting even better results with 0.1kg steel balls and 0.5kg wheel made of Custom material. I got 4 full turns but stopped the rendering because if I let it go further the program crashes for some reason and restarts the computer. Wish I knew how to make a video to show it to those who don't have WM2D.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Cherryman on April 10, 2009, 03:02:56 PM
In fact, it seems I'm getting even better results with 0.1kg steel balls and 0.5kg wheel made of Custom material. I got 4 full turns but stopped the rendering because if I let it go further the program crashes for some reason and restarts the computer. Wish I could make a video to show it to those who don't have WM2D.


I can do that, place upload the WM2D file then i will make you a video
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on April 10, 2009, 03:21:08 PM
Tried to upload it but the file is too large. Says maximum attachment size allowed is 250 KB. Do you video it with a camera or there's a way to make a video from within WM2D?
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Cherryman on April 10, 2009, 03:24:28 PM
Tried to upload it but the file is too large. Says maximum attachment size allowed is 250 KB. Do you video it with a camera or there's a way to make a video from within WM2D?

You can upload larger viles in the upload section (Left side of this page) Don't know if WM2D can make video's itself.

I Use Debut Capture (A free program,, google it)
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on April 10, 2009, 03:31:51 PM
Hope this is the link: http://www.overunity.com/index.php?action=tpmod;dl=item262
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: mondrasek on April 10, 2009, 03:33:53 PM
All,

WM2D files grow larger if they have already calculated frames!  Change any object property, hit run, stop and reset.  Then change the property back to original value and SAVE.  This clears all calculated frames.  This file will be just the geometry with no frames calculated.  It will be a very small file!

M.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Cherryman on April 10, 2009, 03:43:18 PM
Hope this is the link: http://www.overunity.com/index.php?action=tpmod;dl=item262

Ok, here is the video

I let it run, good work..  you have made it indeed run smoother, but there still comes the timing problem.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1KlLMA5oFxg&feature=channel_page

Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on April 10, 2009, 03:51:14 PM
Here it is as an attachment. Thanks @mondrasek.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: hartiberlin on April 10, 2009, 03:58:06 PM
Well, I've worked out the power cycle for the Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel - and here it is.

http://i136.photobucket.com/albums/q171/frank260332/Sjackcycle.jpg

So it looks as though his gravity wheel really will work, though as he says, why someone didn't find this out a long time ago just by chance is a bit of a mystery.

Still, I suppose before knowledge of the Carnot cycle and the Leibniz calculus it would have been a bit of a mental stretch.

When I first recognised that the acceleration leg (d2x/dt2)and the rate of change of acceleration leg (the adiabatic leg - d3x/dt3) gave the potential for a power cycle I couldn't see where the other return legs were going to come from. But then I realised that cos everything is turning round the returning legs are the same as the outgoing legs. Tricky, eh!

But what on earth has this got to do with a Carnot cycle you may ask?

Well, think of the balls being thrown around as monster molecules and the structure enclosing them as the cylinder. The equivalent of the thermal potential change is the gravitational potential change and the adiabatic leg (the balls rising up) is where the motion energy is exchanged for gravitational energy.

If you don't understand what I'm on about (or even what I'm smoking  ;) ) I can't say I blame you.
And if you want to ask questions I'll do my best to answer them.

Oh, and one more think to note. The containing structure can be made as stiff as needs be so no significant power is lost to the structure.

Hi Grimer,
looks good, so it is a right turning cycle process, right ?
How can we make the area inside the curve bigger, for more output ?
Can you please calculate this and let us know, how to do this in the real world ?

Many thanks.

Regards, Stefan.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: hartiberlin on April 10, 2009, 04:03:31 PM
All,

WM2D files grow larger if they have already calculated frames!  Change any object property, hit run, stop and reset.  Then change the property back to original value and SAVE.  This clears all calculated frames.  This file will be just the geometry with no frames calculated.  It will be a very small file!

M.

Very good tip.
I always wondered, how I can delete the already calculated frames,
that are always stored into the WM2D file...

Is there no other way to delete the frames easier ?
Many thanks.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on April 10, 2009, 04:12:58 PM
Ok, here is the video

I let it run, good work..  you have made it indeed run smoother, but there still comes the timing problem.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1KlLMA5oFxg&feature=channel_page



Thanks, @Cherryman.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: hartiberlin on April 10, 2009, 04:16:12 PM
@Cherryman,
can you please upload the KAD5 WM2D file
from:

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

I want to test some basic things with it.

Many thanks in advance.

2. I really think, using centrifugal forces  it might just only work,
if we really get the balls OFF the wheel at 6 o´clock and
let them run up a external ramp and get them onto the wheel again at 12 o´clock.

This the wheel can speed up and can conduct work onto an external axis load.

3. Alexioco,
I don´t understand your drawing, could you please explain it some more ?
Many thanks in advance.

Regards, Stefan.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: hartiberlin on April 10, 2009, 04:19:17 PM
@Omnibus,
if you want a Video from the WM2D program:
you need to click on menu File/EXPORT and the choose
AVI and then use a codec like XVID ( You must first install this
codec in your PC, DIVX codec for instance does not work in my PC for it)
and then use 24 bits deepth and 25 or 30 frames/sec
and then let it render it.

Hope it helps.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: hartiberlin on April 10, 2009, 04:22:39 PM
I think this KAD 9 file works only, cause you have a motor in it.
the barrier at the left is much too steep and there are too few balls
and it always will stop, so this design is a dead end for a selfrunning wheel
I guess.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on April 10, 2009, 04:23:35 PM
This is my comment on youtube regarding the simulation:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1KlLMA5oFxg&feature=channel_page

"This is modeled with no initial torque with Custom material (whatever it means), 0.1kg steel balls and 05kg rotor. If nothing is overlooked in the parameters rendered, this design by @YbborNetsrek (@Cherryman, that is) appears to be the first simulated working gravity wheel."
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on April 10, 2009, 04:24:59 PM
I think this KAD 9 file works only, cause you have a motor in it.
the barrier at the left is much too steep and there are too few balls
and it always will stop, so this design is a dead end for a selfrunning wheel
I guess.

Stefan, the initial torque is set to zero in this simulation here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1KlLMA5oFxg&feature=channel_page
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on April 10, 2009, 04:26:41 PM
@Omnibus,
if you want a Video from the WM2D program:
you need to click on menu File/EXPORT and the choose
AVI and then use a codec like XVID ( You must first install this
codec in your PC, DIVX codec for instance does not work in my PC for it)
and then use 24 bits deepth and 25 or 30 frames/sec
and then let it render it.

Hope it helps.


Thanks a lot, Stefan, will try it.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: mondrasek on April 10, 2009, 05:04:06 PM
Very good tip.
I always wondered, how I can delete the already calculated frames,
that are always stored into the WM2D file...

Is there no other way to delete the frames easier ?
Many thanks.

Not that I know of.  But I am also new to WM2D.  Played around with it for about a month or so I guess.

Also, custom material just means you are setting material characteristics manally rather than using the few pre-sets like steel or wood.  You manually set the static and dynamic friction, density (mass), elasticity, etc.  This is because there are many more materials than WM2D has in the pre-sets.  Once you find characteristics that give you the desired design functionality, you then select real world materials similar to those characteristics.  It could even lead you to choose a material such as glass.

BTW, every wheel in WM2D will spin forever until you turn on air resistance.  The pin joints are frictionless, and this is not the case in the real world.  So you can add air resistance or a resisting torque to simulate real air resistance and axle friction.  Of course, if any wheel accelerates in WM2D due only to geometry and the simulated gravity, it should be a runner.

M.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: hartiberlin on April 10, 2009, 05:09:43 PM
Stefan, the initial torque is set to zero in this simulation here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1KlLMA5oFxg&feature=channel_page

in the above KAD9 file there was still a motor set at 1 rad/sec
so it was the drive of the wheel.

Also the background disc was very heavy with over 1000 Kg,
so this is not realistic.

I am trying to change this all now and see, if it will really run without any
motor at all...
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on April 10, 2009, 05:18:15 PM
@mondrasek,

Quote
Of course, if any wheel accelerates in WM2D due only to geometry and the simulated gravity, it should be a runner.

This appears to be the case with @Cherryman's design. So far this is the only working simulation of a gravity motor (or any OU motor for that matter) that I've ever seen. Of course, we have to study this thoroughly to ensure that it isn't a novice's success (by novice I mean myself because I started using MW2D for the first time only several hours ago). I really hope it's the real thing, as it appears to be at this point. Once it's established crafting it won't be a problem, I think, when we have such skilled folks as @CLaNZeR and @X00013. The photograph of Mylow's device which Sterling posted shows a very beautifully crafted device as well and maybe that talented person would be interested in making this device too.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: hartiberlin on April 10, 2009, 05:19:55 PM
Hmm,
how did you design the polygon 5 of KAD9  ?

If I delete the motor in the center the disc begins to turn
counterclockwise...

Hmm, very strange...

Also the left barrier can not be set as a different colored fill
mode. It stays always transparent...
How did you design these polygons ?
in a different program ?
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on April 10, 2009, 05:20:33 PM
in the above KAD9 file there was still a motor set at 1 rad/sec
so it was the drive of the wheel.

Also the background disc was very heavy with over 1000 Kg,
so this is not realistic.

I am trying to change this all now and see, if it will really run without any
motor at all...

The disc is only 0.5kg and the steel balls are 0.1kg in the simulation. Where did you see the 1rad s^-1 motor?

I meant the simulation I modified, not the original KAD9.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: hartiberlin on April 10, 2009, 05:56:13 PM
The disc is only 0.5kg and the steel balls are 0.1kg in the simulation. Where did you see the 1rad s^-1 motor?

I meant the simulation I modified, not the original KAD9.

This one attached to this message:

http://www.overunity.com/index.php?topic=7150.msg170088#msg170088

has a motor in it.

Check it out again.

Where is the one without the motor ?
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Tracker on April 10, 2009, 05:59:17 PM
Hi Omnibus,

With all due respect.
There IS a motor in this simulation.
When removed, nothing happens.
If you have one without the motor, please post it here.

regards,

Tracker

The disc is only 0.5kg and the steel balls are 0.1kg in the simulation. Where did you see the 1rad s^-1 motor?

I meant the simulation I modified, not the original KAD9.

Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on April 10, 2009, 06:01:04 PM
Stefan, try this one (attached).
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on April 10, 2009, 06:04:04 PM
Hi Omnibus,

With all due respect.
There IS a motor in this simulation.
When removed, nothing happens.
If you have one without the motor, please post it here.

regards,

Tracker



I just posted one for Stefan. In it I zeroed anything that I could lay hands on, except for gravity. One thing I noticed, though, values are seen here and there when I reset after rendering (not the torque and the rad/s). What else should I do to avoid "motor", do you think?
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Tracker on April 10, 2009, 06:08:12 PM
Hi Omnibus,

It looks like you are RIGHT !!!
If I understood it correctly, in this specific case, the motor works only as "bearing".
Can be later use as generator.
Clever.
Let's try replace motor with some real bearing.

regards,

Tracker

Stefan, try this one (attached).
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Grimer on April 10, 2009, 06:19:44 PM
Hi Grimer,
looks good, so it is a right turning cycle process, right ?
How can we make the area inside the curve bigger, for more output ?
Can you please calculate this and let us know, how to do this in the real world ?

Many thanks.

Regards, Stefan.

Thanks for your reply, Stefan. I must say I didn't really expect any. For one thing I thought the idea of an area on a displacement vs. time graph representing energy would too big a stumbling block. I can explain why it is energy but the explanation requires both an unconventional view of time, a view of stress as an alias for an equilibrium natural strain which leads to energy as strain energy.

I don't know what a "right turning cycle process" is I'm afraid. Perhaps Harvey's idea of a mini tide machine may be useful.

I know the area inside the loop looks a bit constrained but it better than Carnot and no-one has ever complained about that.

http://i136.photobucket.com/albums/q171/frank260332/Stefan1.jpg (http://i136.photobucket.com/albums/q171/frank260332/Stefan1.jpg)

From the sound of things I don't think one will need more power. Anyway, let's wait to see it actually working first before worrying about bells and whistles.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: mondrasek on April 10, 2009, 06:43:51 PM
Guys,

I think you are experiencing one of the (many) bugs in WM2D.  Try closing the program.  Then open the file and double click directly on the motor, or any other element to open the properties box.  Make sure from the pull down menu that you are looking at the Motor (Constraint 14).  It says the velocity is -1.0 rad/sec.  Change this to zero and nothing runs.

If you click around in the motor properties you will find that it stops working properly.  That is why you must start by opening the file and program from scratch and only look for the motor velocity.

Sorry,

M.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Tracker on April 10, 2009, 06:51:45 PM
Hi Mondrasek,

Just to be sure this is not WM2D problem, I'm reproducing this model in SketchyPhysics for Sketchup.
Let's see ...
Just in case I will not use any motor in this simulation.

regards,

Tracker


Guys,

I think you are experiencing one of the (many) bugs in WM2D.  Try closing the program.  Then open the file and double click directly on the motor, or any other element to open the properties box.  Make sure from the pull down menu that you are looking at the Motor (Constraint 14).  It says the velocity is -1.0 rad/sec.  Change this to zero and nothing runs.

If you click around in the motor properties you will find that it stops working properly.  That is why you must start by opening the file and program from scratch and only look for the motor velocity.

Sorry,

M.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: itanimuLLi on April 10, 2009, 06:56:27 PM
Can anyone make a calculation and maybe an animation. the blue balls are static the reds are getting in and out of the rotor.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on April 10, 2009, 06:56:56 PM
Guys,

I think you are experiencing one of the (many) bugs in WM2D.  Try closing the program.  Then open the file and double click directly on the motor, or any other element to open the properties box.  Make sure from the pull down menu that you are looking at the Motor (Constraint 14).  It says the velocity is -1.0 rad/sec.  Change this to zero and nothing runs.

If you click around in the motor properties you will find that it stops working properly.  That is why you must start by opening the file and program from scratch and only look for the motor velocity.

Sorry,

M.

@mondrasek, I closed the program, opened it again, looked at V0 and its value was 0.000 rad/s. Then I ran it and, as usual, it started rendering it in a way that we already saw it does. Where's the problem?
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on April 10, 2009, 07:08:16 PM
Hi Mondrasek,

Just to be sure this is not WM2D problem, I'm reproducing this model in SketchyPhysics for Sketchup.
Let's see ...
Just in case I will not use any motor in this simulation.

regards,

Tracker



It will be very interesting indeed if this effect will be reproduced in another program. Is SketchyPhysics similar to WM2D
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: mondrasek on April 10, 2009, 07:22:00 PM
Guys,

Here is the file with the motor velocity changed from -1 rad/sec to 0 rad/sec.  Only change.

Now it does not move because the motor is a brake.

Stefan, when I remove/delete the motor I also have the wheel spin backwards.  Not sure what Cherryman was doing with the other torques in the file.

M.
Title: ABELING CONCEPT WM2D MODEL
Post by: AquariuZ on April 10, 2009, 07:35:05 PM
Well, that was fun...

There are so many variables to set in wm2d that I went nuts. Spheres falling out of constraints. Shit.

Here now what I have been working on.

You are looking at a side view here. The spheres do NOT represent the weights but the extended axles of the dumbbell weights.

The flow can be shown clearly now. please remember the frontal view of the dumbbells I showed you earlier and keep that in mind.

Without motor all kinds of constraint and overlap errors occur, I do NOT know enough about wm2d to fix those to put the model to a real test and look for acceleration(it does!!). I changed so many textures I am a bit lost, but you can see the flow concept and we should take it from there.

Model attached.

EDIT: I FORGOT TO MENTION... YES WHEN YOU LET IT RUN FOR A FEW SECONDS (IGNORE THE OVERLAP ERRORS), THEN STOP, THEN SELECT START HERE AND REPLACE THE MOTOR WITH A PIN (IGNORE THE WARNINGS) IT STARTS TO ACCELERATE AND COMPLETELY DESTRUCTS WITH BALLS FLYING EVERY WHERE WITHIN SECONDS. WARNINGS ALL OVER.

If you can help make the model more solid, who knows? Also when the weight leaves the lower barrier it should remain motionless and then move right onto the upper barrier. So yeah I need to slightly adjust the lower barrier (again) Coming off it now moves a little to the left, stops, and accelerates to the right into the upper barrier. FRONTAL VIEW EXTENDED AXLE DUMBBELL WEIGHT ADDED. YELLOW=WHAT YOU ARE LOOKING AT..

Just ignore the Warning:CoE violation messages  8)

Please comment and help clean up the model if you can, thanks.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: mondrasek on April 10, 2009, 07:48:36 PM
I took AquariuZ file, removed the motor, and normalized all the masses (some "balls" and arms were not equal weight).

Great work AquariuZ!

Unfortunately it does not appear to self run.

M.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Tracker on April 10, 2009, 07:48:50 PM
Hi Omnibus,

SketchyPhysics is free ware plug-in for Google Sketchup (only for version 6)
It is quite different. Google Sketchup is all about easy creation of 3D objects.
I love it. It is soooo simple to use and has all needed tutorials built in.
Just try, you won't be disappointed.
I have just installed SketchyPhysics, and to tell you the truth, I will need another few hours to get use to it.
Anyway, I'll try to implement "our" model ASAP.
BTW. I confirm that I have no such problems like Mondrasek is experiencing with WM2D.

regards,

Tracker 

It will be very interesting indeed if this effect will be reproduced in another program. Is SketchyPhysics similar to WM2D
Title: Re: ABELING CONCEPT WM2D MODEL
Post by: Cherryman on April 10, 2009, 07:48:55 PM
Well, that was fun...

There are so many variables to set in wm2d that I went nuts. Spheres falling out of constraints. Shit.

Here now what I have been working on.

You are looking at a side view here. The spheres do NOT represent the weights but the extended axles of the dumbbell weights.

The flow can be shown clearly now. please remember the frontal view of the dumbbells I showed you earlier and keep that in mind.

Without motor all kinds of constraint and overlap errors occur, I do NOT know enough about wm2d to fix those to put the model to a real test and look for acceleration(it does!!). I changed so many textures I am a bit lost, but you can see the flow concept and we should take it from there.

Model attached.

EDIT: I FORGOT TO MENTION... YES WHEN YOU LET IT RUN OF A FEW SECONDS (IGNORE THE OVERLAP ERRORS), THEN STOP, THEN SELECT START HERE AND REPLACE THE MOTOR WITH A PIN (IGNORE THE WARNINGS) IT STARTS TO ACCELERATE AND COMPLETELY DESTRUCTS WITH BALLS FLYING EVERY WHERE WITHIN SECONDS. WARNINGS ALL OVER.

If you can make the model more sold, who knows? Also when the weight leaves the lower barrier is should remain motionless and then move right onto the upper barrier. So Yeah I need to slightly adjust the lower barrier (again) Coming off it now moves a little to the left, stops, and accelerates to the right into the upper barrier.

Just ignore the Warning:CoE violation messages  8)

Please comment and help clean up the model if you can, thanks.

Looks Good!

I like it.. I now see what you mean... and now  i understand the shape of the "creadles"in the outer ends!

Very good work! 
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: AquariuZ on April 10, 2009, 08:00:07 PM
I took AquariuZ file, removed the motor, and normalized all the masses (some "balls" and arms were not equal weight).

Great work AquariuZ!

Unfortunately it does not appear to self run.

M.

You need to let it run for a few seconds before you remove the motor and you will see what I mean. It also depends where you remove the motor, bit hard to explain.

I will update the picture above to again show the extended axle dumbbells from the front so it is clear that the spheres are NOT the weights itself, but rather a sideview of one of the axles. (in yellow).

I do not know about you, but this flow concept is good enough for me to start building a prototype which will fit on a desktop. Initial size estimate would be 40cm height, including stands. ALL WOOD except for bearing, weight and axles.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: mondrasek on April 10, 2009, 08:01:47 PM
BTW. I confirm that I have no such problems like Mondrasek is experiencing with WM2D.

Tracker, open one of the files that has a motor.  Double click to get the properties box and make sure you have the motor selected in the top pull down menu.  Now change the Type pulldown from Torque to Velocity to Rotation and back.  On mine the value will spontaneously reset to some unknown value.  The file then becomes corrupt and may say zero velocity in this box but stil have a non zero value in use.  The problem does not appear for me if I do not scroll through the motor Types.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on April 10, 2009, 08:05:02 PM
Guys,

Here is the file with the motor velocity changed from -1 rad/sec to 0 rad/sec.  Only change.

Now it does not move because the motor is a brake.

Stefan, when I remove/delete the motor I also have the wheel spin backwards.  Not sure what Cherryman was doing with the other torques in the file.

M.

@mondrasek, well then, if we can't have a free turning rotor, unobstructed by a motor which even stopped acts like a brake, then what good is this program? Then, any attempt so far that had seemed negative might not have been negative.

OK, I saw the exchange between @Cherryman and @AquariuZ. Seems the motor can be replaced by a pin but how is that done?
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Cherryman on April 10, 2009, 08:11:10 PM
@mondrasek, well then, if we can't have a free turning rotor, unobstructed by a motor which even stopped acts like a brake, then what good is this program? Then, any attempt so far that had seemed negative might not have been negative.

OK, I saw the exchange between @Cherryman and @AquariuZ. Seems the motor can be replaced by a pin but how is that done?


The safest way is to use a pin, and then to drop a weight on it what will fall off.. Then you have a starting speed, with no after influence.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: mondrasek on April 10, 2009, 08:11:17 PM
You need to let it run for a few seconds before you remove the motor and you will see what I mean. It also depends where you remove the motor, bit hard to explain.

I will update the picture above to again show the extended axle dumbbells from the front so it is clear that the spheres are NOT the weights itself, but rather a sideview of one of the axles. (in yellow).

I do not know about you, but this flow concept is good enough for me to start building a prototype which will fit on a desktop. Initial size estimate would be 40cm height, including stands. ALL WOOD except for bearing, weight and axles.


I'm not sure what you are trying to say.  I removed the motor by deleting it.  I replaced it with a pin joint (axle).  The wheel will sway back and forth but not spin.  If you add a free falling weight to collide with one arm to induce an initial spin it will also stop quickly.  So far the model appears to mimic the real world actions of any gravity wheel built with ramps to move the balls towards the axle.

I'm not saying Abeling does not have something real.  And I believe you have done a hell of a job investigating and modeling the path.  But I don't think the device is complete yet.  I think there must be some other mechanism(s) that gather energy in the lower left quadrant and use that to somehow accelerate the ball up the ramp.  And somehow this must also create an energy gain, if the wheel is to spin.

Abeling may have been happy to allow the video team to see the wheel as shown.  The critical piece(s) might not have been on display.

M.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: mondrasek on April 10, 2009, 08:12:35 PM

The safest way is to use a pin, and then to drop a weight on it what will fall off.. Then you have a starting speed, with no after influence.

Exactly!  I also put a fixed barrier with elasticity of .005 under the weight so it has a place to land.  If not it continues to fall forever and may blow up the program.  Also, if not stopped it is wasting computation cycles (time).
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Cherryman on April 10, 2009, 08:14:08 PM
Exactly!

Better will be a selfstarting one!  ;D

Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: mindsweeper on April 10, 2009, 08:17:37 PM
A note on deleting calculated frames in WM2D

After you reset the simulation click Measure then Time, (time measure window opens) click it and delete or cut, all calculated frames are gone, save for minimal size.

Quick and easy and you don't have to touch the model.

Great thread by the way...
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on April 10, 2009, 08:19:45 PM
So, how does one get rid of this motor and why was it part of this construction in the first place?
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Cherryman on April 10, 2009, 08:22:48 PM
So, how does one get rid of this motor and why was it part of this construction in the first place?

I Use motors to test the path of the balls, sometimes you want to control the speed during designing.

But i also dit think that after you let the motor getted stopped by thiming, it would run free....

Nou you guys say the motor (in this programme) will still cause drag???  ???

Then i have to relook a lot of my designs...     ::)
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: mondrasek on April 10, 2009, 08:27:08 PM
So, how does one get rid of this motor and why was it part of this construction in the first place?

Click on the motor so it is highlighted and hit the delete key on your keyboard.  If you cannot select the motor (sometimes other objects get selected) you can find it in the property box by doubleclicking any object and finding it in the pulldown menu.  Once you have it selected you must close the properties box.  Then hit delete like before.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on April 10, 2009, 08:28:09 PM
I Use motors to test the path of the balls, sometimes you want to control the speed during designing.

But i also dit think that after you let the motor getted stopped by thiming, it would run free....

Nou you guys say the motor (in this programme) will still cause drag???  ???

Then i have to relook a lot of my designs...     ::)

Let us see it first without the motor. How do you delete the motor forever and replace it by a pin? That's the first thing to be done. This is a great design and I intuitively feel the answer is somewhere there.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: AquariuZ on April 10, 2009, 08:28:43 PM
So, how does one get rid of this motor and why was it part of this construction in the first place?

MODEL WITHOUT MOTOR ATTACHED
It accelerates for a few seconds then the path breaks and the spheres violate boundaries.

Please check accuracy settings to be Accuracy -> Custom -> Kutta-Merson (accurate) Fixed @ 0.005s

The motor was there for testing the flow.

A lot of work left to make a decent model out of this.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: mondrasek on April 10, 2009, 08:31:34 PM
MODEL WITHOUT MOTOR ATTACHED

AquariuZ,  the arms on that model are not all the same mass!  A few (3 I think) are waaaay heavier than the others.  That is why I normalized them in my previous modification posted.  Once that is corrected it does not accelerate.

Sorry,

M.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on April 10, 2009, 08:32:45 PM
Thanks, @AquariuZ, but that's not @Cherryman's design. I'd like to see his first without a motor.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Grimer on April 10, 2009, 08:55:44 PM
Hi Grimer,
looks good, so it is a right turning cycle process, right ?
How can we make the area inside the curve bigger, for more output ?
Can you please calculate this and let us know, how to do this in the real world ?

Many thanks.

Regards, Stefan.

Hi Stefan,
I've been swotting up on the history of Johann Bessler. What a fantastic story. It seems to me the evidence of his wheel's reality is very strong indeed. Which can only mean the Sjack has stumbled upon its secret. I suppose someone had to, sooner or later. I shall have to find the time line in relation to Carnot.

Cheers, Frank
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: AquariuZ on April 10, 2009, 09:14:07 PM
Thanks, @AquariuZ, but that's not @Cherryman's design. I'd like to see his first without a motor.

Hmmm. This is getting confusing. Maybe the KAD deserves a thread of its own as the designs differ

What does Cherryman say?
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: AquariuZ on April 10, 2009, 09:15:13 PM
AquariuZ,  the arms on that model are not all the same mass!  A few (3 I think) are waaaay heavier than the others.  That is why I normalized them in my previous modification posted.  Once that is corrected it does not accelerate.

Sorry,

M.

O. Well how do I clean it up? Select all arms and change props?
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: mondrasek on April 10, 2009, 09:21:37 PM
O. Well how do I clean it up? Select all arms and change props?

Yep.  WM2D sometimes assigns different masses to identical objects that are imported from DXF.  Don't know why...

BTW, all the ball/weights are okay.  Just the arms need fixing (or use my previously posted file where I removed the motor).

Also, just some tips:  You have the elasticity on the ramps at 0.  That would make it very "soft."  You'd actually want them to be of a hard material closer to 1.  I personally do not use 0 or 1 for friction or elasticity.  Doing so opens up the possibility that the program might try to divide by zero.  Not sure if it would error out or just not work right.  I put in values like .0001 for 0 and .99 for 1 in those fields.

M.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on April 10, 2009, 09:22:59 PM
Hmmm. This is getting confusing. Maybe the KAD deserves a thread of its own as the designs differ

What does Cherryman say?

They are all inspired by Sjack Abeling, aren't they? The problem is that Abeling isn't forthcoming and we have to guess what his design is. @Cheriryman's seems very promising so far. Stefan has more experience with these designs and he's skeptical (too few steel balls, too steep the ascending path and so on). This may be true but the direction I think is promising. Unfortunately, I have no experience with WM2D, in fact, today is the first day I'm using it, and that stands in the way of me being more flexible. Wonder what other programs are out there similar to WM2D, to see if the effects are reproducible.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: AquariuZ on April 10, 2009, 09:26:18 PM
Yep.  WM2D sometimes assigns different masses to identical objects that are imported from DXF.  Don't know why...

BTW, all the ball/weights are okay.  Just the arms need fixing (or use my previously posted file where I removed the motor).

Got it thanks.

I deleted all vectors and momentum as well and let it go. It does not doe anything, and then very slowly starts to rotate LEFT. Uhuh.

I am going to experiment with the barriers as someone pointed out the top one seems to be much steeper.

Still confident this is the concept though. The rest is just tweaking until you get it right.

Look closely.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: AquariuZ on April 10, 2009, 09:28:11 PM
They are all inspired by Sjack Abeling, aren't they? The problem is that Abeling isn't forthcoming and we have to guess what his design is. @Cheriryman's seems very promising so far. Stefan has more experience with these designs and he's skeptical (too few steel balls, too steep the ascending path and so on). This may be true but the direction I think is promising. Unfortunately, I have no experience with WM2D, in fact, today is the first day I'm using it, and that stands in the way of me being more flexible. Wonder what other programs are out there similar to WM2D, to see if the effects are reproducible.

Eh no, his KAD had nothing to do with Abeling as he explained earlier.

I just do not want to cloud the concept I am trying but I leave it up to him.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Grimer on April 10, 2009, 10:05:53 PM
Hi Stefan,
I've been swotting up on the history of Johann Bessler. What a fantastic story. It seems to me the evidence of his wheel's reality is very strong indeed. Which can only mean the Sjack has stumbled upon its secret. I suppose someone had to, sooner or later. I shall have to find the time line in relation to Carnot.

Cheers, Frank

Carnot's work was over a century after Bessler's wheel so Bessler must have developed his wheel by trial and error. I suppose what has prevented its re-discovery until now is the idea the a perpetual motion machine driven by gravity is impossible. demonstrably this is not the case as more perceptive people, like Harvey on Fizzx, realise.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: mondrasek on April 10, 2009, 10:17:34 PM
Still confident this is the concept though. The rest is just tweaking until you get it right.

I completely agree that you have modeled the intended path of weights in the wheel shown in the video.  Fantastic job with both the detective work and the models.  I just hope this wheel is representative of what Abeling says actually works, and not just attempts from before he found the key concept.  I also still wonder if the pictures are missing some other mechanism that works in conjunction with the wheel slots and static guides.

Remember that finding the right geometry for the slot profiles is probably as important as the guide profiles and angles.

One more pointer to speed your efforts.  If every slot is the same, this type of wheel should work with only two slots and weights 180 degrees apart.  Testing a single pair set up might go quicker.  Because if one weight cannot lift one opposite weight, eight of the same will still not lift eight more.

Good luck!  I hope you beat Abeling to his unveiling!

M.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: NerzhDishual on April 10, 2009, 10:31:53 PM
Hi guys,

This D shaped path let me think about these old French patents:

http://freenrg.info/Patents/PMM/FR0543065/FR543065A.pdf  (http://freenrg.info/Patents/PMM/FR0543065/FR543065A.pdf)
August 1922
Turbine autogène =/= Self running turbine


http://freenrg.info/Patents/PMM/FR0563952/FR563952A.pdf (http://freenrg.info/Patents/PMM/FR0563952/FR563952A.pdf)
October 1923
Roue motrice produisant une force gratuite =/=  Moving wheel producing a free force


But, these are just patents...  ;D

Very Best
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: canam101 on April 10, 2009, 10:44:17 PM
I don't care for this motor compared to Mylow's. The reason is that Mylow's motor involved complex interactions between magnets, and it was possible to fantasize that there was something mysterious and unknown to science going on.

But this wheel of Abelings is too easy to visualize. I mean, a ball rolls down a ramp, pulled by gravity, then rolls up the other side of the ramp. It is obvious that the ball will not reach the same height as it started out at because of friction. We've all played with something like this at one time or another.

It just isn't mysterious enough. And Abeling's flimsy-looking wooden gizmo isn't too inspiring either.

If Abeling could work in a few magnets, he might have something, but I don't think this one can go very far, at least not to the 230 message mark that Mylow's is at.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: AquariuZ on April 10, 2009, 11:55:56 PM
Good luck!  I hope you beat Abeling to his unveiling!

M.

So far I seem to have created a balanced wheel..  8)

Thanks, I appreciate the comments
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: AquariuZ on April 10, 2009, 11:57:53 PM
It just isn't mysterious enough. And Abeling's flimsy-looking wooden gizmo isn't too inspiring either.

In that case he has fooled many, including me...

But, ofcourse if it were that simple it would have been invented 200 years ago.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: AquariuZ on April 11, 2009, 12:22:36 AM
Q: Where does the extra energy come from?
A: The weights are applied two by two: one weight is pushing/falling, the other one has to be lifted. Due to the invention of the dual lifting system , the falling/pushing weight will hardly be hindered by the weight that has to be lifted. In the top left of the system the weight is accelerated (like with shot put). The weight is moving faster than the system, and as the system catches the weight it is propelled forward. The path of the weights in the system is determined up front so the weights are always in a fixed position relative to each other and that will reduce the drag of the lifted weight on the falling/pushing weight. The system will start rotating from any position. Extra force is generated in the lower left of the system and on top it is transferred to the system itself, generating the extra energy. If the system would fail to catch the propelled weight, the weight would be ejected from the system with force.

The system starts from any position
Weights are propelled

How?
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Cherryman on April 11, 2009, 12:42:46 AM
Seems we keep getting stuck with balance,...

Here a slow one (With motorwarning  ;D )
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: spinner on April 11, 2009, 01:04:40 AM
@Grimer
Thanks for your explanations!
Although i can't agree with everything you said, i still like your views on inertial mechanics....Hey, Mr. Laithwaite's work... We talked about it once...

Btw, high order derivatives (like the rate of change of acceleration) are just a mathematical description of a physical motion (not an energy source).

It would be interesting what kind of real values for a "rate of change of acceleration" would you be getting, for instance, when calculating an integral of a closed path of a weight in a "gravity wheel"....
I'd say this 3rd derivative would be very small, but still a negative number after completing a full circle.


Quote
by AB Hammer
I keep looking and reading, but after so many builds, I think I will wait on a video or other proof. Simply put, ramps have always been tried and so far no proof of one working. If Sjack has it patented, why not show the working wheel?
Indeed!


Btw,  Ramps and rolling balls are a recipe for... Ah, never mind.
Let's say they're just not the most optimal combination for a successful gravity wheel.

Anyway, you can check your concepts easily.
True gravity/overbalanced wheel would start from a standstill all by it's own.


@AquariuZ
I was surprised when I read that Henkel answered your e-mail. "Glue attachments challenges"? Why not! And they say it's a serious project...
(quantity of the glue needed?)

I hope you'll get an answer from that other institution, too. (Dutch authority which supposedly gave a permission to build the Abeling Gravity plants)...
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Dusty on April 11, 2009, 01:14:27 AM
I have a different idea as to how this wheel works, so here is a video as to how I think it works:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jh7GAUYg_E8&feature=channel_page

Over this weekend I'm going to build a unit and see if my theory is correct.

Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Cherryman on April 11, 2009, 01:23:04 AM
I have a different idea as to how this wheel works, so here is a video as to how I think it works:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jh7GAUYg_E8&feature=channel_page

Over this weekend I'm going to build a unit and see if my theory is correct.



Good thinking about the different slots!

I'm not sure what you mean about the "Skateboard" so looking forward to your built!

This one works with one bar also...  (With motor ) So maybe the Skateboard wil do the trick!  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nSaKQEn0Wwc&feature=channel_page

Good Luck!
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on April 11, 2009, 01:24:27 AM
@Cherryman,

Can you remove the motor altogether replacing it by a pin and make sure that there's noting anywhere in the program acting as a motor? I'm talking about your KAD9 as well as KAD10.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Grimer on April 11, 2009, 01:36:52 AM

Btw, high order derivatives (like the rate of change of acceleration) are just a mathematical description of a physical motion (not an energy source).

Absolutely right. And the isothermal legs and adiabatic legs of the Carnot cycle are also just mathematical descriptions of piston motion and are not in themselves an energy source either. It is the way they are put together that makes them derive energy from the thermal gradient. I'm sure you are intelligent enough to realise that.  ;D

After all, as Harvey has pointed out on Fizzx, there's nothing new about deriving energy from gravity. Tides do it all the time. Think of the Bessler Wheel as a human scale tide. It makes it feel more homely.  ;)
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Cherryman on April 11, 2009, 01:37:23 AM
@Cherryman,

Can you remove the motor altogether replacing it by a pin and make sure that there's noting anywhere in the program acting as a motor? I'm talking about your KAD9 as well as KAD10.

I Can do that, but it doesn't work the, otherwise i would be cheering a little harder  ;D

I think it's a bug in WD2D that when you remove the motor the structure falls apart..  So I have to rebuilt them.. That will be not tonight.

You can do it yorself to. Just select and erease everything besides the shapes and rebuilt it. It ain't that many parts.

Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Grimer on April 11, 2009, 01:57:15 AM

@AquariuZ
I was surprised when I read that Henkel answered your e-mail. "Glue attachments challenges"? Why not! And they say it's a serious project...
(quantity of the glue needed?)

Glue is used in the manufacture of fibreglass composite. If glued composites are good enough for the wings of the A380 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Airbus_A380) I guess they are good enough for a Bessler Wheel, eh!

Bessler used wood, a natural composite. But I've no doubt he would have used fibre glass if he were building his wheel today. Boat builders also used to use natural composite but have now turned to man made composite.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on April 11, 2009, 02:04:36 AM
@canam101,

I don't care for this motor compared to Mylow's. The reason is that Mylow's motor involved complex interactions between magnets, and it was possible to fantasize that there was something mysterious and unknown to science going on.

Mylow’s and any other magnet motor for that matter doesn’t differ in its basic principle from a gravity motor because ultimately it’s a contraption which defies the commonly held belief that conservative forces cannot be harnessed through a proper construction to cause displacement for which no energy from a pre-existing energy reservoir is spent. This is what’s unrecognized rather than unknown, in science. A gravity motor, such as the one allegedly constructed by Sjack Abeling is in many respects more interesting in common conditions than a magnet motor because of the ubiquitous gravity. Of course, a magnetic motor is more independent and can work also under conditions of no gravity, in space, say.

Quote
But this wheel of Abelings is too easy to visualize. I mean, a ball rolls down a ramp, pulled by gravity, then rolls up the other side of the ramp. It is obvious that the ball will not reach the same height as it started out at because of friction. We've all played with something like this at one time or another.

It just isn't mysterious enough. And Abeling's flimsy-looking wooden gizmo isn't too inspiring either.

If Abeling could work in a few magnets, he might have something, but I don't think this one can go very far, at least not to the 230 message mark that Mylow's is at.

We’ve all played with a ball, as you describe it. However, we’ve never played with a contraption whereby the ball you’re talking about will be assisted by another ball to reach the same height as it started out and overcome friction, the same way that other ball will be assisted by still another ball and so on and so forth, all that due to a certain very specific construction of a device. We’ve never played with such a thing and Sjack Abeling not only claims he has it but he says he’s turning it into an industry. That’s no joke, if true, and Mylow’s, also if true, pales in comparison, at present.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on April 11, 2009, 02:14:12 AM
@spinner,

Quote
Anyway, you can check your concepts easily.
True gravity/overbalanced wheel would start from a standstill all by it's own.

But that’s what Sjack Abeling claims his device is doing.

Quote
I hope you'll get an answer from that other institution, too. (Dutch authority which supposedly gave a permission to build the Abeling Gravity plants)...

But you may say again ‘why not?’, if this Dutch institution confirms it has indeed given the permission, the way you said it regarding Henkel. If Henkel’s confirmation isn’t convincing enough to you why should this be? The truth is, nothing can prove the validity of Sjack Abeling’s claim or any other claim for that matter but independent verification by third parties.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on April 11, 2009, 02:19:57 AM
I Can do that, but it doesn't work the, otherwise i would be cheering a little harder  ;D

I think it's a bug in WD2D that when you remove the motor the structure falls apart..  So I have to rebuilt them.. That will be not tonight.

You can do it yorself to. Just select and erease everything besides the shapes and rebuilt it. It ain't that many parts.



Please, rebuild these two (KAD9 and KAD10) without a motor. I'm new to this and don't know how to do it. From my perspective to include a motor in these simulations makes no sense. Motor activity should be excluded by presumption in it's entirety and there should be no hidden activities that may suggest that the rotor is driven by a motor in any way. I thought setting torque to zero and zeroing out the velocities and such would be sufficient but obviously it isn't. That's very contradictory but that's how the program works.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: AquariuZ on April 11, 2009, 02:39:11 AM
I have a different idea as to how this wheel works, so here is a video as to how I think it works:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jh7GAUYg_E8&feature=channel_page

Over this weekend I'm going to build a unit and see if my theory is correct.

Great input! Also it is fun to see my snapshots being used for the higher goal...

You may very well be onto something as he clearly states that the weights move in pairs, the path is preset through the system and : while one weight is falling another is being lifted without effort (friction?)

Really looking forward to your ideas, this is what it is all about!!
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Cherryman on April 11, 2009, 02:40:34 AM
Please, rebuild these two (KAD9 and KAD10) without a motor. I'm new to this and don't know how to do it. From my perspective to include a motor in these simulations makes no sense. Motor activity should be excluded by presumption in it's entirety and there should be no hidden activities that may suggest that the rotor is driven by a motor in any way. I thought setting torque to zero and zeroing out the velocities and such would be sufficient but obviously it isn't. That's very contradictory but that's how the program works.

The reason i use a motor is that to get the rotational speed to make the difference , you need a start speed.  And with the way i build my model i cannot drop a ball on to the,. I haven't got time now to rebuilt. Maybe tomorrow evening, sorry.

Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Grimer on April 11, 2009, 09:06:25 AM
@spinner,

But that’s what Sjack Abeling claims his device is doing.

But you may say again ‘why not?’, if this Dutch institution confirms it has indeed given the permission, the way you said it regarding Henkel. If Henkel’s confirmation isn’t convincing enough to you why should this be? The truth is, nothing can prove the validity of Sjack Abeling’s claim or any other claim for that matter but independent verification by third parties.

Good post, Omnibus. :)

I knew nothing about Bessler's wheels until I looked it up the history very recently. The amazing thing I find is that there was heaps of confirmation by independent parties of its working. How people failed to discover his "secret" over all these years is the real mystery to me.  ???

Sjack's claims dovetail perfectly with the history of Bessler's invention.

I look forward to the fat lady's singing. 8)

Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on April 11, 2009, 09:38:36 AM
@Grimer,

The communication means during the times of Bessler are incomparable to what we have now, wouldn't you agree? Nowadays such a thing will spread like wildfire if there's anything to it and no one would be able to contain it. In this respect it's interesting to see how people like Abeling are still holding on to the old-fashioned ways such as patents of protecting their rights. Full disclosure and ensuring that it's reproduced by as many people as possible is the best way nowadays to protect your rights for a construction which can hardly contain trade secrets. Do you think the world would ignore the fact that Mylow was the first to demonstrate a perpetuum mobile, had it had any merit to it and innumerable fellows around the world had reproduced it? I don't think so. The permission by whatever Dutch institution is also curious. While it may work for the benefit of the Dutch government in a short term, it will be beyond control in a not so far future if it really is true and no one will ask for their permission.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Philip Hardcastle on April 11, 2009, 09:49:51 AM
Hi guys,

I just want to know.

Where is there any theory or proof?

Your efforts are amazing but I cannot figure how 4 people of better than average intellignece can be so illogical. What am i missing?

I am not trying to be negative or sceptical but you surely must have something to hang your hats on.

Talk of rumours of mad inventors machines that worked is pseudo religious.

If we want to take it to that level we should all go to religious books and see what the Gods say about free energy.

Perhaps Noah's ark was powered by rubber band motors or overbalancing wheels since there is no reference to sails.

Guys, please tell me where is there evidence of this project having any, any possibility of success¡

Phil
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on April 11, 2009, 10:01:31 AM
@Philip Hardcastle,

I've already answered you. It can be shown that with a proper construction displacement can be induced under the action of a conservative force without the expenditure of energy from a pre-existing energy reservoir. That has already been proven conclusively and what we're doing here is to find out ways to have such displacement occur continuously. This thread has more of a practical side than just discussing over and over again what has already been proven.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Philip Hardcastle on April 11, 2009, 10:08:17 AM
@omnibus,

I think you have already said you do not want to go into it.

Show me the conclusive proof.

I am willing to suspend my belief system if you can show me such.

I have a long record of invention and lateral thinking, extensive multi field training and experience so I think I am the sort of person you would want to at least talk to.

Show me something, then if it makes sense I could contribute.

Just give me a link to go read the conclusive proof.

Otherwise I will conclude that you are all smoking something a bit too strong.

Regards Phil
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on April 11, 2009, 10:26:57 AM
@Philip Hardcastle,

Can you give an e-mail address where to send a link. I don't want to discuss this further and I'll only send you the link privately because you so insist, so that you can see what I have in mind.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Philip Hardcastle on April 11, 2009, 10:33:27 AM
@omnibus

ok

it is on my profile but here is

pjhardcastle@gmail.com

Phil
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on April 11, 2009, 10:37:12 AM
@omnibus

ok

it is on my profile but here is

pjhardcastle@gmail.com

Phil

Thanks. Just sent it.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Philip Hardcastle on April 11, 2009, 10:43:21 AM
@omni,

got it, thanks.

I will read thrice then return.

Phil
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Philip Hardcastle on April 11, 2009, 11:48:37 AM
@omni

Sorry to be blunt, and I know you do not want a debate, but anyone saying that it is proved by that essay is not being rational.

It is not the basis for anything and certainly extracting from it some sense as to support all these efforts is misguided. Mistakes start from the first few paragraphs and are then built upon to form a misdirection of common sense.

A bit like the old story

"A guy is given $10 by each of three ladies to go buy 3 bottles of wine, he buys the wine at $10 a bottle, $30 in all. However the merchant says, sorry I have over charged you, that wine is on special, here is $5 refund.

The guy thinks to himself walking back that splitting $5 is a bit tricky so he decides to give the ladies back a dollar each.

So he gives back each lady a dollar and gives them each a bottle of wine.

So they each paid $9 for a total of $27, and the guy kept $2 so 27 + 2 = $29.

So what happened to the other dollar?"


This is an old nonsense puzzle and so is that CoE violation paper.

I did read the paper twice and started to mark it up but thought, omni is smart enough to see this himself, and if not he maybe sees something I am missing.

I do not believe so, however I respect all your  rights to pursue non scientific ideas and will leave you to do your own thing.

Also I note that despite showing a preparedness to share my ideas they are ignored.

I note that no one comments on RTG or Curled Ballistic.

I guess I do not fit in here, and I do not wish to offend, so I must go and do, instead of talking.

Best wishes to all.


Philip Hardcastle.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: AquariuZ on April 11, 2009, 12:10:55 PM
There is no solid undeniable proof. If there were the whole world would be in or travelling to Ter Apel to see Abeling right at this moment. A small town trampled like in  "Swing Vote".

There are only hints, clues and many of them.

Things like Chas Campbell's snooker wheel (I also modelled that one, sigh) are easy to disprove, but Abeling, given the above might have something if a whole list of investors and reputable firms want to do business with him. That is the main indication Abeling has something. Adding to that the way he is handling things AND I have spoken to him personally (which may or may not mean anything to anyone) and found that he is rational, calm and not sensationalist leads me personally to believe he has found something.

Let us not forget he told me he did not need money because he has all the funding he needs right now. This should tell you this is not another "standard scam" where e.g. plans are sold or people's money is being taken to reserve a device which will come out in the near future. You all know who I mean.

Now, we can try and reproduce, debate or do nothing and risk losing the invention to corporate.

Take your pick and please fill in the blanks in the claim below.

This new physical theory will explain how to generate energy by rotating two bodies with the same mass/weight. The weight of the bodies together with (.....BLANK...) (intentionally omitted) and the rotational velocity determine the amount of energy that can be generated.

The new physical theory explains the working of the Weight Power Plant ("Gewicht Energie Centrale") developed by Sjack Abeling. In this plant, the mass of the bodies is controlled in such a way that from a complete standstill to a rotation of 180 degrees, 80% more energy is generated than required to propel the system itself. The only source of energy required is the earth's gravity...


BTW I think Dusty maybe onto something with his dumbbell cross or "race car", but I disagree with his theory about the holes being simply trial and error creations. The video did state this was a prototype so who knows. I really hope we (including myself) will not start to lose interest in this fascinating topic and we can nail the concept.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: CLaNZeR on April 11, 2009, 12:28:33 PM
The reason i use a motor is that to get the rotational speed to make the difference , you need a start speed.  And with the way i build my model i cannot drop a ball on to the,. I haven't got time now to rebuilt. Maybe tomorrow evening, sorry.



Nice animations Cherryman

Can you export any of those frames as DXF's from that application?

Cheers

Sean.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on April 11, 2009, 12:38:58 PM
@Philip Hardcastle,

You did not keep the agreement. I did not ask for your opinion in sending the text and I specifically said I don't want to discuss this. Uttering the nonsense you've uttered above is starting a discussion and this is deplorable once you've agreed not to discuss it.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: AquariuZ on April 11, 2009, 02:26:47 PM
@Philip Hardcastle,

You did not keep the agreement. I did not ask for your opinion in sending the text and I specifically said I don't want to discuss this. Uttering the nonsense you've uttered above is starting a discussion and this is deplorable once you've agreed not to discuss it.

Omnibus can you please PM me this documentation. I would be very interested in reading it and will not comment in public on it.

Contrary to some individuals in here you seem committed with a scientific basis for being so which makes me curious,

Thanks in advance
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: AquariuZ on April 11, 2009, 02:30:05 PM
@omni

Sorry to be blunt, and I know you do not want a debate, but anyone saying that it is proved by that essay is not being rational.

It is not the basis for anything and certainly extracting from it some sense as to support all these efforts is misguided. Mistakes start from the first few paragraphs and are then built upon to form a misdirection of common sense.

A bit like the old story

"A guy is given $10 by each of three ladies to go buy 3 bottles of wine, he buys the wine at $10 a bottle, $30 in all. However the merchant says, sorry I have over charged you, that wine is on special, here is $5 refund.

The guy thinks to himself walking back that splitting $5 is a bit tricky so he decides to give the ladies back a dollar each.

So he gives back each lady a dollar and gives them each a bottle of wine.

So they each paid $9 for a total of $27, and the guy kept $2 so 27 + 2 = $29.

So what happened to the other dollar?"


This is an old nonsense puzzle and so is that CoE violation paper.

I did read the paper twice and started to mark it up but thought, omni is smart enough to see this himself, and if not he maybe sees something I am missing.

I do not believe so, however I respect all your  rights to pursue non scientific ideas and will leave you to do your own thing.

Also I note that despite showing a preparedness to share my ideas they are ignored.

I note that no one comments on RTG or Curled Ballistic.

I guess I do not fit in here, and I do not wish to offend, so I must go and do, instead of talking.

Best wishes to all.


Philip Hardcastle.

Philip, I would seriously doubt that this forum is here to defend the CoE law, wouldn´t you agree?

There cannot be technological evolution without fresh looks at dusty matter, especially if you are not hampered by formal scientific education.

Funny thing is, the first thing any decent professor will teach you is to question everything. That would include the law of CoE.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: eisenficker2000 on April 11, 2009, 02:34:17 PM
Just another interpretation..from a Dutch engineer..Yep roots in the north, I know ter Apel.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on April 11, 2009, 02:38:37 PM
@AquariuZ,

Can you give me your e-mail address? Thanks.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on April 11, 2009, 02:42:50 PM
@eisenficker2000,

Thanks for sharing. The idea seems very similar to that of @Cherryman. Wonder how close it is to Abeling's. Have you shown it to him?
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: AquariuZ on April 11, 2009, 02:46:44 PM
@eisenficker2000,

Thanks for sharing. The idea seems very similar to that of @Cherryman. Wonder how close it is to Abeling's. Have you shown it to him?

Hey! I started that theory!

 ;D ;D ;D
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: AquariuZ on April 11, 2009, 02:48:25 PM
Just another interpretation..from a Dutch engineer..Yep roots in the north, I know ter Apel.

Hi! And welcome, thanks for sharing and please jion the discussion

I tried modelling this, but results were negative so far.

Trying to figure out the weights, shape and interconnectivity at the moment.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on April 11, 2009, 02:55:20 PM
@AquariuZ,

Would be interesting to model @eisenficker2000's idea in WM2D exactly as he proposes it with the groove etc. and then maybe play with the pattern of the groove as well as with the rest of the elements (weight of spheres, material and so on).
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: AquariuZ on April 11, 2009, 03:11:03 PM
@AquariuZ,

Would be interesting to model @eisenficker2000's idea in WM2D exactly as he proposes it with the groove etc. and then maybe play with the pattern of the groove as well as with the rest of the elements (weight of spheres, material and so on).

I already posted that model earlier, but here it is again... PS: I did play with moving the barriers all around (because I saw the barriers on the video) and as of yet no self running, but at best a balanced wheel.

Also, to eisenficker2000: WHAT IF THE WEIGHTS ARE CONNECTED VIA A BAR PAIRING THEM IN 2 X 2

Inspired by Dusty
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: mondrasek on April 11, 2009, 03:14:50 PM
I think it's a bug in WD2D that when you remove the motor the structure falls apart..  So I have to rebuilt them..

You should be able to delete the motor and replace it with a pin joint.  I do it all the time.

FWIW, I will usually construct a wheel using a pin joint for an axle first.  If I want to force rotation to visualize the motion during rotation, I put a motor on top of the pin joint.  Then when you delete the motor the pin joint axle is still there.

Omni, if you can point me to just which sim file you want the motor removed from, I can do it if you have not been able to.  Also, please PM me any questions you have with how to use WM2D and I'll answer as best I can.  Or maybe we should start a WM2D users thread with tips and Q&A?   I recommend that everyone at lease take the 15 minutes to do the tutorials as well.  Very basic, but it gets you going.

M.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: mondrasek on April 11, 2009, 03:24:06 PM
I have a different idea as to how this wheel works, so here is a video as to how I think it works:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jh7GAUYg_E8&feature=channel_page

Over this weekend I'm going to build a unit and see if my theory is correct.

Dusty, good luck with your idea! 

I wanted to reiterate that any system like this should work with only two weights at 180 degrees apart on a wheel as you have stated.  But once you have a positive torque due to one pair (and a self starting and running system), you would want to add more pairs.  This increases the amount of usable output torque.  So if you get an output torque of say 1 N.m from one pair, you would get 8 x 1 = 8 N.m from eight pairs.

Likewise, if it doesn't run with one pair, you actually have a resisting torque.  Adding more pairs will  increase the amount of resiting torque.  So adding additional pairs will cause a wheel to spin even less when an identical impulse is used to give it initial motion.

Therefore, the most expedient test method would be to model or build only one weight pair per test.  I agree that Abeling's wheel in the video appears to have been testing different slot profiles.  But then his production model would use as many pairs of the optimal slot profiles as he could assemble on the wheel.

M.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Grimer on April 11, 2009, 04:30:42 PM
I've come across quite a nice suggestion of how the Bessler wheel could work

http://www.orffyre.com/speculation.html (http://www.orffyre.com/speculation.html)

This represents the essence of the device I feel. If the attachment of the weights was more flexible and a barrier hangs down so they are drawn up vertically to get the full d3/dt3 action, then we have the Abeling arrangement.

Two comments worthy of note:

 His Highness, who possesses all the qualities that a great prince should have, has always had consideration for the inventor, and will not use the machine in any way for fear of the secret being discovered before the inventor had received a reward from foreigners. His Highness, who has a perfect understanding of mathematics, assured me that the machine is so simple that a carpenter's boy could understand and make it after having seen the inside of this wheel, and that he would not risk his name in giving these attestations, if he did not have knowledge of the machine...' - letter from Joseph Fischer to J.T. Desaguliers, 1721.

Orffyreus commented that when the secret is revealed, he is afraid that people will complain that the idea is so simple it is not worth the asking price.

This latter comment has been echoed by Sjack Abeling.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on April 11, 2009, 05:40:30 PM
Sorry, @AquariuZ, didn't know you started that idea. Didn't follow the thread too closely so I've missed the exact sequence of events. What we need now is a working model and we should all put our heads together. Good luck.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on April 11, 2009, 05:43:47 PM
@mondrasek,

Thank you very much for your willingness to help in sorting out the issues with WM2D. Could you please remove the motor in @Cherryman's KAD9 and KAD10 and replace it by a pin. How do you actually do that? Thanks in advance.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: mondrasek on April 11, 2009, 06:25:10 PM
@mondrasek,

Thank you very much for your willingness to help in sorting out the issues with WM2D. Could you please remove the motor in @Cherryman's KAD9 and KAD10 and replace it by a pin. How do you actually do that? Thanks in advance.

Omni, could you post where they are or re-post them?  I want to make sure I change the specific ones you want.  I also don't want to search and reread the entire thread looking for them.

M.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: AquariuZ on April 11, 2009, 06:32:44 PM
@Omnibus
I was not serious, I could not care less who gets it first as long as we get it. Actually Cherryman thought of a curving ramp, and I thought of the inside outside path... Both seem incorrect at this time but looking at Grimers link I must say

@Grimer
VERY INTERESTING
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on April 11, 2009, 06:34:26 PM
@mondrasek,

These are the original files @Cherryman posted (see attached)
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: AquariuZ on April 11, 2009, 06:34:46 PM
@Omnibus

Open the model
Click on the motor to select it
Hit the delete key (motor disappears)
Go to the left and select a pin (green circle)
Go back to where themotor was and single click to drop the pin wm2d will indicate the center of the object with "X"

Now you have replaced the motor with a pin.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: AquariuZ on April 11, 2009, 06:48:12 PM
@mondrasek,

These are the original files @Cherryman posted (see attached)

KAD9 with pin attached

What do you wish to be done to KAD10? (The motor is not attached to the wheel in KAD10)
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on April 11, 2009, 06:58:16 PM
@AquariuZ,

Thanks a lot. I tried KAD9 but it's acting weird. One would expect a clockwise turn but it's turning counter clockwise. As for KAD10, I though @Cherryman said it has a motor. Otherwise, if it's freewheeling, then that's it.

I'm zeroing out all velocities in Properties but it keeps turning couter clockwise nevertheless.

I notice it keeps reverting to V0 = 1 rad/s. How can I zero out everything, keep it that way and have it as a default?
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: mondrasek on April 11, 2009, 07:03:12 PM
The motor in KAD10 is in the small wheel to the side.  It is "geared" to the big wheel to drive it.  I have removed.

Motor removed file attached.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: AquariuZ on April 11, 2009, 07:06:20 PM
@Cherryman

I must say your models look very very good.

Thanks for the hard work and sharing
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: mondrasek on April 11, 2009, 07:07:41 PM
Besides the motor in KAD9, Cherryman also assigned a rotation of 1 rad/sec to the main wheel element (didn't know you could do that).  I have removed both and the altered file is attached.

M.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: mondrasek on April 11, 2009, 07:09:33 PM
@Cherryman

I must say your models look very very good.

Thanks for the hard work and sharing

Agreed!  Your learning curve with WM2D was alarmingly fast.

M.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on April 11, 2009, 07:23:16 PM
@mondrasek,

Thanks a lot. However, if that's freewheeling, then it seems to work just fine, unless there's still someting hidden which acts as a motor. Can you check it out? Thanks. (see attached)
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: persume on April 11, 2009, 07:44:36 PM
Omnibus what's with the masonic quote? That was free masonery wasn't it, the part about the alpha and omega and the traveler?
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: persume on April 11, 2009, 07:48:11 PM
"Orffyreus commented that when the secret is revealed, he is afraid that people will complain that the idea is so simple it is not worth the asking price.

This latter comment has been echoed by Sjack Abeling."

Hey guess what Grimer, a lot has been echoed by Sjack Abeling.
 
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on April 11, 2009, 07:49:20 PM
Omnibus what's with the masonic quote? That was free masonery wasn't it, the part about the alpha and omega and the traveler?

Masonic quote?
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: persume on April 11, 2009, 07:51:57 PM
Sure, you know the post where you asked aquariuz if he was a fellow traveler following a star in a desert for 40 days, since he had the alpha and omega in his name. That was you wasn't it?
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: CLaNZeR on April 11, 2009, 07:53:04 PM
Knocked up a Bhaskara's Indian Wheel today. I know it is meant to have lots of little ball bearings, which I have to order but for now using a couple of small bearings in each slot.

Got some magnet ideas I want to try with it when it is mounted.

Off to make the base and uprights and will start a new thread to cover progress if any LOL

Cheers

Sean.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: mondrasek on April 11, 2009, 07:58:43 PM
@mondrasek,

Thanks a lot. However, if that's freewheeling, then it seems to work just fine, unless there's still someting hidden which acts as a motor. Can you check it out? Thanks. (see attached)

Omni, that is messed up.  What you posted is NOT the same file that I posted.  When I open your attachment the balls are in different locations and there is an immediate collision error.  Did you change something or play with it before sending it back?

I downloaded what I had posted and it was fine.  I am attaching it again as a different file.  Maybe it became corrupt in download to you?  Or else it has to do with the version of WM2D you have vs. what I have?

M.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on April 11, 2009, 08:10:26 PM
@mondrasek,

Yes, I moved one ball up and put it on the first upper empty groove. This is the starting position which will cause the wheel to turn clockwise. That's the only thing I changed.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: persume on April 11, 2009, 08:10:30 PM
AquariuZ, question, how did you know that the white circle was the axle?
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on April 11, 2009, 08:11:22 PM
Sure, you know the post where you asked aquariuz if he was a fellow traveler following a star in a desert for 40 days, since he had the alpha and omega in his name. That was you wasn't it?

No, you must be confusing me with someone else. Sorry.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: persume on April 11, 2009, 08:29:48 PM
Hi Omnibus. Sorry I had to go back and try to find it. The quote was from Grimer;

"Who am I? A man from the west who has been following a star across the desert for 40 years. When I see a handle which begins with alpha and ends with omega what else should I think but that perhaps I have met a fellow traveller on the same journey."

Grimer isn't that a free masonry quote? From a possible member to another?
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: 0c on April 11, 2009, 08:40:43 PM
... isn't that a free masonry quote? From a possible member to another?

Revelation 1:8, King James Bible
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alpha_and_Omega

(Now back to your regularly scheduled topic.)
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: mondrasek on April 11, 2009, 08:57:09 PM
@mondrasek,

Yes, I moved one ball up and put it on the first upper empty groove. This is the starting position which will cause the wheel to turn clockwise. That's the only thing I changed.

Omni, I guess in doing so you also broke one of the constraints.  The system thought the ball you moved was also supposed to be in collision mode with the wheel.  Since it was sitting on the wheel you had two objects occupying the same space at the same time.  So the sim blew up.  If you want to fix that sim, first click the ball (so it is selected), then hold shift and click the clear wheel (now both the ball and wheel should be selected).  You then go to the top pulldown menu "Object" and select "Do Not Collide".

If you are wanting to learn WM2D, please PM me the questions.  Or start a WM2D users thread.  I don't see why we should clog this thread with WM2D Q&A.

Fixed file attached.

M.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Grimer on April 11, 2009, 09:01:15 PM
Hi Omnibus. Sorry I had to go back and try to find it. The quote was from Grimer;

"Who am I? A man from the west who has been following a star across the desert for 40 years. When I see a handle which begins with alpha and ends with omega what else should I think but that perhaps I have met a fellow traveller on the same journey."

Grimer isn't that a free masonry quote? From a possible member to another?

Wot! Me a mason? That's a laugh. ;D

Reminds me of the time when I was in a crisis meeting with Pilkingtons in no mans land (a Birmingham hotel) I was resisting their introduction of GRC (glass reinforced cement) pointing out that our research showed that after 5 years it had lost all its ductility and would fail. Long technical argument - unresolved. Their product champion, Dr.B. tried to browbeat me into agreeing with their interpretation of the results. I said,

"You're entitled to have your opinion Dr.B but you must allow me to have mine."

At which point he went ballistic, and finished up screaming,

"I'll hound you Grimer. I'll hound you. I'll hound you..."

Then he burst into tears.

One of the other Pilks scientists diplomatically suggested we adjourned.

I was told later that while we were all having a pee, Dr.B had said to our Head of Chemistry, Dr Gutt,

"That Grimer, he's a communist isn't he?" (I wore an astrakhan hat).

"No," said Gutt. "Far from it, he's a catholic."

(needless to say, after 5 years it did all fail)
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: persume on April 11, 2009, 09:05:10 PM
dam keyboard.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: AquariuZ on April 11, 2009, 09:05:20 PM
Omni, I guess in doing so you also broke one of the constraints.  The system thought the ball you moved was also supposed to be in collision mode with the wheel.  Since it was sitting on the wheel you had two objects occupying the same space at the same time.  So the sim blew up.  If you want to fix that sim, first click the ball (so it is selected), then hold shift and click the clear wheel (now both the ball and wheel should be selected).  You then go to the top pulldown menu "Object" and select "Do Not Collide".

If you are wanting to learn WM2D, please PM me the questions.  Or start a WM2D users thread.  I don't see why we should clog this thread with WM2D Q&A.

Fixed file attached.

M.

It just started with a rotational speed of -0.700 rad/s (hehe)

If you set the circle and slots to say v=-0.100 rad/s you see something nice. Not acceleration though but very nice still. Playing with balls I am...

@Persume WHAT white circle?
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: mondrasek on April 11, 2009, 09:09:01 PM
Grimer,

How confident are you in your analysis with regards to:  http://i136.photobucket.com/albums/q171/frank260332/Sjackcycle.jpg ?

If you are highly confident, can we start another thread so we can get more opinions from others with like analytical capabilities?  It is currently over my head, but I once could speak thermodynamics.  Just might could have to dust off the cobwebs and become more educified.

Thanks,

M.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: mondrasek on April 11, 2009, 09:14:14 PM
It just started with a rotational speed of -0.700 rad/s (hehe)

Of course!  Energy was added to the one ball to raise it up into the slot at 2 o'clock.  That energy is now spinning the wheel.  But is there enough energy in the system to lift a second ball into a slot at 2 o'clock?

Lift anything up and it will fall again.  But how to lift one thing up while another of equal mass falls the same distance and still have energy left over?

M.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: persume on April 11, 2009, 09:18:49 PM
AquariuZ you said the white circle in the logo ( you have it pictured in black on a modification you did ) was the axle of the wheel.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Grimer on April 11, 2009, 09:55:56 PM
Grimer,

How confident are you in your analysis with regards to:  http://i136.photobucket.com/albums/q171/frank260332/Sjackcycle.jpg ?

If you are highly confident, can we start another thread so we can get more opinions from others with like analytical capabilities?  It is currently over my head, but I once could speak thermodynamics.  Just might could have to dust off the cobwebs and become more educified.

Thanks,

M.

Confident enough to discuss the thinking that underlies the analysis and I have no objection to you starting another thread to discuss it.

I am happy to answer questions and discuss things in a polite and calm manner. However, my experience of most forums, especially loosely moderated ones, is that when one introduces radically new viewpoints (like gravity being a vertical wind blowing steadily downward for instance) it so disturbs peoples view of things that discussions quickly dissolve into slanging matches.

And I've been in quite enough of those on the Steorn Forum.

I have been reading the history of the Bessler wheel. It provided plenty of examples of the kind of vitriolic opposition radically new ideas engender.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: itanimuLLi on April 11, 2009, 10:09:34 PM
how about this
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: mondrasek on April 11, 2009, 10:22:54 PM
Confident enough to discuss the thinking that underlies the analysis and I have no objection to you starting another thread to discuss it.

I am happy to answer questions and discuss things in a polite and calm manner. However, my experience of most forums, especially loosely moderated ones, is that when one introduces radically new viewpoints (like gravity being a vertical wind blowing steadily downward for instance) it so disturbs peoples view of things that discussions quickly dissolve into slanging matches.

And I've been in quite enough of those on the Steorn Forum.

I have been reading the history of the Bessler wheel. It provided plenty of examples of the kind of vitriolic opposition radically new ideas engender.

Thanks.  New thread here:  http://www.overunity.com/index.php?topic=7225.new#new

I have to say that yours are one of the few posts on Steorn that I bother to read.  I mainly go there to see if there is any news on that front.  Appears to be as much bickering and off topic slanging there as happens here as well.

It is because of the Bessler info that I follow these threads on gravity wheels.  All my schooling and experiments confirm a gravity wheel cannot work.  But I cannot mentally resolve the information about Bessler.  How could he have fooled so many people for so long?  I cannot dismiss all that information as just an elaborate hoax.  So I am stuck looking for what he discovered.

I truly hope that Abeling has discovered something and is not caught up in a "it should work" idea that he has only proved in parts but not as a whole.  His comments that are similar to Bessler's makes me wonder, "Did he figure out what Bessler figured out?", or, "Is he educated about Bessler and using that info to fuel his hoax/delusion?".

M.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Grimer on April 12, 2009, 12:01:38 AM
Thanks.  New thread here:  http://www.overunity.com/index.php?topic=7225.new#new

I have to say that yours are one of the few posts on Steorn that I bother to read.  I mainly go there to see if there is any news on that front.  Appears to be as much bickering and off topic slanging there as happens here as well.

It is because of the Bessler info that I follow these threads on gravity wheels.  All my schooling and experiments confirm a gravity wheel cannot work.  But I cannot mentally resolve the information about Bessler.  How could he have fooled so many people for so long?  I cannot dismiss all that information as just an elaborate hoax.  So I am stuck looking for what he discovered.

I truly hope that Abeling has discovered something and is not caught up in a "it should work" idea that he has only proved in parts but not as a whole.  His comments that are similar to Bessler's makes me wonder, "Did he figure out what Bessler figured out?", or, "Is he educated about Bessler and using that info to fuel his hoax/delusion?".

M.

If you approach Bessler's story as a piece of history and leave all your scientific prejudices behind, then in my view it is perfectly obvious that he had what he claimed and he had harvested the force of gravity, the gravitational potential, the vertical gravitational wind that blows steadily down.

It is enormously difficult to get rid of those prejudices. Even though intellectually, early in my career, I could see that the aether must exist, must hold things together, and that internal tensions were simply reduction in external pressure,  it was years before I felt it emotionally and it was only when I did feel it emotionally that I could harness the implications to my research.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: gyulasun on April 12, 2009, 12:18:53 AM
how about this

Very clever, I like it!

Gyula
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: AquariuZ on April 12, 2009, 01:25:52 AM
AquariuZ you said the white circle in the logo ( you have it pictured in black on a modification you did ) was the axle of the wheel.

Abeling marked this with "As" which is the Dutch word for "Axle".
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: AquariuZ on April 12, 2009, 01:27:39 AM
how about this

Very interesting concept and probably worth a try...
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on April 12, 2009, 01:52:41 AM
@itanimuLLi,

As several friends here said already, it's indeed a very interesting suggestion. I wish I knew how to model your idea with WM2D and then play with different conditions starting with elastic collision between different masses and then making it more and more inelastic.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on April 12, 2009, 02:34:20 AM
Of course, modeling with WM2D would be the easy way out. I guess, it shouldn’t be difficult for a skeptic who is versed in classical mechanics calculations to show rigorously why such proposal (@itanimuLLi’s proposal) demonstrates an impossible device. Maybe we, the proponents of the idea that devices such as this one are possible, can attempt to write the equations governing this system and prove the opposite, namely, that there are viable sets of conditions, classically, under which such device is possible. Would be interesting to see the clash of such proposals by the adherents of the pro and con. @itanimuLLi’s device gives an excellent opportunity for such classical analytical approach. This looks like a problem that would be given not exactly to first year physics students but maybe to PhD candidates (in a mainstream university it would probably sound like this – prove, using your knowledge of classical mechanics, that such device is impossible under any conditions; or that there are no conditions under which this device is possible).
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: persume on April 12, 2009, 05:16:16 AM
Allright let's make this interesting. I'll bet anyone $2000.00 that this device doesn't work.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: AquariuZ on April 12, 2009, 05:18:00 AM
Where is Cherryman?

I love his inverted wheels and am using them for some great tests. Weight connected with rods looks very interesting...
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: AquariuZ on April 12, 2009, 05:42:02 AM
Allright let's make this interesting. I'll bet anyone $2000.00 that this device doesn't work.

Boing fails. wm2d (flimsy) attached...
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: hansvonlieven on April 12, 2009, 08:18:13 AM
G'day all,

For those of you that are playing around with that inner ramp idea here is probably the most interesting version. It was designed in 1835 in England by Dixon Vallance. Instead of a ramp it features a belt.

Hans von Lieven
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: spinner on April 12, 2009, 10:29:26 AM
Quote
After all, as Harvey has pointed out on Fizzx, there's nothing new about deriving energy from gravity. Tides do it all the time. Think of the Bessler Wheel as a human scale tide. It makes it feel more homely.  Wink

Yes, but "we all know where the energy comes from" when observing the natural tide cyclus... How about water wheels "gravitational energy"? Why they don't use this ancient concept on an "ISS", for instance?  :P


Glue is used in the manufacture of fibreglass composite. If glued composites are good enough for the wings of the A380 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Airbus_A380) I guess they are good enough for a Bessler Wheel, eh!

Bessler used wood, a natural composite. But I've no doubt he would have used fibre glass if he were building his wheel today. Boat builders also used to use natural composite but have now turned to man made composite.

Yes, good points... Fibreglass has many good properties! (I know the stuff because I'm a nautical enthusiast...)

But... (You know about my language problems).... If someone says "glass", I translate it as "glass", not "fibreglass"...
I can even  distinguish a "glue" from a "resin"... So we have a glue/glass and the fibreglass/resin terms...

OK... Building a "proof of a concept" device from wood and stuff is still believable project...

But for a "MW power" producing suitable materials...

...
So, Henkel is "officially confirmed" as provider of "gluing" substances for an "Abeling weight power plants"....
Hey, I can buy it....It's quite possible...

Cheers!
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on April 12, 2009, 10:55:30 AM
@spinner,

So, you think Henkel are in it just for the profit from their glue business and couldn’t care less that in doing so their name will be inevitably connected with a super controversial project? Interesting.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: spinner on April 12, 2009, 11:00:58 AM
@spinner,

But that’s what Sjack Abeling claims his device is doing.
...

But you may say again ‘why not?’, if this Dutch institution confirms it has indeed given the permission, the way you said it regarding Henkel. If Henkel’s confirmation isn’t convincing enough to you why should this be? The truth is, nothing can prove the validity of Sjack Abeling’s claim or any other claim for that matter but independent verification by third parties.

Hello, Omnibus!

Yes, I had Abeling statement (device starting from a standstill) in mind...
After I saw other concepts here - K.A.D., and others... (which were certainly not self-starting), I just made a remark...

...
If "Henkel Netherlands" is saying that "they're involved in the challenging glue techniques" for the "Abeling Weight power plant", then i can believe that...

At this point, we all don't know much about anything.... Especially the Sj's work. It's (like always) the believe/not believe issue....


My main point was - if the authority, the "commercial...."  (I don't exactly remember the official name of that Netherlands authority) would confirm that they really gave him a permission to build "weight/gravity" power plants all over the Netherland, that would be something else entirely....
 
...

And, yes, an official third party (trustfull independent verification) confirmation build is all what is needed...

Cheers!
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on April 12, 2009, 11:05:14 AM
So, we know it cannot work but, hey, why not make a buck off of it like Sterling does. We're in a really bad shape if reputable companies such as Henkel rationalizes it that way.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: spinner on April 12, 2009, 11:08:34 AM
@spinner,

So, you think Henkel are in it just for the profit from their glue business and couldn’t care less that in doing so their name will be inevitably connected with a super controversial project? Interesting.

No.
Do you think it's necessary that they know the "whole secret"?
I think I remember that Sjack A. "said" he is the only one who knows the truth... Beside his partners, investors?...

Why do you think that Henkel knows the whole story? Is this firm a partner? Could be.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on April 12, 2009, 11:14:40 AM
No.
Do you think it's necessary that they know the "whole secret"?
I think I remember that Sjack A. "said" he is the only one who knows the truth... Beside his partners, investors?...

Why do you think that Henkel knows the whole story? Is this firm a partner? Could be.


Aha, so now you allow for Henkel's engineers to forget their classical training and suppose there might be something to Abeling's claim. Based on what? If they don't have the evidence Henkel, in selling the glue not just for the profit but also because they believe somehow in the project without proper evidence, would appear more like a crank company than the reputable one we think it is, wouldn't it?
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Tink on April 12, 2009, 11:54:42 AM
Patent is online now, thank you Espacenet.
http://www.overunity.com/index.php?action=tpmod;dl=item265
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: spinner on April 12, 2009, 12:01:35 PM
Aha, so now you allow for Henkel's engineers to forget their classical training and suppose there might be something to Abeling's claim. Based on what? If they don't have the evidence Henkel would appear more like a crank company than the reputable one we think it is, wouldn't it?

Sorry, but what guarantees you that they are indeed involved in this "controversial" project? Because of a few posts you read here? Because you talked to him?
What guaranties you that they (Henkel) knows the "whole story"? Did Henkel saw Abeling experiments and are now convinced this is a real deal? Why, for instance, a guy from some other Henkel's branch (high ranking doctor of chemistry from another branch which I happened to know well.....)

If this project is indeed so controversial (and secret), why would they be answering some "unknown guy from the web" request?


Yeah, could be.
I admit a find AquariuZ's posts sincere, so I have no problems with his reports. But I'd say we don't know much about what there may be really happening...


Btw, what classical training of the Henkel engineers are you alluding to? Are they specialised in chemistry, biology (maybe physics?), or, doh.., in  "FE" questions?
Yes, I know they most know the CoE and similar stuff (that's a basic... especially for technically educated experts).
Any conventionally trained expert would know that gravity motors are considered as impossible...

So, why does a commercialist from one of the Henkel units claims this really is a serious project ?

I'd like to know why, too.
Cheers!
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on April 12, 2009, 12:05:37 PM
Patent is online now, thank you Espacenet.
http://www.overunity.com/index.php?action=tpmod;dl=item265

Thanks @Tink. Unfortunately it's in Dutch. Perhaps @Cherryman can help us understand what it's all about.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: spinner on April 12, 2009, 12:13:15 PM
Patent is online now, thank you Espacenet.
http://www.overunity.com/index.php?action=tpmod;dl=item265
Thanks, Tink!

Aha.
Well, good luck with replicating....

If this are really the basics of "weight power  plant",  than you can have it....
Another ones bites the dust.

Cheers!
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on April 12, 2009, 12:25:02 PM
@spinner,

Quote
Sorry, but what guarantees you that they are indeed involved in this "controversial" project?

Henkel is splashed all over Abeling's web page. You think they are gullible enough not to know that and not to realize this connects them with Abelings obviously (as seen directly from his web page) controversial project, correct?

Quote
Because of a few posts you read here? Because you talked to him?

Because of what his web site says. Do you want a quote?

[qupte]What guaranties you that they (Henkel) knows the "whole story"?[/quote]

You mean to tell me they can be folled by any passerby? You mean to tell me a website connecting their name with a super controversial project means nothing to them, is that what you mean? We're in a really bad shape if that's the case.

Quote
Did Henkel saw Abeling experiments and are now convinced this is a real deal?

Good question. They must have to allow such involvement of their name with his project (Sterling way of making a buck from non-working project excluded). Otherwise, they are as flimsy as they can get.

Quote
If this project is indeed so controversial (and secret), why would they be answering some "unknown guy from the web" request?

Maybe because they are so convinced, they've seen it and so on that it allows them to respond in this way to a question from the public. What else?

Quote
So, why does a commercialist from one of the Henkel units claims this really is a serious project ?

Because they really consider it a serious project, beyond than just a commercial activity for selling glue. What's in it for them to make it up -- present it to the public as a serious project while knowing it isn't? Just to sell more glue? Hardly.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on April 12, 2009, 12:25:59 PM
Thanks, Tink!

Aha.
Well, good luck with replicating....

If this are really the basics of "weight power  plant",  than you can have it....
Another ones bites the dust.

Cheers!

Why?
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on April 12, 2009, 12:30:00 PM
Please see this. Seems there's again something I'm overlooking. (see attached)
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: spinner on April 12, 2009, 12:32:20 PM
Why?

Because of what I saw on the "drawings" pages.

I don't understand the original language (Dutch)

Or maybe I'm just dead wrong.
Cheers!
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on April 12, 2009, 12:37:03 PM
Because of what I saw on the "drawings" pages.

I don't understand the original language (Dutch)

Or maybe I'm just dead wrong.
Cheers!

So, from what you saw on the "drawing" pages you think it won't work but at the same time you think you may be dead wrong about that. Is this covering your bets or what?
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: spinner on April 12, 2009, 12:39:22 PM
@spinner,

Henkel is splashed all over Abeling's web page. You think they are gullible enough not to know that and not to realize this connects them with Abelings obviously (as seen directly from his web page) controversial project, correct?

Because of what his web site says. Do you want a quote?

[qupte]What guaranties you that they (Henkel) knows the "whole story"?

You mean to tell me they can be folled by any passerby? You mean to tell me a website connecting their name with a super controversial project means nothing to them, is that what you mean? We're in a really bad shape if that's the case.

Good question. They must have to allow such involvement of their name with his project (Sterling way of making a buck from non-working project excluded). Otherwise, they are as flimsy as they can get.

Maybe because they are so convinced, they've seen it and so on that it allows them to respond in this way to a question from the public. What else?

Because they really consider it a serious project, beyond than just a commercial activity for selling glue. What's in it for them to make it up -- present it to the public as a serious project while knowing it isn't? Just to sell more glue? Hardly.


Omnibus, I'd like to see this would come true (like you would like, too).

No offence, if I'm sounding too skeptical.

We'll see, won't we?
Soon.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: spinner on April 12, 2009, 12:54:06 PM
So, from what you saw on the "drawing" pages you think it won't work but at the same time you think you may be dead wrong about that. Is this covering your bets or what?

Ok, your posts questions are just to quick for me...

The drawing pages? I see the weight paths. Nothing special. There are no "revolutionary mechanisms" which would use some other forces in a novel way.

I'm certainly not trying to "cover my bets".  If that's a questionnaire, you can count me as a "non believer" in this Abeling project.

I am just saying (for the record) that from what i saw here - so far, it's my opinion it doesn't work. It's probably just another delusion.
As simple as that. You can have all the glory at the successfull confirmation, no prob.

Not that I wouldn't like to see a working gravity wheel. (!!!)

Cheers!
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on April 12, 2009, 01:05:10 PM
Ok, your posts questions are just to quick for me...

The drawing pages? I see the weight paths. Nothing special. There are no "revolutionary mechanisms" which would use some other forces in a novel way.

I'm certainly not trying to "cover my bets".  If that's a questionnaire, you can count me as a "non believer" in this Abeling project.

I am just saying (for the record) that from what i saw here - so far, it's my opinion it doesn't work. It's probably just another delusion.
As simple as that. You can have all the glory at the successfull confirmation, no prob.

Not that I wouldn't like to see a working gravity wheel. (!!!)

Cheers!

Posts like this are useless. What you're presenting are not arguments but some hunches of yours which are hardly of interest to anyone because they are trivial. Probably you'd do much better to keep them to yourself. You can imagine what will become of this thread if everyone starts to fill it with his or her trivial negative premonitions and prejudices.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: spinner on April 12, 2009, 01:26:04 PM
Posts like this are useless. What you're presenting are not arguments but some hunches of yours which are hardly of interest to anyone. Probably you'd do much better to keep them to yourself. You can imagine what will become of this thread if everyone starts to fill it with his or her premonitions and prejudices.

Yes, you're right.
These are just my personal opinions. Expressed by answers to your questions addressed to me.

Now, please, read again this last post of yours, and try to understand what you're saying.
Do you see anything which could be related with your own posts/opinions, too?

Quote
...You can imagine what will become of this thread if everyone starts to fill it with his or her premonitions and prejudices.
;)
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on April 12, 2009, 01:33:49 PM
Yes, you're right.
These are just my personal opinions. Expressed by answers to your questions addressed to me.

Now, please, read again this last post of yours, and try to understand what you're saying.
Do you see anything which could be related with your own posts/opinions, too?
 ;)

No, the last sentence applies to you, not to me. Restrain from uttering trivial negative opinions which are hardly of anybody's interest and don't try to be too funny.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: mindsweeper on April 12, 2009, 02:01:42 PM
Please see this. Seems there's again something I'm overlooking. (see attached)

You have not set any air resistance, you can find this in the World tab, second one down. Set it to low and try again.

Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: spinner on April 12, 2009, 02:05:27 PM
No, the last sentence applies to you, not to me. Restrain from uttering trivial negative opinions which are hardly of anybody's interest and don't try to be too funny.

Don't flatter me  ;D... I know my Engrish sucks, so why would I want to sound funny?

After all, we're not talking about "pig's excrement here"...

Omnibus, I'm not interested in trying to debunk anything....

So please, forgive me!.
I can easily stop posting in this "thread of yours", if it really bothers you so much..

Cheers!
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on April 12, 2009, 02:06:15 PM
You have not set any air resistance, you can find this in the World tab, second one down. Set it to low and try again.



Why should air resistance make any difference? Consider the experiment is in vacuum.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: itanimuLLi on April 12, 2009, 02:41:48 PM
According the patent this is how it works ?!
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on April 12, 2009, 02:53:16 PM
According the patent this is how it works ?!

So, @eisenficker2000's http://www.overunity.com/index.php?topic=7150.msg170514#msg170514 was the closest so far. In your rendition the weights (balls) are in couples, however, as was explained in Abeling's webpage. I wonder what would make this work and not @AquariuZ' or @Cherryman's?
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: AquariuZ on April 12, 2009, 03:01:22 PM

My main point was - if the authority, the "commercial...."  (I don't exactly remember the official name of that Netherlands authority) would confirm that they really gave him a permission to build "weight/gravity" power plants all over the Netherland, that would be something else entirely....

I filed an official information request at the VROM site about a week ago. All RFI´s towards the dutch government are handled by an entity called "Postbus 51" or P.O. Box 51. They claim to usually respond within 48 hours. In this case I think they may have some trouble finding the information. Sjack Abeling confirmed to me over the phone they had an agreement with the Ministery of Economic affairs to build at least a prototype factory which may use the current infrastructure managed by the government. This does not sound all to alien to me.

He will not have permission to build plants all over the netherlands just yet, I must assume the trial project must be assessed before VROM gives the go ahead for a full scale production environment in the netherlands and maybe even outside.

Interesting still.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: AquariuZ on April 12, 2009, 03:03:53 PM
G'day all,

For those of you that are playing around with that inner ramp idea here is probably the most interesting version. It was designed in 1835 in England by Dixon Vallance. Instead of a ramp it features a belt.

Hans von Lieven

More food for thought... Thanks for that, the more ideas the better...

In this case friction will be a major factor as up till now with the other models.

Currently looking if a weight can be launched by scissoring it betwen a barrier and its holder. Looks like it will...!
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: hansvonlieven on April 12, 2009, 03:06:44 PM
This is the same idea with a different control mechanism.Of course it doesn't work.

Hans von Lieven
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on April 12, 2009, 03:07:00 PM
Quote
Interesting still.

... to say the least, if indeed the Dutch government is involved in this way. I've never heard of any OU project to have reached that far.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: AquariuZ on April 12, 2009, 03:12:18 PM
Patent is online now, thank you Espacenet.
http://www.overunity.com/index.php?action=tpmod;dl=item265


 :o :o :o

All hail TINK!!!

I have read most of it and it is great to be (almost) right

Guiding rails on the side!
Dumbbells!
Guiding "kidney" on the inside

But there is more to it than we thought...

I´ll read up on this thread to see if there are volunteers to translate into English, if not I will do it TODAY

Halleluja TINK.

Tink!
Tink!
Tink!

Everybody!  8)
Title: STARTING TRANSLATION... NOW!!!!
Post by: AquariuZ on April 12, 2009, 03:18:28 PM
OK, Cherryman was kidnapped by the MIB, and no other takers yet, so off I go.

I´ll sacrifice my lunch and nap, and have to be back at the ICBM silo by 17:00 which gives me one hour and 45 minutes for the initial translation.

The text is interesting to say the least....

Pant pant
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: mondrasek on April 12, 2009, 03:20:44 PM
All

WM2D CONCERNS

#1 SIZE MATTERS!

The unit for size in WM2D is meters.  This is very important!  Some forces and movements are very dependent on the size of an object.  In our case, the critical force being effected by size is Centrifugal Force.  CF is proportional to the distance of a mass from the axle (radius) on which it is spinning.  So a mass spinning close to the axle has less CF than an equal mass spinning further out at the same RPM.  Look at the KAD10 sim.  The wheel is 320 meters across!  The CF at the rim of such a wheel even rotating only once per sec will be so much greater than the effects of gravity that gravity will hardly play a part.

Try and keep things to a scale where CF and the force due to gravity (F=ma or F=9.8m) are relative.  If you look at the post I made here http://www.overunity.com/index.php?topic=7150.msg169128#msg169128 you can see the combined gravity and CF accelerations for 12 ft. wheel at 26 rpm (mimicking a Bessler design).  Changing the size and/or RPM would change the acceleration map.

Side note:  Size is also very important when systems involve a pendulum.  The period of a pendulum (time it takes to swing back and forth) is dependent on the length only.

#2  SIM ARE APPROXIMATIONS

And can only calculate interactions one at a time.  So there is always a small error.  The error is decreased by making the time step of each calculation smaller and smaller, but the error always exists.  So in the case of a spring loaded teetertotter (a la Omni's example.wm2d) the falling weight is calculated to move first.  Then the movement of the teetertotter, then the force of the spring due to the movement of the teetertotter, then the force on the ball on the opposite side of the teetertotter.  But wait!  That other side of the teetertotter has already moved and also now had a spring force, so the resultant force calculated to push up on the second ball is exaggerated.  And so the cycle repeats and everything gets higher.

Springs give very strange results in WM2D unless used with a dampener or with air resistance turned on (per mindsweep).

Thanks,

M.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: AquariuZ on April 12, 2009, 03:35:04 PM
Someone with OCR capabilities please upload the text, if not I have to type every letter by hand!!

If you can translate PDF to Text please send or upload the text (only)

See Tink´s post, the patent is online now....
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on April 12, 2009, 03:41:24 PM
@AquariuZ,

Quote
OK, Cherryman was kidnapped by the MIB, and no other takers yet, so off I go.

With that kind of involvement by the government, if at all, Holland emerges as a MiB-free country so I'm expecting @Cherryman to appear any moment. By the way, thanks for taking the time to translate the patent. Shouldn't it be patented in the US and other countries as well?
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: noonespecial on April 12, 2009, 03:57:00 PM
G'day all,

For those of you that are playing around with that inner ramp idea here is probably the most interesting version. It was designed in 1835 in England by Dixon Vallance. Instead of a ramp it features a belt.

Hans von Lieven

What is driving the belt pulleys? I assume that its off of the larger wheel but I don't see it in the picture.
Title: INITIAL THOUGHTS AFTER READING THE PATENT
Post by: AquariuZ on April 12, 2009, 04:29:05 PM
So the path of the weights is almost exactly as figured out in here.
Barriers or guiders in smooth flowing curves pushing weight towards axle at six o clock and moves it into place at one o clock. All very tight

Initial reaction: cannot work due to friction

BUT

The claim is

Abeling has considerably reduced and hence overcome friction by the following

For the guides and sockets he uses an interrupted teeth like surface, like the outside of a gear or cogwheel to reduce friction. Please check Fig 6. on 6/7 to see the teeth like surface.

And guess what will further reduce friction: using GLASS as a material for the guides.

I believe this is the main "extra" he uses to make this work.

Running out of time for now, will translate as much as I can and post.

Looking forward to future analysis and replication



Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: AquariuZ on April 12, 2009, 04:32:05 PM
the time to translate the patent. Shouldn't it be patented in the US and other countries as well?

If he has not done it yet, it now cannot be patented anymore because it is public?

In any case it should be public, who cares about a patent. Our best chances are to replicate asap with what we have. Or try at least. About MIB: I do not really believe in them, but I believe in the Evil of Big Corp
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: dutchy1966 on April 12, 2009, 04:33:12 PM
Hi all,

I have done some manual translation. The important things are covered in it.
All the pictures are in there aswell.
I left it in Word 2003 format so others (AquariuZ  ::) ) can work on it as well.

I think it might be a good start.

Used rapidshare cause the attachment was to large.....

http://rapidshare.com/files/220455099/abeling.doc.html



enjoy!


regards,

Dutchy

I just noticed that it can only be downloaded 10 times from rapidshare..... Can someone repost it here as pdf maybe?
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: AquariuZ on April 12, 2009, 04:48:04 PM
I wonder if there aren´t even better materials to reduce friction

What about TEFLON for instance

Needs to be durable too.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: oak on April 12, 2009, 04:52:52 PM
Here's a link to a pdf version of Dutchy's translation (6.2 MB):
  http://rapidshare.com/files/220460304/abeling.pdf.html

And here's a link to the original Word version of his translation (1.6 MB):
  http://rapidshare.com/files/220469055/abeling.doc

There should be no limit to the number of downloads for either of these.

ETA:  PLEASE NOTE:  Attached directly to this post is a smaller, text-only version of the translation.  If you've already downloaded the patent, you already have the diagrams.

ETA:  SEE ALSO five posts below this one -- text copied into post.

Title: Re: INITIAL THOUGHTS AFTER READING THE PATENT
Post by: spinner on April 12, 2009, 04:56:33 PM
So the path of the weights is almost exactly as figured out in here.
Barriers or guiders in smooth flowing curves pushing weight towards axle at six o clock and moves it into place at one o clock. All very tight

Initial reaction: cannot work due to friction

BUT

The claim is

Abeling has considerably reduced and hence overcome friction by the following

For the guides and sockets he uses an interrupted teeth like surface, like the outside of a gear or cogwheel to reduce friction. Please check Fig 6. on 6/7 to see the teeth like surface.

And guess what will further reduce friction: using GLASS as a material for the guides.

I believe this is the main "extra" he uses to make this work.
...

So it was really a glass afterall ... (not the fibreglass)  ;)


You cannot make a "working gravity wheel" just by reducing the frictional losses.
I thought everybody knew that?


Looking forward to hear what other goods are hidden in this patent application text....
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: rbe on April 12, 2009, 04:58:37 PM
Someone with OCR capabilities please upload the text, if not I have to type every letter by hand!!

If you can translate PDF to Text please send or upload the text (only)

See Tink´s post, the patent is online now....

Hi Guys,

First post here, I must say I find this tread very interesting and I really hope this wheel of Sjack's is for real.

As I dont know dutch and want to read the patent of Sjack's ASAP Im glad to contibute a text version (a bit rough) for easy translation.

Cheers

Keep up the good work!
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: spinner on April 12, 2009, 05:33:39 PM
I wonder if there aren´t even better materials to reduce friction

What about TEFLON for instance

Needs to be durable too.

Yes, teflon would be one of such modern materials, much better than glass in terms of low friction.
Or simply a polished steel contact surfaces and a good grease on all of those rails, guides, joints... (which works quite nicely...)

Maybe contactless magnetic levitation?

But... What would make his wheel spinnin' ?  :o
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: AquariuZ on April 12, 2009, 05:39:12 PM
Hi Guys,

First post here, I must say I find this tread very interesting and I really hope this wheel of Sjack's is for real.

As I dont know dutch and want to read the patent of Sjack's ASAP Im glad to contibute a text version (a bit rough) for easy translation.

Cheers

Keep up the good work!


Thank you
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: AquariuZ on April 12, 2009, 05:43:10 PM
Here is Dutchy's text. Thanks from AquariuZ (  ::) )

 ;D

This is the essence of the dutch worded Abeling patent. The translation is my interpretation and is mainly focused on the description of the working principal.

This invention converts gravitational energy into kinetic (rotational) energy.
The principal of conversion comes from controlling the falling and lifting forces that are applied to the weights involved. By letting the weights move radially outward during their fall and force them radially inward on their way up (by means of a guiding system) a momentum is created which is available at the central axle. 

It consists of:
-   at least one carrier disc (2) rotating around a horizontal axle (6), having at least one weight (3) attached which can move mainly radially outward  in a predetermined path. It has slots in it as we know from the pictures seen in the video. The slots can be different in shape and number but figure two is a nice starting point. The central axle is fixed to the carrier disc.
-   Two stands (5) which host the guiding means for the weights. See figure 3.
Point A is the center axle. Further there is the oval shaped guide which guides the weights according to the track shown in Figure 4. The stand have bearings for the central axle(7).
-   Weights.
The weights are indeed dumbbell like, which means two (half) weights attached by a connecting rod which protrudes the carrier disc (2)
-   Extra guiding means (4). These consists of rods (15) attached to the edge of the carrier disc (2) and sitting in a ring bearing(16) on the stands. The ring can be seen  in Figure 3. This seems to be optional and is to prevent wobble of the disc.
Note: Figure 1 shows two discs working side by side which is not further mentioned. One half is the basic principle!

Each carrier disc (2) has for each weight a curved radial guiding slot (fig. 2). To promote the impact of the weights spiraling outward each guiding slot has a curve on the end. The curve being in the direction of rotation. In the example shown the slot is even totally curved.
Each weight can be shifted radially in its own curved guiding slot.
The guiding means(4) on the stands (5) consist in this example of rings (13) by which the weights are guided. These rings are also cut in the stand. These rings have a oval sort of shape. Because of the shape of the rings each weights gets propelled when it comes up to its highest point. This creates a lot of energy.
The oval shape is somewhat tilted. This way the weights are forced to start moving inward already before reaching the lowest point.
In figure 4 one can see the pathway which the weights are forced to follow. At weight posion 3_12 (figure 4)the weights starts getting warped outward again.

In figure 4 the pathway for a single way is shown. It should be clear that each weight follows this same pathway. In figures 5A to 5D the pathways of a 4 weight example is shown. Notice how the weights move towards and away from each other.

The improved version that is being tested at this moment has two carrier discs side by side and the weights in between them (see figure 7). The weights are guided by both discs. The guiding slots are shaped like hockey sticks and positioned as shown in Figure 8. The curved end of the “hockeystick” causes the weight to be briefly , but very intensely, warped outward.  Notice that the slots do NOT stretch out radially!     
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: persume on April 12, 2009, 05:52:01 PM
I was talking about the Sjack Abeling device when it comes to the bet.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: persume on April 12, 2009, 05:57:56 PM
So, we know it cannot work but, hey, why not make a buck off of it like Sterling does. We're in a really bad shape if reputable companies such as Henkel rationalizes it that way.

Hardly Omnibus, you don't see Henkle advertising the fact they might be supplying something to Abeling. It's no skin off their nose, money is money. Now if Abeling really did have something that worked, and they knew about it, they would make no hesitation in advertising the fact that they would be the supplier to this incredible piece of technology. I seriously doubt it that Henkle knows specifics about the supposed technology at all, other than they are working out a quote for supply costs.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: i_ron on April 12, 2009, 05:58:17 PM


Currently looking if a weight can be launched by scissoring it betwen a barrier and its holder. Looks like it will...!

Thank you Aquariuz for bringing this device to our attention and caring for the site.  I can have more
faith in this invention than a certain recent magnet wheel.

Yes, anyone who has ever tried to cut a round rod with a pair of scissors will have no problem with
understanding the final action that launches the weight to its final outer position. Simplicity its self!

Ron

PS: and thanks for the translation!
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: persume on April 12, 2009, 06:16:26 PM
Here's a link to a pdf version of Dutchy's translation (6.2 MB):
  http://rapidshare.com/files/220460304/abeling.pdf.html

And here's a link to the original Word version of his translation (1.6 MB):
  http://rapidshare.com/files/220469055/abeling.doc

There should be no limit to the number of downloads for either of these.

ETA:  PLEASE NOTE:  Attached directly to this post is a smaller, text-only version of the translation.  If you've already downloaded the patent, you already have the diagrams.



Thanks Oak.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Alexioco on April 12, 2009, 06:18:48 PM
Here is Dutchy's text. Thanks from AquariuZ (  ::) )

 ;D

This is the essence of the dutch worded Abeling patent. The translation is my interpretation and is mainly focused on the description of the working principal.

This invention converts gravitational energy into kinetic (rotational) energy.
The principal of conversion comes from controlling the falling and lifting forces that are applied to the weights involved. By letting the weights move radially outward during their fall and force them radially inward on their way up (by means of a guiding system) a momentum is created which is available at the central axle. 

It consists of:
-   at least one carrier disc (2) rotating around a horizontal axle (6), having at least one weight (3) attached which can move mainly radially outward  in a predetermined path. It has slots in it as we know from the pictures seen in the video. The slots can be different in shape and number but figure two is a nice starting point. The central axle is fixed to the carrier disc.
-   Two stands (5) which host the guiding means for the weights. See figure 3.
Point A is the center axle. Further there is the oval shaped guide which guides the weights according to the track shown in Figure 4. The stand have bearings for the central axle(7).
-   Weights.
The weights are indeed dumbbell like, which means two (half) weights attached by a connecting rod which protrudes the carrier disc (2)
-   Extra guiding means (4). These consists of rods (15) attached to the edge of the carrier disc (2) and sitting in a ring bearing(16) on the stands. The ring can be seen  in Figure 3. This seems to be optional and is to prevent wobble of the disc.
Note: Figure 1 shows two discs working side by side which is not further mentioned. One half is the basic principle!

Each carrier disc (2) has for each weight a curved radial guiding slot (fig. 2). To promote the impact of the weights spiraling outward each guiding slot has a curve on the end. The curve being in the direction of rotation. In the example shown the slot is even totally curved.
Each weight can be shifted radially in its own curved guiding slot.
The guiding means(4) on the stands (5) consist in this example of rings (13) by which the weights are guided. These rings are also cut in the stand. These rings have a oval sort of shape. Because of the shape of the rings each weights gets propelled when it comes up to its highest point. This creates a lot of energy.
The oval shape is somewhat tilted. This way the weights are forced to start moving inward already before reaching the lowest point.
In figure 4 one can see the pathway which the weights are forced to follow. At weight posion 3_12 (figure 4)the weights starts getting warped outward again.

In figure 4 the pathway for a single way is shown. It should be clear that each weight follows this same pathway. In figures 5A to 5D the pathways of a 4 weight example is shown. Notice how the weights move towards and away from each other.

The improved version that is being tested at this moment has two carrier discs side by side and the weights in between them (see figure 7). The weights are guided by both discs. The guiding slots are shaped like hockey sticks and positioned as shown in Figure 8. The curved end of the “hockeystick” causes the weight to be briefly , but very intensely, warped outward.  Notice that the slots do NOT stretch out radially!     


That was quite interesting, if its that easy, then thats quite amazing...
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: mrsean2k on April 12, 2009, 06:34:27 PM
Hardly Omnibus, you don't see Henkle advertising the fact they might be supplying something to Abeling. It's no skin off their nose, money is money. Now if Abeling really did have something that worked, and they knew about it, they would make no hesitation in advertising the fact that they would be the supplier to this incredible piece of technology. I seriously doubt it that Henkle knows specifics about the supposed technology at all, other than they are working out a quote for supply costs.

Hi Persume,

This is just what I was thinking following the discussion about Henkel's involvement. Henkel can be involved in the project without endorsing a particular application of the product it supplies.

If I was asked to design a database to handle a capacity at a certain rate, I'd do it and supply it to a customer. I'd certainly be "seriously involved" in the project, but if the customer decides this database is to be used to build a self-aware computing system, I'm not making any comment on whether or not the goal feasible, and I'm not exploiting the customer by taking on the commission. Who am I to say what the customer should or shouldn't spend their money on?

I can supply what's been asked of me, both with a clean conscience and with my critical faculties intact. I'd also be perfectly happy to go public about it. If my database performs according to the specification asked and the customer's satisfied, it's a ringing endorsement of my service, nothing to do with the ambitions of the customer.

This applies to *almost* every consumer / supplier relationship.

Cheers

S
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: persume on April 12, 2009, 06:34:43 PM
 AquariuZ in reply to the wrongly placed glass comment, I'd like you to show me any real life engineering situation where weights are being thrown about with enough force to power over a thousand homes, and glass is used as the powers structure.
 I'd like you to show me how there is no danger of said glass being chipped, scratched, or in the most obvious case completely destroyed, if not immediately, then over time.

As a second request I'd like you to negate an abvious fact that all of Sjacks Abelings previous patents had to do with media display ( for trade shows etc. ) and then try to tell me that Glas AanHecht doesn't specialize in producing products of a similar nature ( which it does )
"In cooperation with partner Henkel B.V. and Glaswerk Hoogezand B.V., Glas Aanhecht is producing decorative glass. For example: granite glass, Trespa glass, marmoleum glass and other materials. These materials are glued to the back of glass, with the decorative side forward. These products are marketed by sales organizations."

I also wonder if Sjack is or isn't getting coin for every click visitors make to those other sites marketed up on his site. Which might have nothing to do with the above but it is a matter of interest.

Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: AquariuZ on April 12, 2009, 06:38:33 PM
Just posting as I pass..

Hope format looks ok

               5

(...)
      The invention is now explained using a number of examples, with reference
20   to the attached drawings, where corresponding parts are marked with reference numbers
   which are raised by 100 at a time and whereby:
      Fig. 1 shows a frontal view of the first type of the conversion unit according to
   the invention,
25      Fig. 2 shows a side view od the carrier of the conversion unit of fig. 1, with eight
   guiding rails for weights,
      Fig. 3 shows a side view of the guidance ring and the axle ring of the conversion
   unit of fig. 1,
30      Fig. 4 shows a schematic side view of the path which a weight follows during a
   complete rotation of the carrier,


               6

      Fig. 5A to 5D shows a schematic of a number of positions of an alternative
   implementation of the carrier which is fitted with four weights,
5      Fig. 6 shows a side view of another implementation of the carrier, which
   is fitted with a serrated surface,
      Fig.7 shows a view from behind of another implementation of the conversion
   unit of fig. 7, and
      Fig. 8 ahows a side view of one of the carriers of the conversion unit of
10   fig. 7.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: persume on April 12, 2009, 06:40:22 PM
Hi Persume,

This is just what I was thinking following the discussion about Henkel's involvement. Henkel can be involved in the project without endorsing a particular application of the product it supplies.

If I was asked to design a database to handle a capacity at a certain rate, I'd do it and supply it to a customer. I'd certainly be "seriously involved" in the project, but if the customer decides this database is to be used to build a self-aware computing system, I'm not making any comment on whether or not the goal feasible, and I'm not exploiting the customer by taking on the commission. Who am I to say what the customer should or shouldn't spend their money on?

I can supply what's been asked of me, both with a clean conscience and with my critical faculties intact. I'd also be perfectly happy to go public about it. If my database performs according to the specification asked and the customer's satisfied, it's a ringing endorsement of my service, nothing to do with the ambitions of the customer.

This applies to *almost* every consumer / supplier relationship.

Cheers

S

HI S,
Your right. I can't fathom why there are those who immediately assume the invention must be true, or the inventor is on the up and up, just because the inventor has other companies names on his site. Your points are well taken and are what I was trying to get across.
Thanks.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: mondrasek on April 12, 2009, 06:45:47 PM
Well, from what I can see, we have no "spectacular event" taking place that would add energy to spin this wheel, or to use less energy to raise the weights than is available due to the falling weights.

When you bring a weight on a spinning wheel inwards towards the axle, you must do work.  Spin around holding a weight at arm's length and try to pull it in.  It takes work.  In the case of this wheel the energy to drive the weights against the ramp guides to force it towards the axle is being supplied by the inertia of the wheel (initially gained from the falling weights).  It will also try to accelerate the wheel since the weight an the larger radius is moving faster than the weight on the smaller radius.  In order to slow down the weight as it is moved in, energy is transferred to the wheel, causing it to speed up.  This is like the ice skater who spins faster by pulling their arms and legs in close to the axis of their spin.

Now when you allow that weight to move back out further away from the axle, the weight must be accelerated.  So it will slow the wheel.  It takes the energy it needs again from the inertia of the wheel (initially gained from the falling weights).

These interactions are all well known and follow exactly the equations of conventional physics.  The Potential Energy of a weight at the top of a wheel is converted to Kinetic Energy (velocity of the weight and rotation of the wheel) while falling.  That exact amount of Kinetic Energy is required to push, pull, swing, throw, etc. that weight back to the top of the wheel.  Without losses due to friction the sum is exactly zero.  With friction it is less and you never spin one entire revolution.

The weights in this wheel are brought in towards the axle by the ramps.  Centrifugal Force will cause them to throw out towards the rim again in just the motion Abeling describes, but those actions will absorb all the kinetic energy released by the falling weight side.  If turned by a motor it will perform quite spectacularly just as described, very similar to Cherryman and AquariuZ models have done.

So either Abeling has nothing new, OR, this patent protects the device by protecting only one of it's pieces.  There could still be some other unrevealed piece that makes the magic happen.  That secret piece may only work with a wheel and weight configuration which he now has patented.

I am regretably confident that this design cannot run as presented.  But could it be part of an as yet unrevealed whole?

Modelers, remember to keep to the scale of a wheel between 1.5 and 2 meters in diameter.  And good luck!

M.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Cherryman on April 12, 2009, 06:48:20 PM
Hi guys, im still alive!The MIB were tough but i resisted!  ;D

Had a quick look at the patent, "curved ramps"  ;D

Anyway..  here is a quick start to play with.

Timing, weight.. will be critical.



Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: mrsean2k on April 12, 2009, 06:49:21 PM
HI S,
Your right. I can't fathom why there are those who immediately assume the invention must be true, or the inventor is on the up and up, just because the inventor has other companies names on his site. Your points are well taken and are what I was trying to get across.
Thanks.

Well you got them across as far as I'm concerned :-)

At this stage it boils down to opinion in the end. Not many people can look at things without any of their personal beliefs influencing things one way or another (me included of course).

Whether or not any of it's true, it's entertaining to speculate - you learn something one way or another.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: NerzhDishual on April 12, 2009, 06:49:51 PM
Hi Figthers!

I have transformed the pdf file (Sjack Abeling patent NL1034252C1) into an .html file.

So, you are able to use Google for translating this .html file into your favorite language.
You can see some automatic translations on: http://freenrg.info/Sjack_Abeling/Patent/Html (http://freenrg.info/Sjack_Abeling/Patent/Html)

Very Best
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: AquariuZ on April 12, 2009, 07:11:22 PM
(cont)


         An installation 1 for the conversion of gravitational energy, consists of two parallel
      movable carriers 2 which rotate around a joint axle line A with each having a number of weights
15      3 attached in the rotational path (fig. 1) These weights 3 are movable in a radial direction in
      relation to axle line A. The conversion unit 1 contains collaborating materials 4 to guide the radial
      displacement of weights 3. These guiding materials 4, which will be discussed in detail hereafter,
20      are incorporated in side plates 5, which are located on the sides of each carrier 2 parallel to the
      plane of the rotational movement.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: AquariuZ on April 12, 2009, 07:18:04 PM
(cont)
      In the shown example both carriers 2 are fixed against rotation on the pertruding axle 6, which
25      is housed in a baring in the openings 7 in the side plates 5. This axle 6 could be attached to a
      generator, through which the output of unit 1 would be converted to e.g. electrical energy. The
      carriers 2 and the side plates 5 shown in this example are made out of glass, but other materials
30      with minimal friction like metals could be used.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: mrsean2k on April 12, 2009, 07:25:23 PM
Stuck the translation + images up as a fairly ropey Google doc, might do until the more expert versions are available:

http://docs.google.com/Doc?id=ddr3zqdb_7f7wrvpdz

Oops just checked and that's a proper mess, best ignored. Not sure what I did there.

This seems to more or less work:

http://docs.google.com/Doc?id=ddr3zqdb_14fwv39dgr
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: AquariuZ on April 12, 2009, 07:27:27 PM
(cont)

         Every carrier 2 has the appearance of a disc, in which for every weight 3 a radially



                  (7)
      directed guidance track 8 is formed (fig.  2). To facilitate the outward hurling of weights 3 the
      guiding tracks at least have on their end 9 which are furthest from axle 6 a track segment which
 5      is curved. The curvature is pointed towards the rotational direction of carrier 2. In the shown
      example the guiding tracks even have a smooth curvature over their entire lenght.
      
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Cherryman on April 12, 2009, 07:27:34 PM
Stuck the translation + images up as a fairly ropey Google doc, might do until the more expert versions are available:

http://docs.google.com/Doc?id=ddr3zqdb_7f7wrvpdz

Great work!

Can you rotate the imiges who stand sideways now?
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: mrsean2k on April 12, 2009, 07:37:48 PM
Great work!

Can you rotate the imiges who stand sideways now?

Ok, slightly better:


http://docs.google.com/Doc?id=ddr3zqdb_14fwv39dgr

Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: AquariuZ on April 12, 2009, 07:42:18 PM
(cont)

         Each of the weights 3 is movable in a radial direction in an accompanying guiding
10      track 8. Towards that end the weights 3 as shown in the example are installed in pairs. Every
      weight 3 has a joining bar 10 which connects both weight parts 11 and is held by guiding track 8.
15      These joining bars 10 move in a radial direction in guiding track 8.
      
      In an alternative setup of the conversion unit the edges 212 of each guiding track 208 have a
20      serrated surface to minimize friction as the weights make their sliding motion (fig. 6). The joining
      bars 210 of the weights are ovally shaped here to ensure regulated motion over the serrated
      surface 212. It should be noted that this setup shows that the guiding tracks 208 can be
25      distributed non uniformly around axle 206.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: AquariuZ on April 12, 2009, 07:54:43 PM
(cont)

In the example show the guiding materials 4 consist of two installed
      rings 13 which are installed on both sides of carrier 2, along which the weights 3 are movable.
30      These rings 13 in this example have been cut out of side plates 5. The rings 13 run in a horizontal
      direction which is eccentrically in relation to the rotational axle A of carrier 2, and have a slightly
      oval shape, whereby the long axle is aimed vertically. In fact the rings 13 have the shape of


               ( 8 )

      an indented circle. Because of the shape of the rings 13 every weight 3 when it reaches the pinnacle
      of its path around axle A, or slightly before, is accelerated strongly in a radial direction. Because of
5      this a lot of energy is released. The long axle of every ring 13 is slightly tilted in such a way that the       weights 3 are forced back inwards even before they reach the lowest point of their path.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: AquariuZ on April 12, 2009, 08:17:46 PM
(cont)
         The conversion unit 1 in the example shown is furthermore fitted with secundary
10      bearing means 14, which are fitted around the circumference of carrier 2. These secundary bearing
      means 14 consist of a number of spacers 15 which run from carrier 2 to each of the side plates 5,
15      and a bearing ring 16 which houses the spacers 15.
      Each bearing ring 15 (16?) runs on the outside with a spacing around guiding ring 13 (fig. 3).
            
            The path each of the weights 3 takes during the rotation of carrier 2 around
20      the axle line A is represented in fig. 4. Assuming the position on the top right (indicated as 3°) the
      weight moves down under the influence of gravity, whereby it will attempt to move away from axial
      line A in a radial direction along its guiding path 8 while influenced by the centrifugal force.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: AquariuZ on April 12, 2009, 08:35:32 PM
(cont)


25      This radial movement is restricted by guiding rings 13. When the weight almost reaches its lowest
      position 3-5 the radius of guiding ring 13 starts to diminish, which causes weight 3 on its upwards
30      motion to be forced into a radial direction towards axial line A. At around the level of axial line A
      the radius of guiding ring 13 starts to increase again, which causes weight 3 to move outwards
      again starting at position 3-12. This means in essence that weight 3 is being "hurled".
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: AquariuZ on April 12, 2009, 08:43:51 PM
(cont)

               (9)

      Due to the variation of distance of the weight with respect to the axial line A, a rotational
      momentum   is generated which is translated to axle 6.
         Even though fig. 4 shows the motion of a single weight, it will be evident that
 5      all the weights follow an identical path. This is shown in fig. 5A to 5D, where a setup of the
      conversion unit 101 is shown with four weights 103a-103d and guiding tracks 108. In these
10      views is shown how weights 103(a red.)-103d move from and towards each other.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: AquariuZ on April 12, 2009, 08:56:50 PM
(cont)

         In the setup of conversion unit 301 which is currently being prepared for practical
15      application tests there are placed two carriers 302 next to each other with spacing (fig. 7). Each
      weight 303 is shown to have a joining part 310 which protrudes on both sides through the guiding
      track 308 in both carriers 302 and into the rings 313 of the guiding materials 304. The guiding tracks
20      inthis example have the shape of a hockey stick; they are in essence straight and only have a curved
      segment on the radial far end 309 (fig. 8 ) Because of this shape the weights 303 are subjected to
      a short but violent hurling motion. It should be noted that the straight parts of the guiding tracks 308
      are not purely radially aligned but rather are slightly offset with regards to axial line A.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: AquariuZ on April 12, 2009, 09:07:26 PM
(cont)

         Even though the invention has been explained through a number of examples it should be
30      obvious that it is not limited to these. There could be more or less carriers and weights than previously
      shown, and the carriers and weights could also have different shapes and dimensions. For example the
      carrier instead of being a disc shape with guiding tracks could also

                  (10)

      be constructed as a wheel with spokes with sliding weights.
         The extent of the invention is therefore solely determined by the following conclusions:
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: AquariuZ on April 12, 2009, 09:31:55 PM
(cont)

                  (11)

Conclusions

         1. Installation for the conversion of gravitational energy into motional energy, containing:
            - at least one rotatable carrier with a horizontal axle with at least one attached
 5      weight which is mainly radially movable relative to the axle, and
            - means collaborating with the carrier to guide the radial movement of the at
      least one weight .
10         2. Conversion unit according to conclusion 1, with the feature, that the guiding
      materials are setup to move the at least one weight near the top of its path around the rotational axis
      away from the axle in an accelerated motion.
15         3. Conversion unit according to conclusion 1 or 2,with the feature, that a number
      of weights is attached to the carrier in a circumferencial way.
         4. Conversion unit according to previous conclusions,with the feature, that the
20      or any weight is radially movable on or housed in the carrier.
         5.  Conversion unit according to conclusion 4,with the feature, that the appearance
      of the carrier is a disc, on which or in which a mainly radially guiding track is formed for the
25      or any weight.
         6. Conversion unit according to conclusion 5,with the feature, that the or all guiding
      tracks at least has a curving segment in the rotational direction on the its far end away from the axle.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: hartiberlin on April 12, 2009, 09:37:53 PM
Hi guys, im still alive!The MIB were tough but i resisted!  ;D

Had a quick look at the patent, "curved ramps"  ;D

Anyway..  here is a quick start to play with.

Timing, weight.. will be critical.





Hi Cherryman,
the guiding barrier track number 13 in picture 8  is still missing in your WM2D model.

Well,. we will see, if this Abeling patent model will really work via simulations.

Many thanks for all, who helped translating the patent.

Am just back in from 2 days away and have to study all the recent postings.
Regards, Stefan.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Cherryman on April 12, 2009, 09:48:09 PM
If you ad the rails you will get this , principle. I tested that...    Sjack has to have something else added...  ???

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

I
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Cherryman on April 12, 2009, 09:53:55 PM
Here a version with the rails
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: AquariuZ on April 12, 2009, 09:55:49 PM
(cont)


                  (12)

         7. Conversion unit according to conclusion 6,with the feature, that the or all guiding
      tracks show a hockey stick pattern.
 5         8. Conversion unit according to conclusion 6,with the feature, that the or all guiding
      tracks show a smooth flowing curvature over its entire lenght.
         9. Conversion unit according to one of conclusions 5 to 8,with the feature, that the
      or all guiding tracks have at least a partially serrated surface.
10         10. Conversion unit according to one of conclusions 5 to 9,with the feature, that the
      or all weights are divided and connected by a pertruding joining part through the guiding track in the
      disc shaped carrier.
15         11. Conversion unit according to one of conclusions 5 to 9,with the feature, that
      two disc shaped carriers with spacing are placed parallel to each other and share one or more weights
      which are installed in the spacing between, and the or all weights show a pertruding joining part on
20      both sides of the disc shaped carriers.
         
         12. Conversion unit according to one of the previous conclusions,with the feature,
25      that the guiding means consist of at least one parallel to its rotational plane covering ring placed next to
      the carrier, along which the or all weights are movable.
         13. Conversion unit according to conclusion 12,with the feature, that the guiding
30      means encompass two on both sides of the carrier placed rings.
         14. Conversion unit according to conclusion 12 or 13,with the feature, that the or
      any ring runs in an eccentrically horizontal direction with regards to the rotational axle of the carrier.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: NerzhDishual on April 12, 2009, 10:03:27 PM
Nil
Void
Nada
Niente
Rien
Que d'alle!

Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: AquariuZ on April 12, 2009, 10:08:38 PM
(cont)

                  (13)

         15. Conversion unit according to one of conclusions 12 to14,with the feature, that
 5      the or any ring shows a mainly vertically aligned oval shape.
         16. Conversion unit according to one of the previous conclusions,featured by the
      installation of secundary housing materials around the circumference of the carrier.
10         17. Conversion unit according to conclusion 16,with the feature, that the secundary
      housing materials contain a number of spacers which run from the carrier towards the guiding materials
      and are housed by a ring which is placed around the guiding materials.
15         18. Conversion unit according to one of the previous conclusions,with the feature,
      that at least the carrier and/or the guiding materials are contructed out of glass.

END OF TEXT
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: mondrasek on April 12, 2009, 10:13:24 PM
Here a version with the rails

Cherryman, fine work as always.

Suggestions:

1)  Scale down your Rhino models before importing to WM2D.  Your current model wheel is 200M across.  The Centrifugal Forces at the rim for even the slowest of rotations are magnitudes of times greater than the force of gravity on each weight.  I think you want the Force due to rotation and the Force due to gravity to at least be within a factor of 10 if you expect to see the interactions of the two visually in the sim.

2)  How about a catch for the ball when it is launch back up to the outer egde of the slots?  But maybe again this is too soon.  It will add a lot of complexity to the model and require more computations and therefore errors per frame.  But if you worked with only two slots instead of all 8 it might still calculate quick enough.

Keep it up!

M.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: AquariuZ on April 12, 2009, 10:16:56 PM
HERE THE COMPLETE TEXT AS OF MIDDLE OF PAGE 5

Sorry for the many posts, I did not want to wait showing all.

Not sure about all this after reading, looking forward to modelling.

               5

(...)
         The invention is now explained using a number of examples, with reference
20      to the attached drawings, where corresponding parts are marked with reference numbers
      which are raised by 100 at a time and whereby:
         Fig. 1 shows a frontal view of the first type of the conversion unit according to
      the invention,
25         Fig. 2 shows a side view od the carrier of the conversion unit of fig. 1, with eight
      guiding rails for weights,
         Fig. 3 shows a side view of the guidance ring and the axle ring of the conversion
      unit of fig. 1,
30         Fig. 4 shows a schematic side view of the path which a weight follows during a
      complete rotation of the carrier,


               6

         Fig. 5A to 5D shows a schematic of a number of positions of an alternative
      implementation of the carrier which is fitted with four weights,
5         Fig. 6 shows a side view of another implementation of the carrier, which
      is fitted with a serrated surface,
         Fig.7 shows a view from behind of another implementation of the conversion
      unit of fig. 7, and
         Fig. 8 ahows a side view of one of the carriers of the conversion unit of
10      fig. 7.

         An installation 1 for the conversion of gravitational energy, consists of two parallel
      movable carriers 2 which rotate around a joint axle line A with each having a number of weights
15      3 attached in the rotational path (fig. 1) These weights 3 are movable in a radial direction in
      relation to axle line A. The conversion unit 1 contains collaborating materials 4 to guide the radial
      displacement of weights 3. These guiding materials 4, which will be discussed in detail hereafter,
20      are incorporated in side plates 5, which are located on the sides of each carrier 2 parallel to the
      plane of the rotational movement.
      
      In the shown example both carriers 2 are fixed against rotation on the pertruding axle 6, which
25      is housed in a baring in the openings 7 in the side plates 5. This axle 6 could be attached to a
      generator, through which the output of unit 1 would be converted to e.g. electrical energy. The
      carriers 2 and the side plates 5 shown in this example are made out of glass, but other materials
30      with minimal friction like metals could be used.

         Every carrier 2 has the appearance of a disc, in which for every weight 3 a radially



                  (7)
      directed guidance track 8 is formed (fig.  2). To facilitate the outward hurling of weights 3 the
      guiding tracks at least have on their end 9 which are furthest from axle 6 a track segment which
 5      is curved. The curvature is pointed towards the rotational direction of carrier 2. In the shown
      example the guiding tracks even have a smooth curvature over their entire lenght.
      

         Each of the weights 3 is movable in a radial direction in an accompanying guiding
10      track 8. Towards that end the weights 3 as shown in the example are installed in pairs. Every
      weight 3 has a joining bar 10 which connects both weight parts 11 and is held by guiding track 8.
15      These joining bars 10 move in a radial direction in guiding track 8.
      
      In an alternative setup of the conversion unit the edges 212 of each guiding track 208 have a
20      serrated surface to minimize friction as the weights make their sliding motion (fig. 6). The joining
      bars 210 of the weights are ovally shaped here to ensure regulated motion over the serrated
      surface 212. It should be noted that this setup shows that the guiding tracks 208 can be
25      distributed non uniformly around axle 206.


         In the example show the guiding materials 4 consist of two installed
      rings 13 which are installed on both sides of carrier 2, along which the weights 3 are movable.
30      These rings 13 in this example have been cut out of side plates 5. The rings 13 run in a horizontal
      direction which is eccentrically in relation to the rotational axle A of carrier 2, and have a slightly
      oval shape, whereby the long axle is aimed vertically. In fact the rings 13 have the shape of


               ( 8 )

      an indented circle. Because of the shape of the rings 13 every weight 3 when it reaches the pinnacle
      of its path around axle A, or slightly before, is accelerated strongly in a radial direction. Because of
5      this a lot of energy is released. The long axle of every ring 13 is slightly tilted in such a way that the    

   weights 3 are forced back inwards even before they reach the lowest point of their path.

         The conversion unit 1 in the example shown is furthermore fitted with secundary
10      bearing means 14, which are fitted around the circumference of carrier 2. These secundary bearing
      means 14 consist of a number of spacers 15 which run from carrier 2 to each of the side plates 5,
15      and a bearing ring 16 which houses the spacers 15.
      Each bearing ring 15 (16?) runs on the outside with a spacing around guiding ring 13 (fig. 3).
            
            The path each of the weights 3 takes during the rotation of carrier 2 around
20      the axle line A is represented in fig. 4. Assuming the position on the top right (indicated as 3°) the
      weight moves down under the influence of gravity, whereby it will attempt to move away from axial
      line A in a radial direction along its guiding path 8 while influenced by the centrifugal force.


25      This radial movement is restricted by guiding rings 13. When the weight almost reaches its lowest
      position 3-5 the radius of guiding ring 13 starts to diminish, which causes weight 3 on its upwards
30      motion to be forced into a radial direction towards axial line A. At around the level of axial line A
      the radius of guiding ring 13 starts to increase again, which causes weight 3 to move outwards
      again starting at position 3-12. This means in essence that weight 3 is being "hurled".


               (9)

      Due to the variation of distance of the weight with respect to the axial line A, a rotational
      momentum   is generated which is translated to axle 6.
         Even though fig. 4 shows the motion of a single weight, it will be evident that
 5      all the weights follow an identical path. This is shown in fig. 5A to 5D, where a setup of the
      conversion unit 101 is shown with four weights 103a-103d and guiding tracks 108. In these
10      views is shown how weights 103(a red.)-103d move from and towards each other.

         In the setup of conversion unit 301 which is currently being prepared for practical
15      application tests there are placed two carriers 302 next to each other with spacing (fig. 7). Each
      weight 303 is shown to have a joining part 310 which protrudes on both sides through the guiding
      track 308 in both carriers 302 and into the rings 313 of the guiding materials 304. The guiding tracks
20      inthis example have the shape of a hockey stick; they are in essence straight and only have a curved
      segment on the radial far end 309 (fig. 8 ) Because of this shape the weights 303 are subjected to
      a short but violent hurling motion. It should be noted that the straight parts of the guiding tracks 308
      are not purely radially aligned but rather are slightly offset with regards to axial line A.

         Even though the invention has been explained through a number of examples it should be
30      obvious that it is not limited to these. There could be more or less carriers and weights than previously
      shown, and the carriers and weights could also have different shapes and dimensions. For example the
      carrier instead of being a disc shape with guiding tracks could also

                  (10)

      be constructed as a wheel with spokes with sliding weights.
         The extent of the invention is therefor solely determined by the following conclusions:
   


                  (11)

Conclusions

         1. Installation for the conversion of gravitational energy into motional energy, containing:
            - at least one rotatable carrier with a horizontal axle with at least one attached
 5      weight which is mainly radially movable relative to the axle, and
            - means collaborating with the carrier to guide the radial movement of the at
      least one weight .
10         2. Conversion unit according to conclusion 1, with the feature, that the guiding
      materials are setup to move the at least one weight near the top of its path around the rotational axis
      away from the axle in an accelerated motion.
15         3. Conversion unit according to conclusion 1 or 2,with the feature, that a number
      of weights is attached to the carrier in a circumferencial way.
         4. Conversion unit according to previous conclusions,with the feature, that the
20      or any weight is radially movable on or housed in the carrier.
         5.  Conversion unit according to conclusion 4,with the feature, that the appearance
      of the carrier is a disc, on which or in which a mainly radially guiding track is formed for the
25      or any weight.
         6. Conversion unit according to conclusion 5,with the feature, that the or all guiding
      tracks at least has a curving segment in the rotational direction on the its far end away from the axle.


                  (12)

         7. Conversion unit according to conclusion 6,with the feature, that the or all guiding
      tracks show a hockey stick pattern.
 5         8. Conversion unit according to conclusion 6,with the feature, that the or all guiding
      tracks show a smooth flowing curvature over its entire lenght.
         9. Conversion unit according to one of conclusions 5 to 8,with the feature, that the
      or all guiding tracks have at least a partially serrated surface.
10         10. Conversion unit according to one of conclusions 5 to 9,with the feature, that the
      or all weights are divided and connected by a pertruding joining part through the guiding track in the
      disc shaped carrier.
15         11. Conversion unit according to one of conclusions 5 to 9,with the feature, that
      two disc shaped carriers with spacing are placed parallel to each other and share one or more weights
      which are installed in the spacing between, and the or all weights show a pertruding joining part on
20      both sides of the disc shaped carriers.
         
         12. Conversion unit according to one of the previous conclusions,with the feature,
25      that the guiding means consist of at least one parallel to its rotational plane covering ring placed next to
      the carrier, along which the or all weights are movable.
         13. Conversion unit according to conclusion 12,with the feature, that the guiding
30      means encompass two on both sides of the carrier placed rings.
         14. Conversion unit according to conclusion 12 or 13,with the feature, that the or
      any ring runs in an eccentrically horizontal direction with regards to the rotational axle of the carrier.

                  (13)

         15. Conversion unit according to one of conclusions 12 to14,with the feature, that
 5      the or any ring shows a mainly vertically aligned oval shape.
         16. Conversion unit according to one of the previous conclusions,featured by the
      installation of secundary housing materials around the circumference of the carrier.
10         17. Conversion unit according to conclusion 16,with the feature, that the secundary
      housing materials contain a number of spacers which run from the carrier towards the guiding materials
      and are housed by a ring which is placed around the guiding materials.
15         18. Conversion unit according to one of the previous conclusions,with the feature,
      that at least the carrier and/or the guiding materials are contructed out of glass.


The first 4.5 pages I'll do later, they are not that relevant.

Now back to the regular scheduled program, have a lot of catching up to do

Hi Cherryman, good to see you back

Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Cherryman on April 12, 2009, 10:18:54 PM
Hi Aquariuz, i had to search some easter eggs  ;D

Anyway, good work on the translation!

Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Cherryman on April 12, 2009, 10:20:51 PM
Cherryman, fine work as always.

Suggestions:

1)  Scale down your Rhino models before importing to WM2D.  Your current model wheel is 200M across.  The Centrifugal Forces at the rim for even the slowest of rotations are magnitudes of times greater than the force of gravity on each weight.  I think you want the Force due to rotation and the Force due to gravity to at least be within a factor of 10 if you expect to see the interactions of the two visually in the sim.

2)  How about a catch for the ball when it is launch back up to the outer egde of the slots?  But maybe again this is too soon.  It will add a lot of complexity to the model and require more computations and therefore errors per frame.  But if you worked with only two slots instead of all 8 it might still calculate quick enough.

Keep it up!

M.

I Will look into that scaling down, i was under the impression it was in .cm  ::)

When you ad cathers to the design then you get something like my early prototypes:

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

So there has to be something else...
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: AquariuZ on April 12, 2009, 10:33:55 PM
This simply cannot work as presented...

I'll try anyway using glass

Darned

IS HE HIDING SOMETHING?

This looks like half a patent
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Cherryman on April 12, 2009, 10:36:30 PM
This simply cannot work as presented...

I'll try anyway using glass

Darned

IS HE HIDING SOMETHING?

This looks like half a patent

Must be.. 

Does he has a working prototype? It could also be that he believes in the principle, convinced a few companies and is allowed to TRY building it...  So Without calling him a lier, just wondering if there is any mention of a working protype.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: AquariuZ on April 12, 2009, 10:44:04 PM
Cherryman, fine work as always.

Suggestions:

1)  Scale down your Rhino models before importing to WM2D.  Your current model wheel is 200M across.  The Centrifugal Forces at the rim for even the slowest of rotations are magnitudes of times 

There is an issue with Wm2d that when you scale too small contraints break so much easier, this has to do with accuracy settings. It stops being fun when you get hit by integrator errors all the time.

I would try large scale first and then scale down to actual size, but that's just me
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: AquariuZ on April 12, 2009, 10:48:07 PM
Must be.. 

Does he has a working prototype? It could also be that he believes in the principle, convinced a few companies and is allowed to TRY building it...  So Without calling him a lier, just wondering if there is any mention of a working protype.

There are two mentions. One in the video

"The real prototype is somewere else. The location is kept secret"

Two in the patent page nine section 10/15:

            In the setup of conversion unit 301 which is currently being prepared for practical
      application tests there are placed two carriers 302 next to each other with spacing (fig. 7).

I am starting to have doubts now too, sorry to say.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: AB Hammer on April 12, 2009, 10:50:46 PM
Greetings All

 After seeing the patent and the drawings. I have but one question. With all this, why is there not some form of video proof to go with it? If it is a done deal it is a done deal. Wright? ::)
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: AquariuZ on April 12, 2009, 10:56:35 PM
Greetings All

 After seeing the patent and the drawings. I have but one question. With all this, why is there not some form of video proof to go with it? If it is a done deal it is a done deal. Wright? ::)

I think he thought he really "had" it in 2007 but made some form of measuring mistake.

Either that or the patent is incomplete and he really has found it.

Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Grimer on April 12, 2009, 10:56:42 PM
Those teeth in figure 6 must engage with the weight like a rack to give them rotation,

This is classic Carnot. The rotating weights are analogous to temperature motion of the atoms, The weights on the downside are analogous the the pressure motion. The rising section is the adiabatic exchange equivalent and the descending section is the isothermal equivalent. The driving force is the gravitational potential drop between top and bottom.

http://i136.photobucket.com/albums/q171/frank260332/rotation.jpg

Above is the rotating power cycle. Think of it as a two stroke and traditional Carnot as a 4 stroke engine,
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: AquariuZ on April 12, 2009, 10:58:44 PM
Those teeth in figure 6 must engage with the weight like a rack to give them rotation,

True, but remember it is not the weights that touch that jagged edge, it is an oval shaped joining bar (in this case)
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Cherryman on April 12, 2009, 11:01:00 PM
Those teeth in figure 6 must engage with the weight like a rack to give them rotation,

This is classic Carnot. The rotating weights are analogous to temperature motion of the atoms, The weights on the downside are analogous the the pressure motion. The rising section is the adiabatic exchange equivalent and the descending section is the isothermal equivalent. The driving force is the gravitational potential drop between top and bottom.

http://i136.photobucket.com/albums/q171/frank260332/rotation.jpg

Above is the rotating power cycle. Think of it as a two stroke and traditional Carnot as a 4 stroke engine,

I read you're posts with much intrest, but understanding is not always easy.

What does the above tells about the design.. can you somehow translate it in things i can use in a drwaing?
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Grimer on April 12, 2009, 11:25:51 PM
I read you're posts with much intrest, but understanding is not always easy.

What does the above tells about the design.. can you somehow translate it in things i can use in a drwaing?

I'll do my best. ;D

Mmmm ....Well you need teeth on the axle cos this is going to give it the highest spin; These teeth engage in the rack, the toothed curve thingees. The axle needs to be as small a diameter as possible where it engages with the rack to give maximum spin. I suppose ideally it would be a conical cog engaging in a slanted rack - a bit like the DAF infinitely variable gear box - cos one has to build up rotational speed.

What happens to the rotating weight when it slams into the going down bit I wouldn't like to say,  :o
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Cherryman on April 12, 2009, 11:31:55 PM
I'll do my best. ;D

Mmmm ....Well you need teeth on the axle cos this is going to give it the highest spin; These teeth engage in the rack, the toothed curve thingees. The axle needs to be as small a diameter as possible where it engages with the rack to give maximum spin. I suppose ideally it would be a conical cog engaging in a slanted rack - a bit like the DAF infinitely variable gear box - cos one has to build up rotational speed.

What happens to the rotating weight when it slams into the going down bit I wouldn't like to say,  :o

When you with calculation state something, isn't then possible to export that into a curve as a DXF file?  If that is possible then we have the perfect angles..

Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Grimer on April 12, 2009, 11:34:52 PM
True, but remember it is not the weights that touch that jagged edge, it is an oval shaped joining bar (in this case)

Yeah. I've just realised that as you can see from my last post. The bar has a smaller diameter than the weights and so you get more bangs (rotations) for the buck as the assembly progresses along the rack track,

I didn't know it was oval shaped. Presumably that's like a two toothed cog and must have some mechanical advantage or other.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Grimer on April 12, 2009, 11:46:34 PM
When you with calculation state something, isn't then possible to export that into a curve as a DXF file?  If that is possible then we have the perfect angles..


Sorry - I don't do calculation - I've been spoilt in my career and always has someone else for that.
A bit like being a king in the past who didn't need to read and right cos he always had scribes to do that for him.  8)

And I've no idea what a DXF file is ( I know what a bastard file is though  ;) )
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Grimer on April 12, 2009, 11:59:32 PM

I am starting to have doubts now too, sorry to say.

I'm not. Now that I can see the high rotation of the weights is modelling the temperature rotation of atoms I'm confident he has a jumbo sized heat engine. with the weights and the working fluid and gravity as the energy source.

I wonder how Bessler got his rotation. The weights were cylindrical which figures. He let people handle them but wrapped in a cloth. Maybe he wanted to hide the hole for an axle.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Grimer on April 13, 2009, 12:25:08 AM
I'll do my best. ;D
....

What happens to the rotating weight when it slams into the going down bit I wouldn't like to say,  :o

I suppose that's the pressure on the piston bit.

And now for beddy byes - till I need to get up for a pee.  :-[
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: AquariuZ on April 13, 2009, 12:32:01 AM
FWIW

Initial "Egg" shape try attached.

Need to reshape legs so they do not point to axle.

And no acceleration, not even in a vacuum & friction less environment....
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: eisenficker2000 on April 13, 2009, 12:35:18 AM
After reading the patent; hockeysticks  and ellipse..
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: AquariuZ on April 13, 2009, 12:36:53 AM
Here a version with the rails

Ah! I can use that!

Thanks Cherryman
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: AquariuZ on April 13, 2009, 12:38:03 AM
After reading the patent; hockeysticks  and ellipse..

Cool, but don´t they bend the other way in the length???
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Cherryman on April 13, 2009, 12:39:52 AM
After reading the patent; hockeysticks  and ellipse..

I like it! Got a file?
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: broli on April 13, 2009, 12:44:31 AM
After reading the patent; hockeysticks  and ellipse..

Yes very cool indeed, spares a lot of time in reading boring text.

Someone should get the feedback of Abeling on that animation  ;D.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: eisenficker2000 on April 13, 2009, 12:51:37 AM
@AquiriuZ: Take picture 8 from the patent and bend back the ends near the axle, so the angle pushing the weight up has a smaller vector in the horizontal plane

@Cherryman: If you could use dxf/Autocad format?


Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Cherryman on April 13, 2009, 12:59:05 AM
@AquiriuZ: Take picture 8 from the patent and bend back the ends near the axle, so the angle pushing the weight up has a smaller vector in the horizontal plane

@Cherryman: If you could use dxf/Autocad format?




Perfect! Send it up

Did you test it WM2D or something? 
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: AquariuZ on April 13, 2009, 01:09:22 AM
Using Cherrymans wheel I can visualize the violent launch of the weights near 12 o clock position.

Now, if you can keep the weight in its socket you may have something.

There are small bursts of acceleration, but again the ball needs to be kept locked into place to get full benefit from the launch. The launch is a scissors effect.

Model attached with an initial momentum of -0.200 rad/s but WITHOUT MOTOR.

Turns for a while (friction less environ)

I´ll see if I can lock those balls
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: eisenficker2000 on April 13, 2009, 01:11:07 AM
@Cherryman: in DXF..zipped :-\
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: LarryC on April 13, 2009, 01:14:32 AM
After reading the patent; hockeysticks  and ellipse..

I'm glad you're showing the upper left quadrant closer to the video. The guides need to allow the weights to be freely thrown outward, varying due to centrifugal force based on rpm. The centrifugal slam at the outside edge of the hockeysticks is where the acceleration is coming from.

Regards, Larry
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Cherryman on April 13, 2009, 01:20:36 AM
@Cherryman: in DXF..zipped :-\

TNx I will play with it!
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Cherryman on April 13, 2009, 01:21:53 AM
Using Cherrymans wheel I can visualize the violent launch of the weights near 12 o clock position.

Now, if you can keep the weight in its socket you may have something.

There are small bursts of acceleration, but again the ball needs to be kept locked into place to get full benefit from the launch. The launch is a scissors effect.

Model attached with an initial momentum of -0.200 rad/s but WITHOUT MOTOR.

Turns for a while (friction less environ)

I´ll see if I can lock those balls

Locking is important. Good luck!
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: AquariuZ on April 13, 2009, 01:37:14 AM
Locking is important. Good luck!

It seems to work, no loss for now... Must be doing something wrong
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: oak on April 13, 2009, 01:40:26 AM
@AquiriuZ: Take picture 8 from the patent and bend back the ends near the axle, so the angle pushing the weight up has a smaller vector in the horizontal plane

Very nice animation, eisenficker.  I have to say I agree with AquiriuZ about the overall curve of the spokes.  (I am not talking about the very end part -- you might have that right.)  Look at patent diagrams 2, 4 & 5.  I imagine a spoke scooping up a weight and then hurling it, similar to a lacrosse stick hurling a ball.  The curve in the direction of travel adds speed to the weight.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on April 13, 2009, 01:44:06 AM
It seems to work, no loss for now... Must be doing something wrong

The old rule of the good engineer. LOL

You are doing great. And, thanks for the translation. @Cherryman and @eisenficker2000 (who found the correct design first) are fantastic too. Keep up the good work guys. Looking forward to @Cherryman's wm2d file of @eisenficker2000 dxf's.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on April 13, 2009, 02:11:58 AM
@mondrasek,

Quote
When you bring a weight on a spinning wheel inwards towards the axle, you must do work.  Spin around holding a weight at arm's length and try to pull it in.  It takes work.

Don’t forget we’re interested here only in the energy possessed by the ball (there’s no external energy anyway).

Imagine a ball lifted to point B at an elevation h with respect to the initial point A. It can get back at its initial height A by just letting it go and allowing it to drop vertically. However, if there’s a construction (constraint) which would make the ball slide sideways to the initial elevation A it would have lost the same gravitational potential energy mgh but in addition there would also be a displacement sideways which wasn’t there when there was no construction. Thus only the presence of a proper construction makes the ball lose the same energy mgh but in a different way, demonstrating a spectacular displacement sideways.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Cherryman on April 13, 2009, 02:29:27 AM
Here a quick one. I Used the original curves.

Have a problem with the left block, but do nat have any time anymore. Maybe someone can fixe the block

Good luck.

Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: noonespecial on April 13, 2009, 02:43:38 AM
I agree with LarryC's assessment with regard to the centrifigal force component. Also, the upper cam is not really required once the wheel reaches critical speed but is only there to lift the weights prior to reaching that speed.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: i_ron on April 13, 2009, 03:13:10 AM
I agree with LarryC's assessment with regard to the centrifigal force component. Also, the upper cam is not really required once the wheel reaches critical speed but is only there to lift the weights prior to reaching that speed.

To the contrary, you and Larry seem to have missed a key function here, the top part of the upper ramp
in combination with the shape of the slot act to propel the weight out into its working position. Think of a pair of scissors....

"If the system would fail to catch the propelled weight, the weight would be ejected from the system with force"

Ron.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: noonespecial on April 13, 2009, 04:34:25 AM
Hi Ron,

[edit]
Q: Where does the extra energy come from?
A: The weights are applied two by two: one weight is pushing/falling, the other one has to be lifted. Due to the invention of the dual lifting system, the falling/pushing weight will hardly be hindered by the weight that has to be lifted.
In the top left of the system the weight is accelerated (like with shot put). The weight is moving faster than the system, and as the system catches the weight it is propelled forward. The path of the weights in the system is determined up front so the weights are always in a fixed position relative to each other and that will reduce the drag of the lifted weight on the falling/pushing weight. The system will start rotating from any position. Extra force is generated in the lower left of the system and on top it is transferred to the system itself, generating the extra energy. If the system would fail to catch the propelled weight, the weight would be ejected from the system with force.

Nothing in here about a 'scissor' action. In fact, if there were a scissor action it would seem the additional friction would simply slow the wheel down. Instead, the propelled weight is 'moving faster than the system' (once a critical speed is reached) through the effect of centrifigal force.
[/edit]

Charlie
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Grimer on April 13, 2009, 05:09:38 AM
To the contrary, you and Larry seem to have missed a key function here, the top part of the upper ramp
in combination with the shape of the slot act to propel the weight out into its working position. Think of a pair of scissors....

"If the system would fail to catch the propelled weight, the weight would be ejected from the system with force"

Ron.


It seems that the end of the hockey stick is where rotational energy (temperature) is converted into linear energy (pressure) like in cricket when a spinning ball hits the ground and you get a "shooter".

That would fit with the Carnot Cycle and

"If the system would fail to catch the propelled weight, the weight would be ejected from the system with force"

It may not be cricket but we have a spin bowler.  ;)

"The Dutch cricket team is a national cricket team representing the Netherlands. It is administered by the Koninklijke Nederlandse Cricket Bond (Royal Dutch Cricket Association) which is based in Nieuwegein in the centre of the country and is older than many renowned cricket clubs in the West Indies, Australia, and New Zealand.

Cricket has been played in the Netherlands since at least the 19th century, and in the 1860s was considered a major sport in the country. Many other sports (notably football) have long since surpassed cricket in popularity amongst the Dutch, and today there are around 6,000 cricketers in the Netherlands, making it the 25th most popular sport. The first national association, the forerunner of today's Royal Dutch Cricket Association, was formed in 1883 and the Netherlands achieved Associate Membership of the ICC in 1966."

Maybe Sjack is a bowler.  ;D

Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: AquariuZ on April 13, 2009, 05:10:09 AM
Good news and bad news *sigh*

It does seem to work - thats good

The "egg" and any other curves MUST be smooth as silk so the acceleration is constant and without interruptions.

So, there I had a model that actually started to turn from standstill and another with test crowns to hold the weights. And a beautiful egg.

I started swapping frame by frame and:

WM.exe has encountered a problem and needs to close

 >:( I knew of this problem when you click too fast between frames, has to do with memory paging.
I will finish this tomorrow, but for now a previous save because you guessed it: I did not save my progress.
So my last save has uncalibrated paths (smoothing) and the egg needs to move slightly to the right.
O, and only the first stopper
Model attached, good night all


Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: AB Hammer on April 13, 2009, 05:23:04 AM
Greetings All

 I still don't see how it is going to work. There has to be a different effect to do this. Back when I started designing I saw the design of Dixon Vallance 1835. I see the same problem with the Sjack Abeling. My 23rd design addressed these type of problems I call it the projector wheel due to the resemblance. It requires traction tracks like some form of rubber to help the reaction, and when the balls get to the end close to the axle they keep spinning on bearings to reducing the friction then at the correct angle it grabs the rim and goes up with the belt to the top. The pulley wheels are driven from the axle in a reverse spin. At least this is the design. I believe it should answer some of your questions on the problems you will face with the Sjack Abeling wheel.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: AquariuZ on April 13, 2009, 05:36:40 AM
Reinstalled the crown stoppers couldn´t help myself.

Model without motor and speed and completely inert.

...or is it???

Hint: calibrate the egg and see what I saw.

Must sleep now birds starting to sing dammit

Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Grimer on April 13, 2009, 06:14:25 AM
The material of the weights should be concentrated on the perimeter like on a flywheel

The closer the material is towards the centre the more it is going to behave in the conventional manner of static material being lifted against gravity.

The key is in the fact that the accelerations the material is subjected to are much greater than the acceleration due to gravity. Gravity acceleration is piddling by comparison. Consequently one half of the weight is outrunning gravity and creating it's own wind which is opposite to the gravitational wind.

In effect the weights are sailing directly up into the gravitational wind.

Sailing directly into the wind is impossible, surely?

No it isn't. There was a long thread on the Steorn forum on the subject. I will have to try and dig out one of the videos which showed a propeller land model "sailing" directly into the wind.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Grimer on April 13, 2009, 06:56:51 AM
Found it. The device is called the Ventomobil

Project: Ventomobil
"Use the wind to drive against the wind", that's the formula of the InVentus Team. The young design engineers are two of the first researchers developing a mechanically powered wind racer for the Aeolus Race in Den Helder - and we support them in turning their vision into reality.

And there's heaps of YouTube videos illustrating it.
Example
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LGxnAWVGcNA

Interestingly enough a lot of them seem to be in the Netherlands. Maybe Sjack Abeling has one, eh!

So the fast rotating flywheels are sailing up the gravitational wind and just as the Ventomobil gets its traction from friction with the ground, the flywheels get it from their axles gripping on the toothed track.

It reminds one of that toy one played with as a kid. A cotton bobbin with a thread wound round the small inner diameter. Pull on it and instead of the reel moving towards you, counter intuitively it moves away.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: fletcher on April 13, 2009, 07:48:38 AM
AquariuZ .. try zeroing out the velocities of all the components in the WM egg sims [>properties] - it seems that you might be carrying forward residual velocities [particularly of the roller balls] giving the wheel assembly momentum when it shouldn't have any from a standing start which could be the source of the torque you are finding - just a suggestion !
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Grimer on April 13, 2009, 08:07:32 AM
Found it. The device is called the Ventomobil

Project: Ventomobil
"Use the wind to drive against the wind", that's the formula of the InVentus Team. The young design engineers are two of the first researchers developing a mechanically powered wind racer for the Aeolus Race in Den Helder - and we support them in turning their vision into reality.

And there's heaps of YouTube videos illustrating it.
Example
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LGxnAWVGcNA

Interestingly enough a lot of them seem to be in the Netherlands. Maybe Sjack Abeling has one, eh!

So the fast rotating flywheels are sailing up the gravitational wind and just as the Ventomobil gets its traction from friction with the ground, the flywheels get it from their axles gripping on the toothed track.

It reminds one of that toy one played with as a kid. A cotton bobbin with a thread wound round the small inner diameter. Pull on it and instead of the reel moving towards you, counter intuitively it moves away.

It seems to me that the mechanical advantage between the flywheel weight and the flywheel axle is an essential feature of the Abeling Gravity Wheel. Any mathematical analysis or simulation will have to build that mechanical advantage in.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on April 13, 2009, 08:19:42 AM
@All,

Does anyone know how to fix the left barrier in @Cherryman's EF2000.wm2d? Seems it's been imported from a dxf file and there are crossing lines at some corners which prevents it to be considered by the program as a polygon which can experience collisions. Is there a way to fix this within WM2D or it has to be done first in AutoCAD?

OK, this can be fixed by using the polygon tool. Move the left block somewhere away from the main construction and start clicking with the polygon tool around the existing contour until you end where you began. In the process you'll see the cursor changing into an X if it's hovering properly over the contour. Of course, special care should be taken to run over the curved part. Once the loop is closed (no pun intended) the polygon appears in color and now the program treats it as a colliding object. Move it back to its proper place on the main drawing and you're done.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Grimer on April 13, 2009, 09:56:04 AM
The rim or the flywheel weight is acting as a vertical axis Ventomobil not the more common horizontal axis  propeller type Ventomobil.    I've seen a video of a vertical axis Ventomobil   in action but I can't find it again. Still, I'm sure members get the idea and realise that if a horizontal axis Ventomobil can drive into the wind, so can a vertical axis Ventomobil.

Of course, because the gravitational wind is blowing vertically downwards a Vertical axis Ventomobil translates into a horizontal axis Gravimobil. ;D

By combining the acceleration due to the gravitational wind downwards on one side and the gravitational wind upwards on the side where the rim acceleration >> gravitational acceleration so that the rim is creating its own negative gravitational wind, it should be possible to calculate the resultant acceleration vector and hence the driving torque on the flywheel. Presumably someone has done these calculations for the Ventomobils.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Cherryman on April 13, 2009, 10:02:12 AM
I Fixed the file

Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on April 13, 2009, 10:16:05 AM
I Fixed the file



Thanks. Seems perfectly balanced, though.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Grimer on April 13, 2009, 10:43:57 AM
If a vertical axis Ventomobil can sail directly into the wind than it can go round a circular track and generate continuous rotary energy. Going downwind or across the wind is no problem. The trick is knowing how to drive into the wind - and that is the trick that Sjack has discovered with his Abeling Gravimobil.

Whose going to be the first to recognise this is indeed the solution?  8)

And who's going to be the first to call me a raving lunatic?  :o

Unfortunately we don't seem to have Nova, BigOil and Joshs on the forum so I've had to copy my posts to the Steorn Forum to get my fix of insults. ;D
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Cherryman on April 13, 2009, 10:47:45 AM
If a vertical axis Ventomobil can sail directly into the wind than it can go round a circular track and generate continuous rotary energy. Going downwind or across the wind is no problem. The trick is knowing how to drive into the wind - and that is the trick that Sjack has discovered with his Abeling Gravimobil.

Whose going to be the first to recognise this is indeed the solution?  8)

And who's going to be the first to call me a raving lunatic?  :o

Unfortunately we don't seem to have Nova, BigOil and Joshs on the forum so I've had to copy my posts to the Steorn Forum to get my fix of insults. ;D

Hahah i like the theory, good luck with getting beat up  ;D
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on April 13, 2009, 10:50:06 AM
@Cherryman,

We never fixed your KAD9 without motor. I'm zeroing out all initial velocities but when running it it restores them for some reason and turns the rotor counterclockwise. {see attached}
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Cherryman on April 13, 2009, 11:06:40 AM
Fixed that

Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on April 13, 2009, 11:09:15 AM
Zeroing out the velocities of the disc which has the profiled polygon attached to seems to fix the problem of counterclockwise rotation and restoring of the non zero velocities upon reset.

Thanks. Postings crossed
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Cherryman on April 13, 2009, 11:14:33 AM
Zeroing out the velocities of the disc which has the profiled polygon attached to seems to fix the problem of counterclockwise rotation and restoring of the non zero velocities upon reset.

I'm new to this WM2D programm..  Indeed sometimes objects seem to have volicity at the start, although i reset them..  Where can i fixe that?
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Grimer on April 13, 2009, 11:19:30 AM
Hahah i like the theory, good luck with getting beat up  ;D

Thank you Cherryman.   :-*

If you attempt the analysis don't worry if accelerations point in the wrong direction. Different hierarchies interact at near right angles. I say near cos if they acted at exact right angles like one was taught then they wouldn't interact at all.

So it's a case of never mind the width, feel the quality.  8)
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on April 13, 2009, 11:21:01 AM
I'm new to this WM2D programm..  Indeed sometimes objects seem to have volicity at the start, although i reset them..  Where can i fixe that?

Like I said, if you zero out the velocities of both the disc and the profiled polygon affixed to the disc the problem seems solved -- after reset these velocities are zero.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Cherryman on April 13, 2009, 11:36:54 AM
Like I said, if you zero out the velocities of both the disc and the profiled polygon affixed to the disc the problem seems solved -- after reset these velocities are zero.

I understand the theory, but WHERE do i zero out them?

Those Vx Vy and V0  numbers? Of the object properties?
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Cherryman on April 13, 2009, 11:38:09 AM
Meanwhile check out this one:

Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on April 13, 2009, 11:42:25 AM
I change them in Properties for both elements. Seems to work.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on April 13, 2009, 11:50:31 AM
Don't forget to zero out the velocities of the spheres as well. Very annoying.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Grimer on April 13, 2009, 12:09:41 PM

It's quite amusing now that we know one can construct a PMM (perpetual motion machine)  to read articles like this one .....

http://www.lhup.edu/~dsimanek/museum/overbal.htm

 .....  which tell you why you can't.  ::)
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on April 13, 2009, 12:48:04 PM
@Cherryman,

We should try to be as close to the patent as possible. So far @AquariuZ' seems to be the closest (see attached).  Seems the grooves have to be slimmer when compared to those in the patent. Also, the form of the guide (the barrier) is slightly different at the ends (no counter guide (barrier) to form that egg oval appears to exist in the patent). Wonder if we could make one model exactly as shown in Fig.2 of the patent?
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on April 13, 2009, 12:57:48 PM
By the way, how do you scale down the dimensions. @mondrasek was quite right, we have to take care of the dimensions of the rotor.Is @AquariuZ' rotor 200m indeed or I'm reading it wrong?
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: mondrasek on April 13, 2009, 02:15:02 PM
There is an issue with Wm2d that when you scale too small constraints break so much easier, this has to do with accuracy settings. It stops being fun when you get hit by integrator errors all the time.

I would try large scale first and then scale down to actual size, but that's just me

In the accuracy setting change the Integration Error size from the default of .001 to .0001 or .00001 (or lower if you have to).  The sim runs slower, but also much more accurate.  You definitely need the Integration Error size lower than the smallest interference you can handle.  When the sim calculates the move of an object it will allow it to enter other objects it is supposed to collide with a small amount (smaller than the Integration Error size I think).  If that interference object then also moves and increases the overlap of the two objects, that is when the sim pukes.

I don't know how much more I can stress that you need to be modeling at the proper scale!  Think of it this way:  When you scale down a wheel, the Centrifugal Forces also scale down.  But Gravity does not scale down!  So you cannot scale a Gravity Wheel design that uses CF and expect the same performance at all.  Designing in anything but the proper scale is mostly a wasted effort.

Keep in mind that I also draw my CAD models with a wheel around 1000 units in radius, since working within this range of numbers is easier for me.  But I scale the entire thing by .001 before importing to WM2D.  Then the wheel is only 2 meters in diameter.  It's that easy.

M.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: AquariuZ on April 13, 2009, 02:55:40 PM
Morning, Afternoon, Evening all

I slept through my alarm  >:( 14:23 local

Abeling patent papers everywhere * Nightmares about OU bunnies  * Wife wants a divorce

What a mess

@Cherryman to reset velocities or change properties for a group of objects select those objects with left mouse and ctrl for multiples. Then double click on any selected to get a mixed materials property window. Enter zero in the last three velocity fields to reset Vx Vy and Vo (axials and rotational) or if you want to change the materials just do so and all objects will be under same material.

It is a pity that there is no glass material in wm2d but there is ice.

@m: you are right ofcourse, but the scaling down, with a correct integrator error is not something my system can handle, and it slows down to around one frame per minute, even with frame skipping. So... Even though your argument makes perfect sense, I use the large scales to determine the optimal paths and polygon smoothing, and will then throw it in here at the correct scale for you all verify.

@Omnibus: If you cannot select an object because it is blocked from view or overlap just select any object and go to the first field in the properties window which contains a multiple selector field. Look for the object there in the list and select it. Then use Object -> move to front to make it visible. Alternatively move the blocking objects to the back with the same function. Stationary objects should be anchored, not pinned.
The less polygons the better so combine when you can.

I think I will start all over again because I want a wheel as in FIG 8 (maybe 10 meters diameter because M is right) Going to look what Cherryman has been up to..
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: AquariuZ on April 13, 2009, 03:04:03 PM
By the way, how do you scale down the dimensions. @mondrasek was quite right, we have to take care of the dimensions of the rotor.Is @AquariuZ' rotor 200m indeed or I'm reading it wrong?

You are right. I stole the wheel from Cherryman and I really like it. But I will start again and make it a little smaller. I wish I had a desktop CRAY system. (Running Linux ofcourse ;D )
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: AquariuZ on April 13, 2009, 03:07:39 PM
Keep in mind that I also draw my CAD models with a wheel around 1000 units in radius, since working within this range of numbers is easier for me.  But I scale the entire thing by .001 before importing to WM2D.  Then the wheel is only 2 meters in diameter.  It's that easy.

M.

I believe I have AutoCad lying around somewhere. Would it be worthwile to design in AutoCad and then import DXF? Or is it too much hassle (not an autoCAD user)
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: AquariuZ on April 13, 2009, 03:12:32 PM
I Fixed the file



Now that´s an egg. Great thanks!
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: mondrasek on April 13, 2009, 03:58:48 PM
I believe I have AutoCad lying around somewhere. Would it be worthwile to design in AutoCad and then import DXF? Or is it too much hassle (not an autoCAD user)

Well, there is definitely a learning curve.  I'd say it would be good to learn for the long run, but doubt you'd enjoy the frustration for this current project.  Alternatively, Cherryman can continue generating models for all in Rhino.  I only used that ages ago for file format translation, and am not sure about the learning curve.  It is not free but had a free 30 day evaluation at that time.

Anyone know of a free 2D CAD or drawing package that is:

1)  Simple to learn
2)  Can accurately draw all the basic 2D geometric shapes and elements
3)  Has basic editing tools like cut, extend, trim, move, copy, mirror, array, offset, scale, etc.
4)  Can export as DXF

?

Or any simple CAD or drawing package that offers a free trial period with the same features?

The inability to accurately size and place objects in WM2D frustrated the hell out of me at first.  But using CAD also has it's issues.  Sometimes it is easier to rotate objects in WM2D when they are already tied together with constraints.  But if you export out of WM2D in dxf and then reopen in CAD you lose accuracy.  So EVERY change you want to keep in WM2D needs to be done in CAD first and then imported. Or else you begin to degrade in accuracy along the way.

I'd also still recommend bumping up the Integration Error in your sims as far as you can stand.  At least when you are zeroing in on a final design and not just doing gross testing.  Better to let it take a few minutes to generate accurate frames than to show quick inaccurate ones that may lead you to think you have a desired effect that does not exist.  But, of course, down and dirty is fine for initial testing.  Just like the slot profiles in Abeling's video wheel.

M.
Title: free CAD programme
Post by: oscar on April 13, 2009, 04:20:24 PM
Anyone know of a free 2D CAD or drawing package that is:

1)  Simple to learn
2)  Can accurately draw all the basic 2D geometric shapes and elements
3)  Has basic editing tools like cut, extend, trim, move, copy, mirror, array, offset, scale, etc.
4)  Can export as DXF

qcad community release.
interface and handling are much like autocad.
file format is dxf.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Qcad
download windows binary from:
http://sourceforge.net/project/showfiles.php?group_id=240145
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Grimer on April 13, 2009, 04:35:45 PM
I predict that all computer modelling will be unsuccessful since it uses the laws of mechanics as we know them.

I believe there is an additional law governing the interaction between gravitational acceleration and inertial mass of which we are not yet aware. Something like the law of magnetic induction, say, discovered by Faraday. Every Sunday I am privileged to pass by  the shop where he worked as an apprentice bookbinder (http://i136.photobucket.com/albums/q171/frank260332/bookbinder.jpg) two centuries ago.

However, don't let me put you off your worthy herculean task. Even negative demonstrations are worth having because if the Abeling motor does prove to be a goer it will lead people to ask why their mathematical models failed.

Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: i_ron on April 13, 2009, 05:17:52 PM
I predict that all computer modelling will be unsuccessful since it uses the laws of mechanics as we know them.


Exactly!  garbage in equals garbage out.

But then I failed at learning auto cad and am 'limited' to cut and try, LOL

Some good posts Sir, a bit fanciful perhaps but no argument from here.

Ron
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: eisenficker2000 on April 13, 2009, 05:34:04 PM
Computer models are there to simulate reality, after being calibrated and checked by measurements off the practical outcome of the real system, in the real world.

Is Abelings "demo-barn" wheel without weights the real stuff or just an illustration?
Is the patent on purpose misleading, having an Easter egg full of promise without practical functionality?

Patents enough....without working guarantees.
I like the idea of patent, but before allowing it to be registered, it should be technically proven to work, in my simple opinion. And  more wishfull thinking  ::)
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: i_ron on April 13, 2009, 05:34:29 PM
Hi Ron,

Nothing in here about a 'scissor' action. In fact, if there were a scissor action it would seem the additional friction would simply slow the wheel down. Instead, the propelled weight is 'moving faster than the system' (once a critical speed is reached) through the effect of centrifigal force.

Charlie

But the weight and axle are moving from 6 o'clock to 12 o'clock in "nearly" a straight line, where is
the centrifugal force?

Looking at the motion from 9 o'clock to 12...the slot width is maintained at the width of the axle,
until the final moment, when because of the hook in the slot the width of the resultant slot closes
off, pinches off, scissors off...spitting the axle out with force, allowing the slow moving axle to
catch up with the fast moving catch pocket!

Ron


Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: noonespecial on April 13, 2009, 06:24:44 PM
But the weight and axle are moving from 6 o'clock to 12 o'clock in "nearly" a straight line, where is
the centrifugal force?

Looking at the motion from 9 o'clock to 12...the slot width is maintained at the width of the axle,
until the final moment, when because of the hook in the slot the width of the resultant slot closes
off, pinches off, scissors off...spitting the axle out with force, allowing the slow moving axle to
catch up with the fast moving catch pocket!

Ron

Hi Ron,

I was just keying off of his comment that the weights are alledgedly "moving faster than the system".  Again, if what you say is true, then in my opinion this is nothing more than yet another unproven overbalanced wheel assuming there is nothing unique to this design.

Charlie

Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: AB Hammer on April 13, 2009, 07:13:35 PM
Hi Ron,

I was just keying off of his comment that the weights are alledgedly "moving faster than the system".  Again, if what you say is true, then in my opinion this is nothing more than yet another unproven overbalanced wheel assuming there is nothing unique to this design.

Charlie



Greetings Charlie

That is one of the reasons I posted one of my old designs. For if the Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel, would work. Mine would as well. IMO Here is the link to my string with some written improvements for it, if someone wanted to build it. It was on my list to build one day when I didn't have a better design to try. So why not post it on its own string. I feel it has a better than average chance but the average of the over balanced wheel stinks. LOL
 http://www.overunity.com/index.php?topic=7235.0;topicseen

Don't get me wrong, I am interested in how the Sjack Abeling gravity wheel truly comes out, and I hope for the best. But I am not good at simulations either, so I can't be of much help in that field.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: i_ron on April 13, 2009, 07:38:49 PM
Hi Ron,

I was just keying off of his comment that the weights are alledgedly "moving faster than the system".  Again, if what you say is true, then in my opinion this is nothing more than yet another unproven overbalanced wheel assuming there is nothing unique to this design.

Charlie


Hi Charlie,

Yes, but the point at which the weights are moving faster than the system is not stated. It is my contention that they are, but after the constriction.

To me, that hook at the end of the slot is the key to the wheel. This is what makes the wheel work. I have been searching for a proper name for this effect that he is using and while it is the most basic mechanical motion it is used so very infrequently. The only analogy that comes to mind is working in a hydraulic press. The “action” we are talking about is not wanted. The two planes are required to absolutely parallel. If one plane is the slightest out of parallel then the forces are not transmitted perpendicular and disaster strikes… the work is propelled out of the press with extreme velocity.

So the weights are in two states, the outer weights at high velocity and the inner  weights at a slower velocity, as they are describing a smaller radius. If, as in previous wheels, the weighs are just feed back into the high velocity circuit they will take energy from the wheel to bring them up to speed. That is why we have never seen a working wheel before. This is why all the syms show a “semi” balanced wheel…. one must factor in the squeeze.

Take a greasy cherry pit between the thumb and bent finger… yes?  It goes a long way, does it not?  This is, or must be, the final action as the slow moving weight is feed back into the high velocity circuit… to give it a little squeeze and spit it back into the higher velocity circuit at speed. 

And you might ask… where is this in the computer models?

Ron
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: noonespecial on April 13, 2009, 07:58:39 PM
Greetings Charlie

That is one of the reasons I posted one of my old designs. For if the Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel, would work. Mine would as well. IMO Here is the link to my string with some written improvements for it, if someone wanted to build it. It was on my list to build one day when I didn't have a better design to try. So why not post it on its own string. I feel it has a better than average chance but the average of the over balanced wheel stinks. LOL
 http://www.overunity.com/index.php?topic=7235.0;topicseen

Don't get me wrong, I am interested in how the Sjack Abeling gravity wheel truly comes out, and I hope for the best. But I am not good at simulations either, so I can't be of much help in that field.

Hi AB,

Good to talk to you again! I did look at your design and quite frankly, I would think that yours has a better chance of working than Sjack's. I would encourage you to build one. And while we are on the subject of builds, here's a shameless self-promotion of my latest one: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1uKoAwFFwPY

Like you, I am interested in Sjack's design but I won't hold my breath waiting for a press release. At least Bob Kostoff provided a video of his design working. Although, he seems to have been spirited away by the MIB :).

Anyway, I'll keep watching...maybe we'll be pleasantly surprised someday.

Best,
Charlie
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: rbe on April 13, 2009, 08:13:51 PM
Hi all,

Just a few questions that popped in to mind. Has anyone thought of the actual dumbell design and might it be essential to make the wheel work as stated by the patent.

* Will the dumbell's spin in a (counter?)clockwise motion to create some extra down force when they are "shot way" at the top position and then land in the end of the slot?

* Are the dumbell's equipped with... for example ceramic ball bearings to make it extra slippery when its in the "scissor" part of the wheel, to make it more like a cherry pip like Ron describes.

Perhaps this has no real relevance for the wheel performance, just some thoughts.

Cheers
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: noonespecial on April 13, 2009, 08:20:44 PM
Hi Charlie,

Yes, but the point at which the weights are moving faster than the system is not stated. It is my contention that they are, but after the constriction.

To me, that hook at the end of the slot is the key to the wheel. This is what makes the wheel work. I have been searching for a proper name for this effect that he is using and while it is the most basic mechanical motion it is used so very infrequently. The only analogy that comes to mind is working in a hydraulic press. The “action” we are talking about is not wanted. The two planes are required to absolutely parallel. If one plane is the slightest out of parallel then the forces are not transmitted perpendicular and disaster strikes… the work is propelled out of the press with extreme velocity.

So the weights are in two states, the outer weights at high velocity and the inner  weights at a slower velocity, as they are describing a smaller radius. If, as in previous wheels, the weighs are just feed back into the high velocity circuit they will take energy from the wheel to bring them up to speed. That is why we have never seen a working wheel before. This is why all the syms show a “semi” balanced wheel…. one must factor in the squeeze.

Take a greasy cherry pit between the thumb and bent finger… yes?  It goes a long way, does it not?  This is, or must be, the final action as the slow moving weight is feed back into the high velocity circuit… to give it a little squeeze and spit it back into the higher velocity circuit at speed. 

And you might ask… where is this in the computer models?

Ron


Hi Ron,

I do understand your point. However, in both of your examples (hydraulic press and cherry pit) external force is applied first. This force isn't free and is in fact, directly proportional to the projectile energy produced. Squeeze the cherry pit a little and it only goes a little way. Squeeze it harder and it travels farther. There's no magical additional energy produced from this interaction. If you can show that there is, I would be very interested.

Regards,
Charlie
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: AquariuZ on April 13, 2009, 08:51:06 PM
Initial try own wheel and guides, cherrymans egg and a modified cherryman barrier.

Initial speed given to wheel around -0.100 rad/s

It will turn without motor for a loooong time (until wm2d limits)

Not being able to reproduce results from yesterday, but that´s prrobably because there is no true "launching" going on..

Model attached
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: AquariuZ on April 13, 2009, 08:53:07 PM
In both of your examples (hydraulic press and cherry pit) external force is applied first. This force isn't free and is in fact, directly proportional to the projectile energy produced. Squeeze the cherry pit a little and it only goes a little way. Squeeze it harder and it travels farther. There's no magical additional energy produced from this interaction. If you can show that there is, I would be very interested.

This is exactly the source of my concern: even if there is a scissor effect it certainly is not free. The generated momentum caused by the scissor is taken out of the system by friction.

Still continuing to test though...
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Cherryman on April 13, 2009, 09:05:24 PM
Well...

Introducing the "valve" ..  and "skipping"

To give the ball a shorter path, you will gain speed (time)  So i try to skip one leg every time, by having one ball less then you have spokes..

Here is a (motorized) concept.


Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: AquariuZ on April 13, 2009, 09:17:03 PM
Well...

Introducing the "valve" ..  and "skipping"

To give the ball a shorter path, you will gain speed (time)  So i try to skip one leg every time, by having one ball less then you have spokes..

Here is a (motorized) concept.

For someone new to wm2d you deliver the most delicious models

Very creative thinking as well 10/10

Thumbs up!
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: broli on April 13, 2009, 09:46:19 PM
Well...

Introducing the "valve" ..  and "skipping"

To give the ball a shorter path, you will gain speed (time)  So i try to skip one leg every time, by having one ball less then you have spokes..

Here is a (motorized) concept.


Wow this model really shows a lot of promise. I tweaked it a bit by removing the motor, gears, the background wheel (repaced it by rods to hold things together), the masses are of reasonable size and also increased the accuracy. There's a very big tendency for rotation and maintaining that rotation.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: broli on April 13, 2009, 09:55:59 PM
Looks like I cheered too soon. The frame without the weights seems to accelerate on its own  ;D. I think this was a known problem with custom polygonal shapes.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Cherryman on April 13, 2009, 09:58:30 PM
For someone new to wm2d you deliver the most delicious models

Very creative thinking as well 10/10

Thumbs up!

TNX!

I'm not trying to actually make an exact copy of the patent, I'm trying to find a working concept..  So i go sideways once in a while.

As for the designs, i have more in my head then i can draw  >:( ,   ;D But my knowledge of Rhino does help a lot. From there it is just importing into WM2D, that's the easy part.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: AB Hammer on April 13, 2009, 10:00:07 PM
Hi AB,

Good to talk to you again! I did look at your design and quite frankly, I would think that yours has a better chance of working than Sjack's. I would encourage you to build one. And while we are on the subject of builds, here's a shameless self-promotion of my latest one: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1uKoAwFFwPY

Like you, I am interested in Sjack's design but I won't hold my breath waiting for a press release. At least Bob Kostoff provided a video of his design working. Although, he seems to have been spirited away by the MIB :).

Anyway, I'll keep watching...maybe we'll be pleasantly surprised someday.

Best,
Charlie

Greetings Charlie

 You need to take your device video and use the design in mine together http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xhskB-0SjKI&feature=channel_page and see what happens  ;)  I was on a short break. Got to get back to work.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: AquariuZ on April 13, 2009, 10:22:22 PM
Well...

Introducing the "valve" ..  and "skipping"

To give the ball a shorter path, you will gain speed (time)  So i try to skip one leg every time, by having one ball less then you have spokes..

Here is a (motorized) concept.


I fixed the valves, no motor, stand still.

Look at V0

EDIT:  FALSE alarm, there is a wheel imbalance. Very smart idea though CM.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Cherryman on April 13, 2009, 10:28:59 PM
I fixed the valves, no motor, stand still.

Look at V0

 :o

LET IT RUN FROM STAND STILL

 :o :o

hey when i have real working models this forum would be to small  ;D

Understand that I'm testing concepts and share the progress for information and critics.


These concept should be judged on potential . This one uses for spokes, so imagine you have 8 or more..  will that help?  and so on...  That's what I'm doing.   

So sometimes i create a selfstarter to see what happens, and sometimes i use motordrive to work out the concept, to make it selfstart there is need of some tweaking.   The question is, is it worth it, will the concept add something.. Well i think valves and shortening the path is fun enough to look closer at.. So I'll be back!  ;D

Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: AquariuZ on April 13, 2009, 10:39:11 PM
O, it is not symmetrical.

I thought for a moment there was acceleration out of thin air...

 ;D

EDIT: actually the spheres were mixed materials, the wheel is fine..
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: AquariuZ on April 13, 2009, 10:49:52 PM
So sometimes i create a selfstarter to see what happens, and sometimes i use motordrive to work out the concept, to make it selfstart there is need of some tweaking.   The question is, is it worth it, will the concept add something.. Well i think valves and shortening the path is fun enough to look closer at.. So I'll be back!  ;D

That was the point, when I reset the model speeds to 0 and removed the motor... It started...

But... see previous post
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: persume on April 13, 2009, 11:39:24 PM
Zippadee doo da
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: noonespecial on April 14, 2009, 12:12:40 AM
Greetings Charlie

 You need to take your device video and use the design in mine together http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xhskB-0SjKI&feature=channel_page and see what happens  ;)  I was on a short break. Got to get back to work.


Hi AB,

Seems like yours runs fine on its own!  The bike wheel in mine is being used as a simple flywheel that will ultimately drive a generator or alternator. I believe I will be able to show honest and sustainable overunity when it is completed. Thanks for subscribing!

Regards,
Charlie
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: LarryC on April 14, 2009, 12:24:55 AM
Just to help some to understand the potential of the centrifugal sling force involved, please look at http://www.overunity.com/index.php?topic=2326.msg153063#msg153063.

It shows a centrifugal sling capture testbed and performance data based on Bob Kostoff design. Since there are two connected weights, the forces would be less than in Abeling design, because each weight is being counterbalanced by the centrifugal pull force of the other based on distance from the center.

Abeling's design has the advantage of multiple weights slinging outward in the same vertical plane. It may not be as efficient at the capture of the CF sling force due to Abeling's use of a directional change to impact the bottom right of the hockeystick in the rotational direction to increase the acceleration. But the multiple weights should give it the advantage. Abeling's design is also much simpler than Bob's pneumatics, cam, and lever approach.


Regards, Larry

 
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on April 14, 2009, 12:25:24 AM
@Cherryman,

Can you scale down the rotor to, say, 1m diameter? Now it's huge -- 80m and that interferes with the concept. (see attached)
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Cherryman on April 14, 2009, 12:40:02 AM
Here is a smaller version, you well have to redo the constraints.

Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: LarryC on April 14, 2009, 01:34:09 AM
Just to help some to understand the potential of the centrifugal sling force involved, please look at http://www.overunity.com/index.php?topic=2326.msg153063#msg153063.

It shows a centrifugal sling capture testbed and performance data based on Bob Kostoff design. Since there are two connected weights, the forces would be less than in Abeling design, because each weight is being counterbalanced by the centrifugal pull force of the other based on distance from the center.

Abeling's design has the advantage of multiple weights slinging outward in the same vertical plane. It may not be as efficient at the capture of the CF sling force due to Abeling's use of a directional change to impact the bottom right of the hockeystick in the rotational direction to increase the acceleration. But the multiple weights should give it the advantage. Abeling's design is also much simpler than Bob's pneumatics, cam, and lever approach.

Just wondering, can any of you WM2D programmers recreate the results of a actual CF sling capture physical testbed result? If any specification is missing, I would be glad to respond.

It would be interesting to know if WM2D can predict CF sling capture force.

Regards, Larry

 
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: noonespecial on April 14, 2009, 01:40:19 AM
Just wondering, can any of you WM2D programmers recreate the results of a actual CF sling capture physical testbed result? If any specification is missing, I would be glad to respond.

It would be interesting to know if WM2D can handle CF sling capture.

Regards, Larry

Hi Larry,

I think your first challenge is to convince anyone here that there is any centrifugal force related to this design. At least that's been my experience :).

Regards,
Charlie
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: AB Hammer on April 14, 2009, 02:23:37 AM
Just wondering, can any of you WM2D programmers recreate the results of a actual CF sling capture physical testbed result? If any specification is missing, I would be glad to respond.

It would be interesting to know if WM2D can predict CF sling capture force.

Regards, Larry

 

Greetings Larry

 Over on Bessler Wheel there are some very good WM2D users, and it seems like many working wheels in WM2D, but not in real life. Most of them use it to work out ideas, not as proof.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on April 14, 2009, 02:29:49 AM
@AB Hammer,

Quote
and it seems like many working wheels in WM2D

Can you give us an example of a working gravity wheel in WM2D?
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: AB Hammer on April 14, 2009, 02:47:26 AM
@AB Hammer,

Can you give us an example of a working gravity wheel in WM2D?

Omnibus

Join up at Besslerwheel.com and look up member KAS. He had one that looked real promising, but when built it didn't work, but it did in WM2D.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on April 14, 2009, 02:57:14 AM
Omnibus

Join up at Besslerwheel.com and look up member KAS. He had one that looked real promising, but when built it didn't work, but it did in WM2D.

Do you have a link to that?
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: AquariuZ on April 14, 2009, 03:22:00 AM
Do you have a link to that?

Here is a self starter, we had a discussion about it I believe a year ago..

There are more out there, I cannot explain this one, it is an unbalanced huge construction.

Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: AquariuZ on April 14, 2009, 03:23:56 AM
Hi Larry,

I think your first challenge is to convince anyone here that there is any centrifugal force related to this design. At least that's been my experience :).

Regards,
Charlie

Well there is an acceleration of the weight due to the curves, but the friction... always the friction will negate the energy generated by this acceleration. It is frustrating
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on April 14, 2009, 03:26:51 AM
Here is a self starter, we had a discussion about it I believe a year ago..

There are more out there, I cannot explain this one, it is an unbalanced huge construction.



Now we need @mondrasek to take a look at this and analyze it. Can you dig out more examples? This is really interesting.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: AquariuZ on April 14, 2009, 03:52:06 AM
Now we need @mondrasek to take a look at this and analyze it. Can you dig out more examples? This is really interesting.

Well do not get too excited, I even invited a wm2d engineer to discuss this one... He said the model was "wrong" but that it was not the program´s fault, there is a thread in here somewhere...

If you run into the limit just do start here and run again where you left off. at around 68000 frames it reaches -2.5 rad/s and then all of a sudden (like it reaches a structural limit) slows all the way down to 0, starts spinning counterclockwise  stops, and starts again.

Really weird. I do not have more, this was just the one I saved.

Makes a nice screensaver
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on April 14, 2009, 03:54:33 AM
@AquariuZ,

Have you tried it scaled down from 500m to 1m, for instance? One should try to write the equations governing this and see rigorously what the conditions for it to work are.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on April 14, 2009, 04:32:40 AM
@AquariuZ,

Quote
He said the model was "wrong" but that it was not the program´s fault,

He hasn't said that much that engineer, has he? That's why I want to hear what @mondrasek has to say. Can you find the link? Was in on bessler.com or it was on this site? This is a very interesting structure which doesn't have springs and other stuff to complicate matters. If WM2D cannot handle this simple device what good is it? One thing, as I said, I'd like to see it substantially scaled down
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: hansvonlieven on April 14, 2009, 04:57:02 AM
I remember the discussion with the WM2D guy at the time. He gave a lot of nonsense reasons, whatever he said did not make much sense.

My suspicion at the time was the very low mass value of the connecting piece. The engineer denied this. I told him that all you had to do was to change the mass of that piece to 1 kg or more and it would behave as expected; and that I thought there was a programme bug. At this point he became rather abusive. I left it at that.

I have a whole collection of WM2D constructs that show perpetual motion when they should not. There are a number of iteration errors, possibly caused by rounding, that are cumulative in WM2D. I think that this causes some of these problems.

Here is one example

Hans von Lieven
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on April 14, 2009, 05:17:50 AM
Hans,

Thanks for the example. However, turn on the air resistance (on low) and you'll see it'll behave normally. Recall several pages back I had a similar example exhibiting weird behavior, getting into instabilities even, and @mondrasek and someone else explained what the real story is. In @KAS's case, however, air resistance is turned on, it doesn't have complicated joints, springs etc. and still works. Like I said I'm waiting to hear what @mondrasek has to say on that.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: persume on April 14, 2009, 05:51:45 AM
I remember the discussion with the WM2D guy at the time. He gave a lot of nonsense reasons, whatever he said did not make much sense.

My suspicion at the time was the very low mass value of the connecting piece. The engineer denied this. I told him that all you had to do was to change the mass of that piece to 1 kg or more and it would behave as expected; and that I thought there was a programme bug. At this point he became rather abusive. I left it at that.

I have a whole collection of WM2D constructs that show perpetual motion when they should not. There are a number of iteration errors, possibly caused by rounding, that are cumulative in WM2D. I think that this causes some of these problems.

Here is one example

Hans von Lieven

I remember you posting about that Hans.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Grimer on April 14, 2009, 08:12:52 AM
I have been able to find a picture of a vertical axis Ventomobil. It on this video at 28 seconds in (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nBm6DU_t9i0).

It can be seen from the video that this particular Ventomobil uses blades. In order to move closer to the mechanics of the Abeling Gravimobil we have to imagine a Ventomobil which uses Flettner rotors as the blades.

Now what in the rising weight flywheel of the Abeling Gravimobil is acting equivalent to the Flettner rotors of a vertical axis mobil and driving it into the gravitational wind? ???

It has to be the rotating entity where the mass is concentrated, i.e. the atomic nucleus. Under the action of the combined gravitational and inertial acceleration this rotation must be polarised to some extent in an analogous way to the polarization of electron when emitting Bremsstrahlung radiation at near light speed.

It is these massive rotating nuclei which are interacting with the gravitational wind and giving the flywheel the added torque - effectively reducing its gravitational mass and allowing it to "sail" directly into the gravitational wind using the power of that wind.

It rather reminds one of that Japanese art of self defence, Jujitsu.  :)
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on April 14, 2009, 08:21:22 AM
Did you see this from besslerwheel.com? (see attached)
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: mindsweeper on April 14, 2009, 09:04:47 AM
Here, a working wheel of sorts. It shows the inherent problems when attempting to model a gravity wheel with polygons.

There are many others far more complex than this. And many more on besslerwheel.com (like the above post)

Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: mindsweeper on April 14, 2009, 09:17:55 AM
And this one with no polygons, works ok but in the real world?
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on April 14, 2009, 09:22:55 AM
@mindsweeper,

Turn the air resistance off this time and the behavior seems to turn somewhat back to normal.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: mindsweeper on April 14, 2009, 09:41:50 AM
@mindsweeper,

Turn the air resistance off this time and the behavior seems to turn somewhat back to normal.

Yes, exactly my point, that should prove the unpredictability of WM2D imho..
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: hansvonlieven on April 14, 2009, 09:51:21 AM
Here are another two, I cannot remember who posted the first one but Stefan posted the second one. Both are WM2D stuff ups.

@ Omnibus

I know if you change almost any parameter it behaves almost normally. This is hardly the point though. If the system gives false results on a pure setting (ie. no outside influences) it will hardly give more reliable results when outside forces enter into the picture. Are you seriously suggesting that the model in question will work as shown in a vacuum?
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on April 14, 2009, 09:53:19 AM
Yes, exactly my point, that should prove the unpredictability of WM2D imho..

Take a look at the calculated and displayed velocity and acceleration. There's something very confusing about all this. Someone should explain what's going on. Otherwise it's just a waste of time to model these contraptions. (see attached)
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on April 14, 2009, 09:57:35 AM
Here are another two, I cannot remember who posted the first one but Stefan posted the second one. Both are WM2D stuff ups.

@ Omnibus

I know if you change almost any parameter it behaves almost normally. This is hardly the point though. If the system gives false results on a pure setting (ie. no outside influences) it will hardly give more reliable results when outside forces enter into the picture. Are you seriously suggesting that the model in question will work as shown in a vacuum?

Correct. That was exactly my point. If you go back some 10-15 pages you'll see that I raised exactly this question about the device working in vacuum. The explanation given was that elements such as springs are not ideal and there are always some losses which in this case are modeled by the air resistance (and I thought I read somewhere in several other ways such as deliberate inducing slight back force, back torque and the like).

The problem is that in this last example (before the two you gave) the "correct" result appear to be when air resistance is turned off rather than on. Go figure.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: hansvonlieven on April 14, 2009, 10:01:50 AM
Perhaps not a complete waste of time Omnibus,

but personally I don't see in WM2D much more than a rough guide. In some configurations it is very good. Put complex polygons into the picture or have too many elements interacting it fucks up. The programme does have a number of bugs regardless of what the WM2D guy says.

Just a couple of cents wort from me.

Hans von Lieven
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on April 14, 2009, 10:12:11 AM
Hans,

Your last examples are very interesting but in them one may start imagining things because they are quite complex and in a sense elaborate. Also, one may think that because of their complexity certain stages of the calculations take place out of order and that causes the seeming effect. This last worker.wm2d, however, is really puzzling because it seems as simple as can be and one can hardly suppose that such a simple example would pose any calculating problems. Something must be wrong with the algorithm of the program. Unless that's indeed a real effect. You know, I'm not excluding such circumstances because what we are dealing with are the outmost fringes of what the mainstream considers science and trained scientists won't touch this with a ten foot pole (we know why). So, it very well may be that there's something which simply hasn't been studied or has been ignored for being a threat to one's career in professional science.

No doubt, if it really is a true effect it has to be confirmed by a working lab device in flesh in blood.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: robbie47 on April 14, 2009, 10:16:58 AM
Gents,

Here are the drawings from the patent.
I'll post the rest later, since max attachment size is 250KB.

Main text is in Dutch. I can translate this but it will take some time.
(I am Dutch myself)
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: mindsweeper on April 14, 2009, 10:19:47 AM
Hans,

Your last examples are very interesting but in them one may start imagining things because they are quite complex and in a sense elaborate. Also, one may think that because of their complexity certain stages of the calculations take place out of order and that causes the seeming effect. This last worker.wm2d, however, is really puzzling because it seems as simple as can be and one can hardly suppose that such a simple example would pose any calculating problems. Something must be wrong with the algorithm of the program. Unless that's indeed a real effect. You know, I'm not excluding such circumstances because what we are dealing with are the outmost fringes of what the mainstream considers science and trained scientists won't touch this with a ten foot pole (we know why). So, it very well may be that there's something which simply hasn't been studied or has been ignored for being a threat to one's career in professional science.

No doubt, if it really is a true effect it has to be confirmed by a working lab device in flesh in blood.

I assume you are talking about my design, it does not work in the real world. I have tried it.

I also posted another (where double post was) without using polygons. I did them about 6 to 8 months ago and Hans pointed out the errors so I made a quick model with stuff I had lying about and the results were negative.


EDIT: this is why I requested a WM2D section for the board but nothing was created, all these topics could have been covered there.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: hansvonlieven on April 14, 2009, 10:31:20 AM
G'day Mindsweeper,

If I remember correctly there was such a thread a while ago. There was not much interest then and it kind of died.  >:(

Maybe now that there is a lot more interest in the programme we should start it again. I for one would be interested.

Hans von Lieven
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: hansvonlieven on April 14, 2009, 10:37:38 AM
Gents,

Here are the drawings from the patent.
I'll post the rest later, since max attachment size is 250KB.

Main text is in Dutch. I can translate this but it will take some time.
(I am Dutch myself)

Have a look back a bit in this thread. Someone already translated it. Not that there is much in it. It's all bullshit anyway. The guy is a wanker.

Hans von Lieven
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on April 14, 2009, 10:41:31 AM
@mindsweeper,

I think the topic of MW2D is intrinsic here and it shouldn't be moved elsewhere. For now this is the only possibility to test the ideas we're discussing but we have to know clearly the limitations. Therefore, we need a very clear explanation as to why your device is modeled incorrectly, if that's the case. Of course, I don't doubt your manufacturing and experimental skills but even the most skilled experimenters sometimes overlook things or come upon an interesting fact by sheer luck. That's so typical even when the great minds carry out experiments. So, let's see if someone can come up with a clear explanation as to what's happening with your model. The best would be to have a mathematician specializing in mechanics to write the equations governing the system an prove rigorously that based on classical mechanics what we see isn't possible. That may seem trivial but it isn't unless one is inclined to take for granted that we're done with classical mechanics and there cannot be new findings there.

I did a quick "replication" of your model and you can see, it goes berserk under high speed air resistance, destroying itself. No air resistance seems to calm it down to "normal" behavior. Why is that? (see attached)
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: hansvonlieven on April 14, 2009, 10:51:56 AM
You pay far too much attention to mathematics Omnibus,

The test of a system is experiment, nothing else!

When this is done mathematics can be pulled in to create an analogy to what is happening in the real world.

But that is all it is!

I am not saying mathematics is useless, far from it, but you must bear in mind it is only an explanation of the phenomenon, not the phenomenon itself.

Hans von Lieven
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on April 14, 2009, 10:52:38 AM
Nobody seems to have noticed another patent, from 2004, which I uploaded earlier. The idea seems practically the same as Abeling's. Here it is again (see attached)

Wonder what will happen if someone calls the guy and asks for a demonstration? Bet you he's gonna be nowhere to be found. It's kinda weird Sjack Abeling isn't so much reclusive (I, for one, spoke personally with him, as I reported here, to no avail).You may recall about a year or two ago there was a discussion here on these matters -- USPTO issuing perpetuum mobile patents which they claim isn't their job to refute. Their understanding is that if the patent is no good it will simply die out and if someone is so much interested in voiding such non-working patents, the only recourse it to go through the court system.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: mindsweeper on April 14, 2009, 10:58:15 AM
@ Omnibus

That does pick up speed very quickly, I have pondered over this for many months and ended up discounting it due to the many working prototypes I have seen in WM2D. I don't know why the model does what it does but when I originally made the design I wanted to use CF to my advantage and this was the model I came up with.

My modeling capability is not very good and when I say I threw something together I mean that is what I did, if there is something here then it's all open and free for anyone to pick up and run with it as they see fit.

@ Hans

Do you think I should start another thread, perhaps take it over to Besslerwheel ?
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on April 14, 2009, 11:06:23 AM
You pay far too much attention to mathematics Omnibus,

The test of a system is experiment, nothing else!

When this is done mathematics can be pulled in to create an analogy to what is happening in the real world.

But that is all it is!

I am not saying mathematics is useless, far from it, but you must bear in mind it is only an explanation of the phenomenon, not the phenomenon itself.

Hans von Lieven

No, no, don't get me wrong. Far from it. I've always insisted physics makes mathematics, not vice versa. In this case, however, equations describing the phenomena at hand are claimed to have been pretty well studied. However, I'm not excluding the possibility that even these allegedly so well studied equation may yield something unexpected. It's for a physicist to look at the solution, though, because a mathematician, being a poet in science, usually tends to be carried away and would be satisfied by the beauty of the equation, never mind that it doesn't make physical sense. Some physicists are falling into this trap, unfortunately, and that has to change.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: hansvonlieven on April 14, 2009, 11:07:38 AM
Yes Omnibus,

there are a number of so called patents on the loose about this sort of thing. Frankly I don't think patent offices care anymore. As long as the prescribed wording is OK they will issue a patent. No-one checks, no-one cares about anything other than the fees.

For instance, just about anything Milkovic has patented was patented in the 1920's by George Constantinesco. Evidently the Serbian patent office is totally oblivious of that fact.

The Dutch patent office does not seem to be any better, nor is the USPTO.

The whole system appears to have become a lawyer's scam

Hans von Lieven
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: hansvonlieven on April 14, 2009, 11:09:04 AM
No, no, don't get me wrong. Far from it. I've always insisted physics makes mathematics, not vice versa. In this case, however, equations describing the phenomena at hand are claimed to have been pretty well studied. However, I'm not excluding the possibility that even these allegedly so well studied equation may yield something unexpected. It's for a physicist to look at the solution, though, because a mathematician, being a poet in science, usually tends to be carried away and would be satisfied by the beauty of the equation, never mind that it doesn't make physical sense. Some physicists are falling into this trap, unfortunately, and that has to change.

LOL Omnibus, I like the poet bit  ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D

Hans
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Grimer on April 14, 2009, 11:11:17 AM
I see that I am in good company is proposing a gravitational wind that is blowing steadily downwards. None other than that canonised scientific saint, Newton himself.  ::)

"Remarkably, Newton himself does not seem to have ruled out the possibility of a perpetual motion machine. It is a little known fact that in his early notebooks under the heading "Quaestiones"[sic] Newton speculates that gravity (heaviness) is caused by the descent of a subtle matter which strikes all bodies and carries them down. "Whither ye rays of gravity may bee stopped by reflecting or refracting ye, if so a perpetual motion may bee made one of these two ways." Adjacent to these words, Newton added two sketches of perpetual motion powered by the "flux of the gravitational stream".
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: hansvonlieven on April 14, 2009, 11:11:52 AM

@ Hans

Do you think I should start another thread, perhaps take it over to Besslerwheel ?

There is already such a thread at besslerwheel Mindsweeper.

Hans
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on April 14, 2009, 11:15:13 AM
Hans,

Do you have any of Constantinesco's patents. Would be interesting to take a look.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Cherryman on April 14, 2009, 11:22:44 AM
Oké, i tried a new path..  Gears

Just a concept, full of mistakes  ;D ... I have to sweeten it still a little

 
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: hansvonlieven on April 14, 2009, 11:26:11 AM
I see that I am in good company is proposing a gravitational wind that is blowing steadily downwards. None other than that canonised scientific saint, Newton himself.  ::)

"Remarkably, Newton himself does not seem to have ruled out the possibility of a perpetual motion machine. It is a little known fact that in his early notebooks under the heading "Quaestiones"[sic] Newton speculates that gravity (heaviness) is caused by the descent of a subtle matter which strikes all bodies and carries them down. "Whither ye rays of gravity may bee stopped by reflecting or refracting ye, if so a perpetual motion may bee made one of these two ways." Adjacent to these words, Newton added two sketches of perpetual motion powered by the "flux of the gravitational stream".

Helmholtz, the guy who came up with the conservation of energy laws did not think that perpetual was impossible either, see below quote, which has been excised by science from his paper "Ueber die Erhaltung der Kraft" (On the conservation of force)

One wonders why.

Hans von Lieven
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Cherryman on April 14, 2009, 11:49:13 AM
A slightly improved version,


It's just to show the concept..   


The trick is that you gear the wheel so that there are always more balls (Weight)  going down then there are going up.  So tho accomplish that, the path up must either be shorter or faster, prefarably both!!


Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: hartiberlin on April 14, 2009, 01:22:35 PM
And this one with no polygons, works ok but in the real world?

There is a problem with WM2D with the ridgid joints,
So always only use pin joints,
Just use 2 pin joints, if you need to fix 2 things together.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Grimer on April 14, 2009, 01:23:06 PM
Helmholtz, the guy who came up with the conservation of energy laws did not think that perpetual was impossible either, see below quote, which has been excised by science from his paper "Ueber die Erhaltung der Kraft" (On the conservation of force)

One wonders why.

Hans von Lieven

Force is only an alias for a unrecognised or hidden strain. I realised this years ago from my work on materials testing where what one takes as stress and what one takes as strain is quite arbitrary.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on April 14, 2009, 01:33:34 PM
There is a problem with WM2D with the ridgid joints,
So always only use pin joints,
Just use 2 pin joints, if you need to fix 2 things together.

Thanks, Stefan. That seems to fix the problem also with KAS's model. Wonder why is that? Probably the program treats the rigid joints as some kind of active elements.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: hartiberlin on April 14, 2009, 01:34:58 PM
Take a look at the calculated and displayed velocity and acceleration. There's something very confusing about all this. Someone should explain what's going on. Otherwise it's just a waste of time to model these contraptions. (see attached)

* Worker-1wVectors.wm2d

Again the rigid joint problem.
I just fixed this using 2 pin joints.
Then it behaves normal.

Never use RIGID JOINTs in WM2D.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on April 14, 2009, 01:40:22 PM
Again the rigid joint problem.
I just fixed this using 2 pin joints.
Then it behaves normal.

Never use RIGID JOINTs in WM2D.

Correct. I saw that. Fixes also KAS's design. Have you noticed, when with rigid joint they seem to wobble slightly during the rendering process. Will have to try with that design I posted 20 or so pages back that we discussed with @mondrasek. Forgot what exact page that was.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Cherryman on April 14, 2009, 01:40:56 PM
The key is that if you have a WM2D model, it should accalerate! Because otherwise you can't built in in real. The accaleration is "the force" you need to have it at least stay at a steady rpm in real life.  (Not to mention to hook up  generator)
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: hartiberlin on April 14, 2009, 01:47:03 PM
Nobody seems to have noticed another patent, from 2004, which I uploaded earlier. The idea seems practically the same as Abeling's. Here it is again (see attached)

Wonder what will happen if someone calls the guy and asks for a demonstration? Bet you he's gonna be nowhere to be found. It's kinda weird Sjack Abeling isn't so much reclusive (I, for one, spoke personally with him, as I reported here, to no avail).You may recall about a year or two ago there was a discussion here on these matters -- USPTO issuing perpetuum mobile patents which they claim isn't their job to refute. Their understanding is that if the patent is no good it will simply die out and if someone is so much interested in voiding such non-working patents, the only recourse it to go through the court system.


Interesting patent, but I wonder,
if the friction on the walls will not kill all the effects again ?

But maybe worth a try in WM2D.

Regards, Stefan.

P.S. I am almost much convinced now, that the Abeling wheel
does not work as drawn in his patent.
Just moving weights on elliptical pathes in a wheel just does not work.

There must be still something else, like 90 degrees weight pulling
or something simular to the Milkovic pendulum, etc...
But just an overbalanced wheel with just pure weights going up and
down in circles or elliptical pathes, just does not work.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on April 14, 2009, 01:49:26 PM
OK, here it is. There are no rigid joints here (see attached) but @mondrasek explained that the problem was due to the spring. Somehow the calculations get out of sequence. To take care of this (and the inevitable losses in the spring) one turns on air resistance. I mentioned that at that time and now Hans also noted that this is inconsistent with an experiment in vacuum. Anyway, that seems to be a problem, although what @mondrasek explained makes sense. Seems that losses should be accounted for differently and the "out of sequence" problem should be amended by changing the algorithm probably.

EDIT: Changed the anchors w/ double pins. No joy either.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Cherryman on April 14, 2009, 02:33:31 PM
OK, here it is. There are no rigid joints here (see attached) but @mondrasek explained that the problem was due to the spring. Somehow the calculations get out of sequence. To take care of this (and the inevitable losses in the spring) one turns on air resistance. I mentioned that at that time and now Hans also noted that this is inconsistent with an experiment in vacuum. Anyway, that seems to be a problem, although what @mondrasek explained makes sense. Seems that losses should be accounted for differently and the "out of sequence" problem should be amended by changing the algorithm probably.

EDIT: Changed the anchors w/ double pins. No joy either.

 ;D
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: hartiberlin on April 14, 2009, 02:45:43 PM
OK, here it is. There are no rigid joints here (see attached) but @mondrasek explained that the problem was due to the spring. Somehow the calculations get out of sequence. To take care of this (and the inevitable losses in the spring) one turns on air resistance. I mentioned that at that time and now Hans also noted that this is inconsistent with an experiment in vacuum. Anyway, that seems to be a problem, although what @mondrasek explained makes sense. Seems that losses should be accounted for differently and the "out of sequence" problem should be amended by changing the algorithm probably.

EDIT: Changed the anchors w/ double pins. No joy either.

Yes, seems to be another error,
also at frame 1463 the right ball falls through the blue see-saw bar,
as if it would be not there...
Strange error...
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: mrsean2k on April 14, 2009, 02:46:51 PM
I see that I am in good company is proposing a gravitational wind that is blowing steadily downwards. None other than that canonised scientific saint, Newton himself.  ::)

"Remarkably, Newton himself does not seem to have ruled out the possibility of a perpetual motion machine. It is a little known fact that in his early notebooks under the heading "Quaestiones"[sic] Newton speculates that gravity (heaviness) is caused by the descent of a subtle matter which strikes all bodies and carries them down. "Whither ye rays of gravity may bee stopped by reflecting or refracting ye, if so a perpetual motion may bee made one of these two ways." Adjacent to these words, Newton added two sketches of perpetual motion powered by the "flux of the gravitational stream".

Frank,

I posted this on the Steorn forum (bar a few spelling corrections and elaborations) in reponse to your repeat of this post. Could you try to enlighten me?

==================================

One thing puzzles me about this view though Frank.

If I accept for a moment that there *is* a gravitational "wind" of some kind, I still don't understand how *any* of the devices proposed would make use of this.

The orientation of these rotational devices is all vertical, not horizontal, i.e. the blades are edge on, not face-on into the wind. I think in the case of a windmill for instance this would result in no movement?


I suppose if I was to take a device like this:

http://www.lhup.edu/~dsimanek/museum/arab-t.gif

and apply an *actual* wind-force directly from above - using a large fan for instance - it would turn CCW as the surface area presented by the arms on the LHS of the wheel is larger than that on the RHS.

Other objections aside (I don't need to be saved by being reminded how "mad" this idea is considered, thanks) is my interpretation of your analogy just too literal? Is surface area presented the wrong analogy. i.e it doesn't rely on force per unit area / volume providing a displacement at right-angles to the "wind" itself?
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: hartiberlin on April 14, 2009, 02:48:52 PM
;D
boing4weird3-1_With_Block.wm2d

And here the ball falls through at frame 1277...
Strange.

Probably too much motion of the blue see-saw bar does not trigger the collide function
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Cherryman on April 14, 2009, 02:50:19 PM
IF there is gravitational wind, then would a horizontal windmill in a vacuüm start spinning?
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Cherryman on April 14, 2009, 02:51:33 PM
And here the ball falls through at frame 1277...
Strange.

Probably too much motion of the blue see-saw bar does not trigger the collide function

Yep, or the programm does not calculate a trajactory, but single points. And when at high speeds the points probarly will not collide (A resolution problem of the program)
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: broli on April 14, 2009, 03:06:52 PM
Cheeryman a few tips:

1) Refrain from using polygonal shapes. In your latest model all polygonal shapes can be simple primitives.
2) Always increase the accuracy of both the steps as the integration error to look for consistent results on highly accurate simulations. Again in your latest model if you increase both values by two orders of magnitude you get a completely different result.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: hartiberlin on April 14, 2009, 03:07:39 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
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: AquariuZ on April 14, 2009, 03:12:49 PM
@Stefan

Thanks for the tip about the rigid joints (Now he tells me!)  ;D

I totally agree Abeling is hiding something, because at best you have a very low loss construction like one of the models I posted earlier. Not overunity. The construction as presented in the patent is not new and disproven on several occaisions over the years, same goes for the 2004 patent which Omnibus posted. Interesting as it is, friction kills it.

@Hans

Trial and error is the way to go, the theory can be defined later I totally agree. Tesla would strongly disagree, but he built his devices in his head and tested them before putting a single thing to paper. Edison was more a trial and error engineer hence the two could not stand each other.

If Tesla had a decent way to simulate models back in the day, who knows we would probably be terraforming our third planet by now.

@Omnibus, in the original KADweird just set the mass of the blue rod to 1 KG. The problem is that the dimensions of the rod are around 150 meters by 20 meters and it has a mass of less than a gram. Hence "impossible" because there is no such material. That, combined with the for me new discovery of the rigid joint factor will explain away most of the erratic behaviour. Pity about the joints.

@Cherryman: in your model you have a tiny opening in the ring structure through which the balls fly out. If you move the polygon opening to another location where the spheres cannot get to it the spheres will probably be stopped correctly.

AZ
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: mondrasek on April 14, 2009, 03:15:21 PM
Here is a self starter, we had a discussion about it I believe a year ago..

There are more out there, I cannot explain this one, it is an unbalanced huge construction.

WM2D is calculating the effects of forces on each model piece one at a time.  The analysis is sequential and iterative.  So it looks at the initial conditions of part #1 and calculates where it should move to by the end of the selected time step and what speed and direction while be the result of this iteration.  It then looks at part #2 and does the same.  But what position of part #1 should influence the calculations on part #2?  The position and speed of part #1 at the beginning of the iteration or the one just calculated as the result of this iteration?  Neither.  The results need to be calculated simultaneously, and this the computer cannot do.  To get the best possible approximation you want the time step and integration error for the sim to be as small as possible.  As the time step and integration errors approach zero (get very very small) the sim should approach reality (in theory).

Look at the time step (Animation Step) and Integration Error in this sim.  They are at .25 s and 1.627 meters respectively.  The defaults for these values are .05 s and .010 meters.  So they have both been made purposely larger to introduce more error?  Of course the result is a poor approximation of reality.  Set them back to default or lower (better) and this accelerating wheel does not accelerate.

It is easy to cheat the software.  That is why I advise using the smallest time step and integration errors that you can stand while designing.  The closer you get to what appears to be a desired effect, the smaller you should make these numbers.  Big values are only useful for gross and quick approximations like testing two similar concepts (like small slot profile changes) to see quickly if one idea is better than another.

M.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: AquariuZ on April 14, 2009, 03:16:46 PM
BTW: Whatever happened to Bob and his piston gravity wheel? That one looked really promising.

Was it/he buried?

Was it ever modeled?
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: AquariuZ on April 14, 2009, 03:20:26 PM
Look at the time step (Animation Step) and Integration Error in this sim.  They are at .25 s and 1.627 meters respectively.  The defaults for these values are .05 s and .010 meters.  So they have both been made purposely larger to introduce more error?  Of course the result is a poor approximation of reality.  Set them back to default or lower (better) and this accelerating wheel does not accelerate.

Even better! See previous.

It is so easy to mis tweak, I think niente (author) may have hoaxed this particular model on purpose just to ruffle some feathers.....

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...
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Cherryman on April 14, 2009, 03:40:48 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
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Cherryman 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
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: mindsweeper 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?
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: mondrasek 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.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Cherryman on April 14, 2009, 04:00:28 PM
Talking about strange behaviour...  Why is this going the wrong side???

Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus 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.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: 3decimal14 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.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus 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.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: mondrasek 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.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus 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.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Cherryman 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

Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: mondrasek 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.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: mindsweeper 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.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Cherryman 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
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: hartiberlin 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.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: mrsean2k 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.

Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: hartiberlin on April 14, 2009, 07:19:41 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

Interesting design,
so you just want to pu the ball via the "flying" ramp into the height at 6 o´clock, so that it could be picked up by
the next lever arm ?
Please explain more in detail.
Many thanks.
P.S. For those who don´t have WM2D it would be good to also post a small screenshot at least.

Regards, Stefan.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: persume on April 14, 2009, 07:33:50 PM
@Stefan



I totally agree Abeling is hiding something, because at best you have a very low loss construction like one of the models I posted earlier. Not overunity. AZ

Maybe he has just made a mistake; isn't it possible that a free energy inventor might make a mistake?

I just love how some of you guys go to whatever lengths to justify your belief in free energy. Don't get me wrong, I am not negating the possibility of free energy, but I let the interest of it stand on its own. I find the need to justify it by coming up with new catch phrases like overunity, or retheorizing over and over again forces like gravity and comparing them to wind, or quoting some notible scientist who at one time may have considered perpetual motion ( what good thinker wouldn't have ) to be quite frankly - idiotic.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: hartiberlin on April 14, 2009, 07:37:04 PM
I just made a test with WM2D regarding the centrifugal forces.
I just took a 5 Kg weight and applied to it a "sloted" path.
The weight starts rolling down to the right side the slope down,
then turns inside the slot and comes back up the left slope.

If it gains energy by the centrifugal forces, it should go over the top and continue.

Well, it does it 4 or 5 times over the top and then the next time it does not take the top,
but goes the other way back.

So as potential energy is converted into kinetic energy, this is a balance and
it seems, the centrifugal forces do not put additional energy into the system.
Why it goes for the first 5 times over the top is probably a calculation error of WM2D, cause
no friction was applied.

Regards, Stefan.
Attached is also the WM2D file
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: mondrasek on April 14, 2009, 08:06:31 PM

Why it goes for the first 5 times over the top is probably a calculation error of WM2D, cause
no friction was applied.


Decrease the animation step to get more accurate results and it does not go over the top.

Centrifugal Force is not a true force.  It is the effect of changing the direction of travel of an object (that should go straight) into a circular path.  Changing the path of a weight into a circle requires and acceleration towards the axle.  CF is the equal and opposite acceleration that points away from the axle of a wheel.

When you spin a weight attached to a string around your head, you are applying a force by holding the string.  This force is equal and opposite to the fictional force called Centrifugal Force.  In truth you are providing an acceleration that bends the path of the weight on the end of the string into a circle.  If you let go of the string the weight will travel in a straight line as is the nature of objects.  At the moment of release, the fictional CF also disapears.

So it takes energy, or proper construction (a wheel) to create CF.  It is not a Force that we can use to extract energy, or so we are taught.

Not trying to be negative here, just offer the classical explanation for those who might wnat to read it.  I too look for the "imposible"  way to harvest Gravity and CF.

M.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: 0c on April 14, 2009, 08:40:13 PM
For some adventuresome WM2D user:

Create a 1 meter diameter wheel that has eight 1Kg steel balls/weights held inside at the periphery. Provide a ball escape mechanism for at least one ball which can be triggered to release the ball. Mount the wheel so the lowest portion is 1 meter from a perfectly elastic surface which is 90 degrees to the escape trajectory (you may need to try a couple runs to get the correct trajectory).

Now spin the wheel at 100 RPM and release one ball at the bottom (6:00 position) and see how high it bounces. Also note any changes to wheel rotation when the ball escapes. Now repeat the experiment at 200 RPM and note the difference.

The purpose of this experiment is to see how much energy (momentum) the ball acquires from the centrifugal force of the spinning wheel. We all know what the gravitational effects will be.

A few pages back, I described a system where the balls actually leave the wheel at the bottom and are recaptured at the top. In that concept, there are only weights on one side of the wheel, once it gets up to operating speed. This simple experiment should provide some information about weight and wheel behavior under these conditions, which might be useful for determining the feasibility of using a ball return mechanism external to the rotating device.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Cherryman on April 14, 2009, 08:47:45 PM
For some adventuresome WM2D user:

Create a 1 meter diameter wheel that has eight 1Kg steel balls/weights held inside at the periphery. Provide a ball escape mechanism for at least one ball which can be triggered to release the ball. Mount the wheel so the lowest portion is 1 meter from a perfectly elastic surface which is 90 degrees to the escape trajectory (you may need to try a couple runs to get the correct trajectory).

Now spin the wheel at 100 RPM and release one ball at the bottom (6:00 position) and see how high it bounces. Also note any changes to wheel rotation when the ball escapes. Now repeat the experiment at 200 RPM and note the difference.

The purpose of this experiment is to see how much energy (momentum) the ball acquires from the centrifugal force of the spinning wheel. We all know what the gravitational effects will be.

A few pages back, I described a system where the balls actually leave the wheel at the bottom and are recaptured at the top. In that concept, there are only weights on one side of the wheel, once it gets up to operating speed. This simple experiment should provide some information about weight and wheel behavior under these conditions, which might be useful for determining the feasibility of using a ball return mechanism external to the rotating device.

Again.. That comes down to the same...  See here a ball leaving the wheel:

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

Although it happens on the inside, it still is disconnected from the wheel by the ramp. You can actually see it also flying away from the rod, so it's floating free for a short period and then rejoins the wheel at around 12 o clock.

I tried that in different setups.. But it will loose speed eventually.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: 0c on April 14, 2009, 09:01:08 PM
Again.. That comes down to the same...  See here a ball leaving the wheel:

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

Although it happens on the inside, it still is disconnected from the wheel by the ramp. You can actually see it also flying away from the rod, so it's floating free for a short period and then rejoins the wheel at around 12 o clock.

I tried that in different setups.. But it will loose speed eventually.

In your example, the ball/weight is still supported by the spokes of the wheel on the way up. I want to see how the ball and wheel behave if the ball is ejected at the bottom so there is no interaction with the wheel until it rejoins at the top. And is there a change in the ball's energy level if the wheel is rotating at 200 RPM vs 100 RPM.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: mondrasek on April 14, 2009, 09:07:00 PM
Now spin the wheel at 100 RPM and release one ball at the bottom (6:00 position) and see how high it bounces. Also note any changes to wheel rotation when the ball escapes. Now repeat the experiment at 200 RPM and note the difference.

The ball will not drop straight down if released at the 6 o'clock position.  At that position it is traveling parallel to the surface of the Earth (same direction as an arrow from 3 to 9 o'clock).  Release it there and it will now be able to be acted on by the acceleration of gravity and so its path will arc towards Earth.  If you speed up the wheel to 200 RPM you will be traveling twice as fast in the horizontal when you release at 6 o'clock.  So it will travel further out away from the wheel as it arcs downward due to gravity.

If you want the ball on a clockwise wheel to drop straight down, you must release it at 3 o'clock.  If it does go straight down it would also indicate that the Centrifugal Force disappeared the moment the ball was released as well.  Nice experiment for that purpose I suppose.

M.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Cherryman on April 14, 2009, 09:07:41 PM
In your example, the ball/weight is still supported by the spokes of the wheel on the way up. I want to see how the ball and wheel behave if the ball is ejected at the bottom so there is no interaction with the wheel until it rejoins at the top. And is there a change in the ball's energy level if the wheel is rotating at 200 RPM vs 100 RPM.

The beam is the hollow droplet shaped curve, when you look carefully you will see that the ball leaves the beam due to a higher spead the ball gains from the curved blocker.  But feel free to test it yourself.

About 30 pages back i posted this one..  It has a start speed of 1 for half a second and after settling it will run between 1.22 and 0.88 quite a while. 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fqDWtxSMbCc&feature=channel_page
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Cherryman on April 14, 2009, 09:12:43 PM
Here you can see what a dropping ball from 3 'o clock is capable of  (Without extra force or speed)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=14mzbSkybvk&feature=channel_page
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on April 14, 2009, 09:20:13 PM
@mrsean2k,

When I mentioned parallel processing it was regarding @mondrasek’s remark that calculations are done sequentially, one element at a time. I was thinking maybe if these calculations are done in parallel that would avoid the out of sequence problem we were talking about – calculations done for an element when the conditions for the other elements have changed. Otherwise, in terms of accuracy you’re undoubtedly right. No wonder why difference equations are not exactly differential equations.

@mondrasek,

Probably saying that centrifugal force is not a true force is a bit confusing because the body does experience it. The emphasis should be on the fact which you clearly point out that it is a reaction to a force for which you have to spend energy to create. That is, centrifugal force cannot be used to create energy. On the contrary, energy is spent to have centrifugal force appear. This has to be understood well because it causes a lot of confusion and false expectations, which is evident even in the latest posts.

On the other hand, it is true that the centrifugal force may help in aligning the elements in a favorable way which would allow them to produce energy by some other route, if such route exists. That is, one may think, some energy (part of the previously produced such) is spent to align the elements properly so that further greater energy is produced. That’s, of course, easier said then done when continuous production of such excess energy is aimed at (discontinuously, the way to produce excess energy is already clear).

Maybe I should add, if a proper construction to produce excess energy continuously exists, it should be enough for the aligning the elements properly for its production. One doesn't need centrifugal force to do that alignment. So focusing on the centrifugal force doesn't help much, if at all, when continuous production of excess energy is the goal.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: AquariuZ on April 14, 2009, 09:23:56 PM
So the wheel is not bothered by the ball in the upmovement.. 
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GBygA2vOHx4&feature=channel

That is just what Abeling mentions in the patent. Effortless ascend of the weights.

This is worth taking another look at for sure... Maybe not restricting the ball when it leaves the ramp...

On thing is for sure, "scissoring it" or squeezing it like a cherry pit (no pun intended) between thumb and finger fails miserable due to the friction generated.

No friction - no real acceleration. The more friction the more loss.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: AquariuZ on April 14, 2009, 09:28:54 PM
Talking about strange behaviour...  Why is this going the wrong side???

Same thing, the mass of the wedge is too small. wm2d has a problem with that for some reason.

Set the mass to one KG and it works fine
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Cherryman on April 14, 2009, 09:29:27 PM


This is worth taking another look at for sure... Maybe not restricting the ball when it leaves the ramp...



Grinzz...  That is the basic of the KAD system al along..  Those are from the drawings i started with.. , my first prototype i built with my daughter from lego and an old harddisk and a few rails was built on this principle  ( didn't work, in case you're wondering)   ;D It seems that we do not only play with circles, whe also a walking around in them  :o
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: mondrasek on April 14, 2009, 09:35:42 PM
Probably saying that centrifugal force is not a true force is a bit confusing because the body does experience it.

I'm not thrilled with calling CF "not a true force", but I have seen it expressed as that, or as a "fictional force".

Lets try this example.  You are driving straight in your car.  If we remove all friction you will continue in a straight line forever.  When you initiate a turn by turning the steering wheel, you feel CF, right?  It pushes you away from the way you want to turn.  But what is really happening is your body is trying to continue in a straight line.  There is no force pushing on you.  So CF is fictitious.  What you notice is the change in direction of your reference frame which is the car.  It turns due to a force, but your body does not want to.  What you are experiencing is a resistance to a change in direction due to a force.

I agree it is very confusing to use those terms.  But it might also be more confusing for the term Centrifugal Force to have ever been used in the first place.  Maybe it should have been the Centrifugal Sensation?

M.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: AquariuZ on April 14, 2009, 09:38:06 PM
The mass of poly 2 was incorrect, I set it to 6 and it worked as it should.

Not incorrect, but just very very small because it was a really thin body.

Really small masses or forces are displayed in scientific notation for example 0.00000001 KG

would be displayed by wm2d as: 1.0e-8 kg
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: AquariuZ on April 14, 2009, 09:41:30 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

But... the force to bring up a ball via a ramp will never be enough to bring it up the the same level it started on right?
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on April 14, 2009, 09:41:36 PM
Yeah, that's how it's usually presented in the standard texts, as not being a true force and that I don't think is correct. The correct way to express it is exactly the way you've explained it -- it's a reaction (a true force) to the force you apply, spending energy for that, to change the direction of motion from linear. Therefore, energy cannot be "extracted" by using centrifugal force.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: mondrasek on April 14, 2009, 09:46:45 PM
Not incorrect, but just very very small because it was a really thin body.

Really small masses or forces are displayed in scientific notation for example 0.00000001 KG

would be displayed by wm2d as: 1.0e-8 kg

We might need to be conscious of how many significant digits WM2D maintains.  If it is rounding or truncating after, say, 8 digits, having elements with very large and very tiny property values in the same sim might result in situations where a calculation is performed that exceeds this limitation.  Certain physics predictions might actually become truncated in effect.  One way to prevent this problem (if it exists) is to keep all properties in the same logical range, say like from .0001 up to 9999.

Just a thought.

M.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: AquariuZ on April 14, 2009, 09:48:35 PM
Grinzz...  That is the basic of the KAD system al along..  Those are from the drawings i started with.. , my first prototype i built with my daughter from lego and an old harddisk and a few rails was built on this principle  ( didn't work, in case you're wondering)   ;D It seems that we do not only play with circles, whe also a walking around in them  :o

Good ideas take a while to sink in, especialy for bubble heads like me

Thanks for insisting  ;D
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: AquariuZ on April 14, 2009, 09:58:17 PM
We might need to be conscious of how many significant digits WM2D maintains.  If it is rounding or truncating after, say, 8 digits, having elements with very large and very tiny property values in the same sim might result in situations where a calculation is performed that exceeds this limitation.  Certain physics predictions might actually become truncated in effect.  One way to prevent this problem (if it exists) is to keep all properties in the same logical range, say like from .0001 up to 9999.

Just a thought.

M.

I think it does not truncate but switches to scientific notation for anything with more than three digits after the decimal point..

The bar in the second animation is shown to have a mass of 6.408e+004 or 6.4080 KG or 6408 grams
Then again, it should just have displayed 6.408 kg If I type in just that 6.408 it switches from Standard to custom material. Maybe it does round up to four digits... Who knows?

You know, there is also a switch in there under preferences:

"Prevent model from running faster than realtime" default:on

Hmmmm
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: fletcher on April 14, 2009, 10:09:10 PM
Stefan et al .. IME rigid joints in WM are fine, providing you choose "measurable" rather than "optimised" in the properties box [double click on the joint or go to menu] - ATEOTD WM is a good tool to aid design & help extrapolate likely behaviour - it does not completely replace physical builds [the real simulation & benchmark] or critical thinking, but it can ease the experimenters burden somewhat - in fact quite a lot IMO.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: mondrasek on April 14, 2009, 10:19:22 PM
I think it does not truncate but switches to scientific notation for anything with more than three digits after the decimal point..

Could be, but what if it does truncate?  If it is just keeping the four significant digits that are shown (truncating any further digits calculated) then using very large and small numbers together will mean that the small may have zero effect on the large.  Not a small effect as would be correct, but zero.

This may or may not be something to watch out for.  But when you look at the mass of the 320 M diameter wheel and compare that to the mass of the weight balls in some of the earlier sims and you may see the concern.  Keeping everything in the same logical range only helps to avoid this possible issue.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on April 14, 2009, 10:21:02 PM
Stefan et al .. IME rigid joints in WM are fine, providing you choose "measurable" rather than "optimised" in the properties box [double click on the joint or go to menu] - ATEOTD WM is a good tool to aid design & help extrapolate likely behaviour - it does not completely replace physical builds [the real simulation & benchmark] or critical thinking, but it can ease the experimenters burden somewhat - in fact quite a lot IMO.

Correct. That fixes the problem. I tried it on the several questionable designs. What is this "optimized" anyway? Funny, this change seemed to uncheck the "Prevent the model from running faster than real-time" in Preferences.
Title: REPLY FROM DUTCH GOVERNMENT INFO SERVICE
Post by: AquariuZ on April 14, 2009, 10:22:43 PM
Uw e-mailkenmerk is 235676.
Geachte heer,

Naar aanleiding van uw e-mail, waarin u vraagt of Abeling Beheer B.V. toestemming heeft van het ministerie van VROM voor de bouw van Gewicht Energie Centrales in Nederland, kunnen wij u als volgt informeren. 

Helaas kunnen wij uw vraag niet beantwoorden. Uw e-mail hebben wij daarom voor verdere beantwoording doorgestuurd naar het ministerie van VROM. Om uw vraag goed te kunnen beantwoorden, is het mogelijk dat de beantwoordingtermijn langer is dan de eerder aangegeven twee werkdagen.

 

Wij hopen dat u hier begrip voor heeft.

 
Met vriendelijke groet,

 
Danny Huf

Publieksvoorlichter Postbus 51 Informatiedienst



TRANSLATION

   
Your e-mail reference is 235676.
Sir,

Further to your e-mail, in which you asked whether Abeling Beheer BV has obtained permission of the Ministry of VROM for the construction of Weight Power Plants in the Netherlands, we can inform you as follows.

Unfortunately we can not answer your question. Your e-mail has been forwarded to the Ministry of VROM for further response .It may be possible that the response time is longer than the regular two days.

We hope for your understanding.

 
Best regards,


Danny Huf

Public Information Officer PO Box 51


Waiting then. (not holding breath)
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: AquariuZ on April 14, 2009, 10:26:34 PM
Could be, but what if it does truncate?  If it is just keeping the four significant digits that are shown (truncating any further digits calculated) then using very large and small numbers together will mean that the small may have zero effect on the large.  Not a small effect as would be correct, but zero.

This may or may not be something to watch out for.  But when you look at the mass of the 320 M diameter wheel and compare that to the mass of the weight balls in some of the earlier sims and you may see the concern.  Keeping everything in the same logical range only helps to avoid this possible issue.

You are right ofcourse, Cheryman is still punching out 300 meter diameter wheels.

That would draw some attention from the neighbours, huh.
Title: Re: REPLY FROM DUTCH GOVERNMENT INFO SERVICE
Post by: Cherryman on April 14, 2009, 10:27:23 PM
Uw e-mailkenmerk is 235676.
Geachte heer,

Naar aanleiding van uw e-mail, waarin u vraagt of Abeling Beheer B.V. toestemming heeft van het ministerie van VROM voor de bouw van Gewicht Energie Centrales in Nederland, kunnen wij u als volgt informeren. 

Helaas kunnen wij uw vraag niet beantwoorden. Uw e-mail hebben wij daarom voor verdere beantwoording doorgestuurd naar het ministerie van VROM. Om uw vraag goed te kunnen beantwoorden, is het mogelijk dat de beantwoordingtermijn langer is dan de eerder aangegeven twee werkdagen.

 

Wij hopen dat u hier begrip voor heeft.

 
Met vriendelijke groet,

 
Danny Huf

Publieksvoorlichter Postbus 51 Informatiedienst



TRANSLATION

   
Your e-mail reference is 235676.
Dear mr,

Further to your e-mail, in which you asked whether Abeling Beheer BV has obtained permission of the Ministry of VROM for the construction of Weight Power Plants in the Netherlands, we can inform you as follows.

Unfortunately we can not answer your question. Your e-mail has been forwarded to the Ministry of VROM for further response .It may be possible that the response time is longer than the regular two days.

We hope for your understanding.

 
Best regards,


Danny Huf

Public Information Officer PO Box 51


Waiting then. (not holding breath)

Good work!

And the story continues...    It's becoming a "thriller"   ;D

Now hope you did not wake up a sleepy government official, who suddenly sees that a lower offical has granded the permission...  now he gets youre request... realisez he impact and calls the MIB..  Poor Sjack..   :o

 ;D
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Cherryman on April 14, 2009, 10:30:07 PM
You are right ofcourse, Cheryman is still punching out 300 meter diameter wheels.

That would draw some attention from the neighbours, huh.

Size does matter!   ;D

But i will try to think of rescaling..  The strange thing is that i design in .mm , so somewhere in the conversion from Rhino to DXF there must be an upscaling..

My workflow does'n t like scaling. I like the design in Rhino to be an exact copy of the Design in WM2D, so i can adjust or add easaly and quickly new parts.

But for the sake of free energie i will try to not forget scaling.   

Title: Re: REPLY FROM DUTCH GOVERNMENT INFO SERVICE
Post by: spinner on April 14, 2009, 10:32:54 PM
TRANSLATION   
Your e-mail reference is 235676.
Sir,

Further to your e-mail, in which you asked whether Abeling Beheer BV has obtained permission of the Ministry of VROM for the construction of Weight Power Plants in the Netherlands, we can inform you as follows.

Unfortunately we can not answer your question. Your e-mail has been forwarded to the Ministry of VROM for further response .It may be possible that the response time is longer than the regular two days.

We hope for your understanding.

 Best regards,

Danny Huf

Public Information Officer PO Box 51


Waiting then. (not holding breath)

Thanks for your translation!

I'm not holding my breath, either.  :(  It seems that at least the guy which answered your e-mail doesn't know anything about the Abeling ...

Cheers!
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: rlortie on April 14, 2009, 10:39:28 PM
I'm not thrilled with calling CF "not a true force", but I have seen it expressed as that, or as a "fictional force".

Lets try this example.  You are driving straight in your car.  If we remove all friction you will continue in a straight line forever.  When you initiate a turn by turning the steering wheel, you feel CF, right?  It pushes you away from the way you want to turn.  But what is really happening is your body is trying to continue in a straight line.  There is no force pushing on you.  So CF is fictitious.  What you notice is the change in direction of your reference frame which is the car.  It turns due to a force, but your body does not want to.  What you are experiencing is a resistance to a change in direction due to a force.

I agree it is very confusing to use those terms.  But it might also be more confusing for the term Centrifugal Force to have ever been used in the first place.  Maybe it should have been the Centrifugal Sensation?

I am from the old school!  CF a fictional force and I shall attempt my explanation as to IMO.

When you are traveling in a straight line, kinetic induced inertia tend to keep the trajectory in a straight path. When you turn the wheel, you are not being "pushed" by CF , but rather pulled by inertia wishing you to stay on a straight path.

Shoot an arrow straight up, ask yourself what roll does CF portray when the arrow runs out of inertia? There is no CF, the arrow stops and then starts it path back to the ground.

A lot of researchers have tried to utilize CF as a means to accelerate a gravity driven device. Plain and simply put there is no CF without inertial acceleration, and a physical CpF containment to keep it radial. 

Ralph Lortie
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: mondrasek on April 14, 2009, 10:53:51 PM
But i will try to think of rescaling..  The strange thing is that i design in .mm , so somewhere in the conversion from Rhino to DXF there must be an upscaling..
Actually, Rhino just uses the common drafting base unit of 1 being 1 mm.  WM2D uses the base unit of physics of 1 being 1 meter.  No units are passed between the two programs, just the value 1.  They both assign their own units.  Been a problem for CAD guys for years, but mostly between 1 being 1mm and 1 being 1 inch.
My workflow does'n t like scaling. I like the design in Rhino to be an exact copy of the Design in WM2D, so i can adjust or add easaly and quickly new parts.
It sucks!  Making all of your desired changes in CAD, scaling, and then importing takes patience and practice.  If you export out of WM2D to transfer changes from there back to CAD you may loose precision (I did going to ACAD).

I keep one master CAD file.  When I make a change, I save the whole, and then erase everything but the changes, and save again as a temp file.  I then import just the temp file items into WM2D.  If I make a change in WM2D that I want to keep I export,  and use that file as a reference to update my master CAD, but I always redraw in CAD, not just accept the WM2D geometry as part of the CAD.

You can always scale your Rhino back up and down by .001 and 1000 as many times as you want and it does not degrade the precision.  Just another step or three.

I'm sure others have better ways and you will of course find your own.

M.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: 0c on April 14, 2009, 11:18:41 PM
The ball will not drop straight down if released at the 6 o'clock position.  At that position it is traveling parallel to the surface of the Earth (same direction as an arrow from 3 to 9 o'clock).  Release it there and it will now be able to be acted on by the acceleration of gravity and so its path will arc towards Earth.  If you speed up the wheel to 200 RPM you will be traveling twice as fast in the horizontal when you release at 6 o'clock.  So it will travel further out away from the wheel as it arcs downward due to gravity.

If you want the ball on a clockwise wheel to drop straight down, you must release it at 3 o'clock.  If it does go straight down it would also indicate that the Centrifugal Force disappeared the moment the ball was released as well.  Nice experiment for that purpose I suppose.

M.

I didn't claim the ball would drop straight down. Does the ball exit with enough energy that it can be returned to the top of the wheel? If so we can constantly have weights on one side of the wheel and not on the other side. See how that ball exits at 100 RPM. Can it be returned to the top through some arrangement of chutes? or spings? or teeter totters? How about at 200 RPM?

Just humor me.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: fletcher on April 15, 2009, 12:17:52 AM
Correct. That fixes the problem. I tried it on the several questionable designs. What is this "optimized" anyway? Funny, this change seemed to uncheck the "Prevent the model from running faster than real-time" in Preferences.

Can't help you there - just a novice user - some suggestions about other concerns though - I select 4 decimal places in >view>numbers & units - any part not essential to the operation or investigation I make transparent [>window>appearance>pattern>no] & in properties give it a tiny value of 0.0001 units [whatever units you are using] - then you can go to >view>system center of mass [make other things transparent to see if required] - then using the zoom function you can watch a simplified version of how the constituent parts that have mass & inertia interact & affect the torque etc, & of course, where the system center of mass is in relation to the center of rotation at all times - disregard if this is redundant information.

Keeps things simple, clean & tidy, IMO.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on April 15, 2009, 12:47:08 AM
Can't help you there - just a novice user - some suggestions about other concerns though - I select 4 decimal places in >view>numbers & units - any part not essential to the operation or investigation I make transparent [>window>appearance>pattern>no] & in properties give it a tiny value of 0.0001 units [whatever units you are using] - then you can go to >view>system center of mass [make other things transparent to see if required] - then using the zoom function you can watch a simplified version of how the constituent parts that have mass & inertia interact & affect the torque etc, & of course, where the system center of mass is in relation to the center of rotation at all times - disregard if this is redundant information.

Keeps things simple, clean & tidy, IMO.

Thanks a lot. Very useful suggestions. As for "novice user", you can't beat me to that. It's my third or fourth day using this. lol.

Now, having a slight idea as to the workings of this useful (?) engineering tool wm2d, I'm finding that the greatest challenge is the drawing of the intricate parts of Abeling's design. Well, trying to do it in AutoCAD but, boy, that ain't easy for someone like me who has never worked with it. It isn't at all straightforward, let alone intuitive. And you have to click three times more for the same thing you'd do in other drawing programs with ease. Well, I guess the usefulness of the dxf files for a direct CNC manufacturing is the price for studying this cumbersome thing (or the other way round ... whatever).
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: gyulasun on April 15, 2009, 12:53:49 AM

Hans,

Do you have any of Constantinesco's patents. Would be interesting to take a look.


Omnibus,

I recall my earlier reply in another thread where Constantinesco's patents granted before 1922-23 era were also asked for, here it is:

http://www.overunity.com/index.php?topic=3354.msg165174#msg165174

And here is a link to all his patents available at the European Patent Office:

http://v3.espacenet.com/searchResults?locale=en_EP&ST=quick&IA=Constantinesco&compact=false&DB=EPODOC

He had over 300 different patents,  maybe Hans could be of help on pointing to some,  where either the Milkovic setup or the wheel discussed here are in same way involved.  I simply have no time to wade through the 300 patents.

rgds, Gyula
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Cherryman on April 15, 2009, 12:56:38 AM
Does anyone know if there is a program like WM2D that can handle 3D?

WM3D  would be nice. i have a new idea.. and i cannot simulate this in 2d i guess..

Anyway does there is a 3D program with similar features around? 
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: fletcher on April 15, 2009, 01:06:10 AM
Omnibus .. I have a friend who is very experienced in using wm & he's given me a few tips over the years, for ease of management & reliability - one of the things he does is to [as broli & others have suggested] is reduce the iteration factor down as low as bareable & up the calculation accuracy as high as your patience will allow [approx 200-250 frames is a start] - also if you have the message "inconsistent physical constraints" occurring then it usually means that two parts are overlapping - the brief explanation is that no two parts can physically exists in the same space so you get erroneous energy entering the program pushing them apart - take care with the placement of parts by using extreme zoom if you have to.

He also prefers to import odd or complex shapes etc from autocad etc [dxf files etc] rather than build them with the polygon function - I don't use other programs & import but I see a lot here do - he also cross checks results that seem unusual by driving the wm sim via an excel spreadsheet for inputs, as a cross reference - that is, if you want to bother or you think there might be something fishy going on.

His one mantra to me has always been SIMPLIFY, SIMPLIFY, SIMPLIFY - cuts down opportunities for errors & reduces calculation time - often there are multiple ways to simulate the same thing, some less complex than others - if they all give similar results then the reliability goes up, IMO.

If I remember anything else of relevance I'll mention it !
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on April 15, 2009, 01:07:33 AM
Now, @Cherryman, you're really sinking into this which is getting to be frightening. The MiB's are really gonna get you this time. lol.

Listen, let's first "replicate" Abeling's patent as close as possible. I'm way off at the beginning of the AutoCAD learning curve, so won't be of any help any time soon. Can you draw the wheel exactly as it is in the patent and then affix it to the barrier of your device EF2000.wm2d, scaled down to 1m diameter? That'll be a good start. No motor, please.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on April 15, 2009, 01:12:34 AM
Omnibus,

I recall my earlier reply in another thread where Constantinesco's patents granted before 1922-23 era were also asked for, here it is:

http://www.overunity.com/index.php?topic=3354.msg165174#msg165174

And here is a link to all his patents available at the European Patent Office:

http://v3.espacenet.com/searchResults?locale=en_EP&ST=quick&IA=Constantinesco&compact=false&DB=EPODOC

He had over 300 different patents,  maybe Hans could be of help on pointing to some,  where either the Milkovic setup or the wheel discussed here are in same way involved.  I simply have no time to wade through the 300 patents.

rgds, Gyula

Thanks Gyula. Hans just sent me Constantinesco's patents. Clearly, however, I'm more interested in the discussion at hand so I'll postpone for now looking into them. Anyway, if what we're discussing is the real thing then it will be a moot point discussing patents such as those of Constantinesco anyway.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on April 15, 2009, 01:17:11 AM
@fletcher,

Quote
reduce the iteration factor down as low as bareable & up the calculation accuracy as high as your patience will allow [approx 200-250 frames is a start]

Where do you actually click to do that, especially to control the number of frames? Also where are the data located to export them into Excel?
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Cherryman on April 15, 2009, 01:18:50 AM
Now, @Cherryman, you're really sinking into this which is getting to be frightening. The MiB's are really gonna get you this time. lol.

Listen, let's first "replicate" Abeling's patent as close as possible. I'm way off at the beginning of the AutoCAD learning curve, so won't be of any help any time soon. Can you draw the wheel exactly as it is in the patent and then affix it to the barrier of your device EF2000.wm2d? That'll be a good start.

I have seen so may things come by , you will have to show me again wich of Abelings drawing you mean (He ahas a few different ones i belive?) And I will have to look if i can still find (reproduce) the EF2000 swtup.. I do so many things.. it's getting a bit disorganised.

I will see what i can do.

I don't like replication, because if the clue is there then others will notice, so i follow my own path. Sure sometimes i see things from other designs wich are usefull, but i don't really study the designs, i simply look at them and decide on instinct if it has something or not.

When creating them myself ofcourse there will be influence from what i have seen from others, but by re-inventing it myself i think i might find different approaches or angles.. and i'm stubbern!  ;D

Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: fletcher on April 15, 2009, 01:37:38 AM
@fletcher,

Where do you actually click to do that, especially to control the number of frames? Also where are the data located to export them into Excel?

<File>Import/Export     .....    <World>Accuracy>More Choices

Often if we have something of interest we build a physical model & then back engineer the sim to the same dimensions & mass values etc [or as close as reasonable] - then we adjust pin frictions etc until we get a close alignment between real & predictive sim behaviour, as a further cross reference for reliability - so far the behaviour always lines up but I put that down to his skill  ;D   !
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on April 15, 2009, 01:58:00 AM
@Cherryman,

Well, it's usual patentees to hide some crucial aspects of the device or the method so that they can control further negotiations through trade secrets. I don't think this case is any different. It's worth I think for the time being to have the device "replicated" in wm2d as close to the patent as possible. See attached Fig.2 from Abeling's patent and the two examples of wm2d (especially one of them) closest to the patent.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Cherryman on April 15, 2009, 02:10:59 AM
Okey, so you want this design with the blocks from EF2000 , i will see what i can do....

Here is a teaser to keep your mind bussy in the meantime:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tPgezU4ql58&feature=channel_page
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: broli on April 15, 2009, 02:21:07 AM
If you do some force analysis you can get an idea why these ramp setups won't work. That patent is a joke. Any design that uses a ramp now is patent infringement, that's how vague his patent is and I'm pretty sure is deliberate.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Cherryman on April 15, 2009, 02:39:04 AM
@Cherryman,

Well, it's usual patentees to hide some crucial aspects of the device or the method so that they can control further negotiations through trade secrets. I don't think this case is any different. It's worth I think for the time being to have the device "replicated" in wm2d as close to the patent as possible. See attached Fig.2 from Abeling's patent and the two examples of wm2d (especially one of them) closest to the patent.

Well Omnibus, here is an almost exact copy (I used the original patent drawing as an underlay) as you requested... 

But i warn you... the design doesn't make any sence!

Anyway, you will have to make the restrains yourself, that is a good exercise  ;D
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Cherryman on April 15, 2009, 02:41:24 AM
If you do some force analysis you can get an idea why these ramp setups won't work. That patent is a joke. Any design that uses a ramp now is patent infringement, that's how vague his patent is and I'm pretty sure is deliberate.

I Think he does not have a working model yet, he just thinks the rampo idear might work, asked for a patent and is facing now the same problems as we do..  With the exception that he has some investors behind it...

( Because he doesn't like publicity and doesn't want any money, i do believe that he himself is thinking it will work...  and who knows..  It might work.. But not from those patent drawings)
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on April 15, 2009, 02:57:30 AM
Thanks @Cherryman. That's a good start.

Now that I looked at it I see you've made the rotor consisting of two parts so the rotor as a whole isn't one polygon but two. How do you merge these two parts into one polygon? I've had that problem before but the form was much simpler and I could use the Polygon tool and walk around the contour by hand. Now here the problem is more complex. Is there a way to merge these two polygons in WM2D or I should export it into AutoCAD and try to do it there (have no idea how).

Also, the scaling down from the current 140m has to be done too. That I already seem to have the grasp for in AutoCAD. The merging of polygons, however, is a persistent problem.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Cherryman on April 15, 2009, 03:27:43 AM
Thanks @Cherryman. That's a good start.

Now that I looked at it I see you've made the rotor consisting of two parts so the rotor as a whole isn't one polygon but two. How do you merge these two parts into one polygon? I've had that problem before but the form was much simpler and I could use the Polygon tool and walk around the contour by hand. Now here the problem is more complex. Is there a way to merge these two polygons in WM2D or I should export it into AutoCAD and try to do it there (have no idea how).

Also, the scaling down from the current 140m has to be done too. That I already seem to have the grasp for in AutoCAD. The merging of polygons, however, is a persistent problem.

You do not need to merge the polygons, because you then will not get any balls inside (At least i don't know how to do that in WM2D, Just "pinpoint" them both on the same background circel. 
Scaling.. hmm forgot again. Well as you have autocad. Go in WM2D to file: Export and then select as filetype .dxf  Then you can import it in autocad and change anything you want and export it back again.

Going to sleep now, good luck.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: LarryC on April 15, 2009, 04:31:08 AM
Centrifugal sling slam force versus Centrifugal force:


Bob Kostoff stated:

Once the weights are past the ballance point they accelerate and generate many times their weight that creats the the energy needed.


Sjack stated:

In the topleft of the system the weight is accelerated (like with shot put). The weight is moving faster than the system, and as the system catches the weight it is propelled forward.


In my post at http://www.overunity.com/index.php?topic=2326.msg153063#msg153063, I showed the actual force difference in a physical testbed between a CF sling slam force and CF force at the same distance from center:

With 2.7 lbs for each weight box:
 
CF slam 15 10 lbs/ounces
CF static  5 5 lbs/ounces
 

With 4.7 lbs for each weight box:
 
CF slam 25 4 lbs/ounces
CF static  7 3 lbs/ounces



I then asked if any WM2D user could replicate to see how close it can come to real world testing.
No response, just a ton more WM2D issues.

Please don't respond with anymore CF force definitions as they are all well known including the formulas by anybody with a physics book or Google ability. CF sling slam force calculations are not, so can WM2D do them or not?


Bottom line, if WM2D cannot do CF sling slam force calculations then it will not be able to reproduce Sjack's gravity machine performance.


Regards, Larry

 

 

Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on April 15, 2009, 05:05:47 AM
@LarryC,

As was already explained, that additional force could not have come from the centrifugal force (slim slam, static or whatever you wanna call it). In fact, if true that there's such difference, it has nothing to do with the centrifugal force which needs energy to be spent for its appearance rather than energy release. Reading standard sources and sources from net search engines is good but isn't enough. One thing is to read a definition quite another is to actually understand it.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: LarryC on April 15, 2009, 06:10:10 AM
@LarryC,

As was already explained, that additional force could not have come from the centrifugal force (slim slam, static or whatever you wanna call it). In fact, if true that there's such difference, it has nothing to do with the centrifugal force which needs energy to be spent for its appearance rather than energy release. Reading standard sources and sources from net search engines is good but isn't enough. One thing is to read a definition quite another is to actually understand it.

Let me get this straight. The statements of the main two inventors about CF slam energy should be ignored as it was already explained better by who???

Also, you are saying I don't understand my UNIVERSITY PHYSICS book Sixth edition Fig 5-12 page 98 about centrifugal force. I hope they don't take my degree away based on your flimsy word.

Back to the original question in spite of your obvious missdirection attempts. Can you please give me an answer on my last WM2D question?

Regards, Larry
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: AquariuZ on April 15, 2009, 06:21:11 AM
Larry may have a point. I just found something which can be replicated in wm2d (hope it is not an error) and may very well be Abelings trick.

Keywords acceleration AND spinning weights which hit a constraint (carrier) at a certain angle of attack generates a "jolt". Model tomorrow, looking promising. I´m off as it is 06:20 and work soon.

Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on April 15, 2009, 06:28:46 AM
@LarryC,

Like I said, wm2d won't prove that energy can be extracted from a centrifugal force, no matter how you prefer to qualify it. Therefore, it's a useless exercise to experiment on that even virtually, using wm2d. Also, the fact that you cite a standard textbook, even if you cite the exact edition and page is no proof that you have actually understood the concept. The fact that you're continuing to ask the centrifugal force to be studied as the source of energy proves that you haven't. The statements of the main two inventors about CF slam energy should also be ignored.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on April 15, 2009, 06:29:32 AM
Larry may have a point. I just found something which can be replicated in wm2d (hope it is not an error) and may very well be Abelings trick.

Keywords acceleration AND spinning weights which hit a constraint (carrier) at a certain angle of attack generates a "jolt". Model tomorrow, looking promising. I´m off as it is 06:20 and work soon.



Make no mistake, Larry doesn't have a point.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: rlortie on April 15, 2009, 06:56:22 AM
Please do not stop the merry-go-round! I am an old man an require the assistance of centrifugal force to disembark.  I will pay you back later  ;D

Is this a thread on Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel or "How to simulate CF in WM2D??? May I suggest you use the acronym "wm2d' for Wood Metal & 2 Days, I am sure you will find that CF will not sustain the design in question.   

Ralph
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Grimer on April 15, 2009, 09:43:27 AM
The Abeling Wheel works.

The clue as to why and how is in Figure 6 of the patent.

The Bessler wheel also worked.

The clue is in that quote that gets bandied about on the Bessler forum.

Ezechiel  1:16. And the appearance of the wheels, and the work of them was like
the appearance of the sea:  and the four had all one likeness:  and their
appearance and their work was as it were a wheel in the midst of a
wheel.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: AquariuZ on April 15, 2009, 11:22:31 AM
Here is the model I referred to last night. I just made it pretty.

Regular scale, all real world parameters and accuracy active as far as I can tell.

Imagine a weight receiving spin because it is pulled by gravity along a ramp. It hits a barrier at an angle and transfers the spin to that barrier. Experiment by turning the spoke more and more parallel to the ramp in small increments and watch V0 for the barrier. Pause directly after hit to see full translation of spin. At a certain angle, a significant "jolt" is given to the barrier, which is disproportionate to the momentum of the dumbbell axle.

A hint: the optimal strike angle seems to be near 0.579 rad for the barrier (resulting in V0 = -4.256)

If this is not a bug in wm2d this may be where the extra "energy" comes from: the translation of spin via a specific angle of attack. I am currently trying to build this into another model to show acceleration of the barrier.

Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Cherryman on April 15, 2009, 11:26:52 AM
Here is the model I referred to last night. I just made it pretty.

Regular scale, all real world parameters and accuracy active as far as I can tell.

Imagine a weight receiving spin because it is pulled by gravity along a ramp. It hits a barrier at an angle and transfers the spin to that barrier. Experiment by turning the spoke more and more parallel to the ramp in small increments and watch V0 for the barrier. Pause directly after hit to see full translation of spin. At a certain angle, a significant "jolt" is given to the barrier, which is disproportionate to the momentum of the dumbbell axle.

A hint: the optimal strike angle seems to be near 0.600 rad for the barrier

If this is not a bug in wm2d this may be where the extra "energy" comes from: the translation of spin via a specific angle of attack. I am currently trying to build this into another model to show acceleration of the barrier.



It looks good Aquariuz, but where or how is the weight lifted back up again?
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: broli on April 15, 2009, 11:57:13 AM
READ THIS FIRST BEFORE RUNNING MODEL

AquariuZ, this is interesting. I have been quiet about this but I have been experimenting with this kind of systems. The model below is a  lever with two weights. One weight is further than the center, the one closer to the center is restricted only to move up and down AND can slide back and forth in the direction of the lever. The right model on the other hand has no vertical restriction so the weight can only move back and forth along the lever.

The interesting thing and what force analysis shows is that when restricted like that there's a much larger torque that when you just pretend to calculate the weight at  certain distance from the center. First of all this is the big mistake people make with these rail/ramp designs. But on the other hand how can this be exploited and this is what I'm trying to figure out. Mainly

Quote
Johann E. E. Bessler:

"A great craftsman would be that man who can 'lightly' cause a heavy weight to fly upwards! Who can make a pound-weight rise as 4 ounces fall, or 4 pounds rise as 16 ounces fall. If he can sort that out, the motion will perpetuate itself. But if he can't, then his hard work shall be all in vain."

In the below wm2d file I challenge you to predict first what would happen to the left model before hitting the run button. Both masses are equal and the pivot point is closer to one so you should use your lever logic but then also be amazed to what really happens.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: AquariuZ on April 15, 2009, 12:07:35 PM
Well that did not take long.

Using one of Cherrymans wheels here another example of a translation of spin onto the wheel under a certain angle.

Optimal position of the wheel in this configuration is around 0 = 0.100 rad which gives a (whopping) jolt of -0.228 rad/s to the wheel.

Again, real world params active. NOT TO SCALE.

Bug or not, with this I can build an accelerating wheel. I will build one now with a three meter wheel.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: AquariuZ on April 15, 2009, 12:50:29 PM
Dont rush cherryman
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Cherryman on April 15, 2009, 12:57:20 PM
Dont rush cherryman

With what?

Grinzz...  Well I'm working on two things at the same time...  Not good, i should focus on one.  I had a taught last night about those dumbells (bars) maybe they are not aligned and not only uses as shifting balance but also at the same time as there own lever. But that's becoming difficult 3D Stuff

The other project i post now.. It is not finished, but you cab see the idea behind it. The trick is a steady feedding, and more balls (weights) has to be weighting in a line to keep the feeding on a regular timing.

File attached  (Not working yet, just the concept)
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Cherryman on April 15, 2009, 12:58:44 PM
And Aquarius, i see the force you're setup generates.. But still don't understand how you get the ball back up..  Am I missing something here?  ???
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: AquariuZ on April 15, 2009, 01:01:09 PM
And Aquarius, i see the force you're setup generates.. But still don't understand how you get the ball back up..  Am I missing something here?  ???

You can easily do it using your gear example
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Cherryman on April 15, 2009, 01:05:40 PM
You can easily do it using your gear example

Aha, now i understand!  Hmm  This is worth looking into further. 

Good luck!
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: broli on April 15, 2009, 01:06:52 PM
Aqariuz I tweaked your angle spin wheel a bit by adding energy calculations. The input energy comes from the potential energy of the weight while the total energy output is equal to the kinetic energy of the weight and rotational energy of wheel. There's then also a cop calculation and it's very overunity. But I don't fully trust these numbers as the simulation is filled with polygonal shapes which I don't trust. I would try to primitize it  :P.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Cherryman on April 15, 2009, 01:12:34 PM
Aqariuz I tweaked your angle spin wheel a bit by adding energy calculations. The input energy comes from the potential energy of the weight while the total energy output is equal to the kinetic energy of the weight and rotational energy of wheel. There's then also a cop calculation and it's very overunity. But I don't fully trust these numbers as the simulation is filled with polygonal shapes which I don't trust. I would try to primitize it  :P.

That sounds promissing!  :)
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Cherryman on April 15, 2009, 01:16:58 PM
You can easily do it using your gear example

We need a feeding system that is connected to the mainwheel, to ensure the right timing of the arriving of the weights...  I guess with having a few weights waiting in line and a kind of "thing" that's getting triggered by the wheel feeds a weight inside at the right time.  I tried several of those feeders.. But still not having a good design..  It can't be that hard..  you will see it in almost any factory with automated production lines..

Anyone got a clue??
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Grimer on April 15, 2009, 01:29:01 PM
Johann E. E. Bessler:

"A great craftsman would be that man who can 'lightly' cause a heavy weight to fly upwards! Who can make a pound-weight rise as 4 ounces fall, or 4 pounds rise as 16 ounces fall. If he can sort that out, the motion will perpetuate itself. But if he can't, then his hard work shall be all in vain."

That says it all doesn't it. Together with the Ezechiel quote

Ezechiel 1:16. And the appearance of the wheels, and the work of them was like
the appearance of the sea and the four had all one likeness: and their
appearance and their work was as it were a wheel in the midst of a wheel.  

It shows that Bessler beat Sjack to it by 300 years.

Think about it. What happens to the downwards force on the rack as the cogged weight climbs.

Where does this reaction finish up.

That's right, the ground. And that ain't going anywhere soon.

So the ground "sees" the wheel as having gotten (good Yankee word that  ;) ) heavier.

But if the wheel's gotten heavier, something else must have gotten lighter, eh!

What?

The weights climbing up the rack.

Now go back and read the Bessler quote.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Cherryman on April 15, 2009, 01:53:21 PM
Aquarius, i was trying to test the lifting power of the concept.. It seems to have enough force.. But my cradles are going crazy...  I keep having problems with the program, things moving by themselves.. 

Here is the file
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Cherryman on April 15, 2009, 02:00:26 PM
Oke, If the program isn't fooling us..  Here is proof we can lift a weight back up to its same height...

 :o :o :o

Good work Aquarius!
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: broli on April 15, 2009, 02:04:12 PM
Aqariuz I rebuild your simulation from scratch the "proper" way  :P. I used only primitives to build everything the wheel is only 1m in radius instead of 50m and only weighs 10kg instead of tons while the rolling weight weighs 1kg. Regardless of the amount of animation step chosen the over unity figure remains consistent. The COP can be as little as 1.24 (124%) to 24 (2400%) just by changing the mass of the rolling weight (see below) or the weight of the wheel.

BE AWARE:

If you change the mass of the rolling weight you must not forget to change the Energy input value. The weight of the wheel can be changed freely though. Make the mass of wheel 1 ton and you will see a COP of 28 000%  ;D.

Either there's something to explore here or I made a fatal error  ;D.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: broli on April 15, 2009, 02:29:05 PM
This is really strange. From all my experience with wm2d I have seen nothing like this. Usually the "bug" would go away with proper modeling but this remains consistent. Consistent to a point it makes unbelievable feats. It seems that the static-, kinetic friction and elasticity are the main parameters involved.

Even if the wheel weighs 10,000,000 kg, the 1kg weight manages for some reason to give it an extreme amount of energy on collision which is off the charts. In this specific case it's 7,222,243,630% overunity. But like I said those parameters are crucial. If you reduce them to 0 nothing out of the ordinary happens when you all max them out and make them 1 nothing out of the ordinary happens.

It's only when they reach a specific value where the cop is at its maximum.

Edit: Attached is another model clearly showing overunity instead of numbers. To stay true to the Bessler quote. The red weight is 4 times the yellow weight's mass. As you can see a small mass shoots up a heavy mass quite violently.

I'm on the fence with this one. Wm2d has it quirks but this is pretty amazing to me for such a simple model.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Cherryman on April 15, 2009, 02:48:35 PM
This is really strange. From all my experience with wm2d I have seen nothing like this. Usually the "bug" would go away with proper modeling but this remains consistent. Consistent to a point it makes unbelievable feats. It seems that the static-, kinetic friction and elasticity are the main parameters involved.

Even if the wheel weighs 10,000,000 kg, the 1kg weight manages for some reason to give it an extreme amount of energy on collision which is off the charts. In this specific case it's 7,222,243,630% overunity. But like I said those parameters are crucial. If you reduce them to 0 nothing out of the ordinary happens when you all max them out and make them 1 nothing out of the ordinary happens.

It's only when they reach a specific value where the cop is at its maximum.

Edit: Attached is another model clearly showing overunity instead of numbers. To stay true to the Bessler quote. The red weight is 4 times the yellow weight's mass. As you can see a small mass shoots up a heavy mass quite violently.

I'm on the fence with this one. Wm2d has it quirks but this is pretty amazing to me for such a simple model.

Hi Broli, i rebuilt it as well, but how do i set the weights?  because this doesn't replicate it.

File attached.

Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on April 15, 2009, 02:56:17 PM
@broli,

I'm noticing you still use rigid joints set on Optimized. Recall, it was found out that this way they cause erroneous results and therefore have to be set to Measurable. Try to reset them and see what happens. Also try it with "Prevent model from faster than real-time" unchecked (it's in World>Preferences).
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: broli on April 15, 2009, 03:04:27 PM
@broli,

I'm noticing you still use rigid joints set on Optimized. Recall, it was found out that this way they cause erroneous results and therefore have to set to Measurable. Try to reset them and see what happens. Also try it with "Prevent model from faster than rel-time" unchecked (it's in World>Preferences).
Changing it to measurable killed all the fun ;D. Looks like that was the evil doer in this case. Atleast learned another thing now.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on April 15, 2009, 03:06:02 PM
@Cherryman,

I was playing with the model-replica of Abeling's device you made yesterday. The grooves are so tiny that if used for balls one needs to set ridiculous physical conditions. It appears that the rotor depicted in Fig.2 of the patent is only one half of a pair holding the weights. It very well may be that @AquariuZ is right and these grooves are just the guides for the axes of dumbbells and this has to be modeled in 3D, as you correctly inquired yesterday.

By the way, on the technical side -- do you know by any chance how are the extents preset so "Zoom to extents" can always give you a desired, preset, size?
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Cherryman on April 15, 2009, 03:11:10 PM
@Cherryman,

I was playing with the model-replica of Abeling's device you made yesterday. The grooves are so tiny that if used for balls one needs to set ridiculous physical conditions. It appears that the rotor depicted in Fig.2 of the patent is only one half of a pair holding the weights. It very well may be that @AquariuZ is right and these grooves are just the guides for the axes of dumbbells and this has to be modeled in 3D, as you correctly inquired yesterday.

By the way, on the technical side -- do you know by any chance how are the extents preset so "Zoom to extents" can always give you a desired, preset, size?

Yes.. the "bars" thing could be the clue with Abelings design, although IF the bars are aligned it should be replicable in WM2D as long as the bars are at the same level. 

Sorry i do not now how to set the zoom extends in a fixed way.


@Broli  Hmm thats a shame..    Can you put those wrong settings in my model attached?  I want an "working" device  ;D ;D
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: broli on April 15, 2009, 03:19:18 PM

@Broli  Hmm thats a shame..    Can you put those wrong settings in my model attached?  I want an "working" device  ;D ;D


The only thing that I changed were the joints. I first changed their settings to measurable and then replaced them by pin joints like yours and the overunity stopped. But I noticed in your models that your accuracy is always kept on default. Increase the animation steps to 200 in all models and high if you want to be even more sure and keep the integration error at 0.00001 or even lower. Both can be found at Menu->World->Accuracy.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on April 15, 2009, 03:28:31 PM
@Cherryman,

Quote
IF the bars are aligned it should be replicable in WM2D as long as the bars are at the same level

Seems the bars are at  the same level, judging from Fig. 7, but how do you do it in wm2d? Also, the egg-shaped guide for these bars has to be made precise and smooth. Can you make that egg-shaped guide (groove) exactly with the shape shown in the patent?
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on April 15, 2009, 03:36:06 PM
@Cherryman,

It should be something like what @AquariuZ did (see attached) but with the wheel with the tiny grooves you drew yesterday and a precise oval of the egg-shaped groove. Of course, replacing the balls with dumbbells, if that's possible in wm2d.

Of course, weights, initial velocities, dimensions (200m diameter is too huge), precision and all that should also be set properly.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: hartiberlin on April 15, 2009, 03:53:20 PM
Oke, If the program isn't fooling us..  Here is proof we can lift a weight back up to its same height...

 :o :o :o

Good work Aquarius!

You always use too much weight in your simulations !

A 19.5 Kg weight can not kick a 2000 Kg wheel as the simulation shows.. !
This would not work as the 2000 Kg weight would have much too much inertia.

I just tried to change the weight of the 2 wheels down to 1 or 10 Kg and
then it does not work.

You really need to watch out for your weights.

It seems WM2D has problems with big masses.

Regards, Stefan.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Grimer on April 15, 2009, 04:39:29 PM
Too much cognitive dissonance I suppose.  ::)
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: hartiberlin on April 15, 2009, 04:46:16 PM


Probably saying that centrifugal force is not a true force is a bit confusing because the body does experience it. The emphasis should be on the fact which you clearly point out that it is a reaction to a force for which you have to spend energy to create. That is, centrifugal force cannot be used to create energy. On the contrary, energy is spent to have centrifugal force appear. This has to be understood well because it causes a lot of confusion and false expectations, which is evident even in the latest posts.


Hi Omnibus,
many thanks for setting this clear.
I also mixed this up.
But to speed up a wheel from 100 RPM to 200 RPM you also have to put in energy to do this,
to overcome the inertial rotaional impulse conservation of the masses of the wheel, so you need to
spend a lot of energy to speedit up and to get a higher centifugal force.

So just converting potential energy with a ball going through some circles to create
centrifugal forces and release the ball, when the centrifugal force will have the biggest
value will not get you more energy than you spent by converting the potential height energy
mxgxh.

Regards, Stefan.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on April 15, 2009, 04:59:30 PM
I'm back to practical issues. I think I said it before, this rendition by @AquariuZ (see attached) is probably the closest to the patent. I don't see why, if the dumbbell version would work, this wouldn't. What I think needs to be done first is to find a way to tweak the form of the egg-shaped groove and make it smoother. It is obvious that in its present form the egg-shaped groove is wanting.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: 0c on April 15, 2009, 05:09:30 PM
We need a feeding system that is connected to the mainwheel, to ensure the right timing of the arriving of the weights...  I guess with having a few weights waiting in line and a kind of "thing" that's getting triggered by the wheel feeds a weight inside at the right time.  I tried several of those feeders.. But still not having a good design..  It can't be that hard..  you will see it in almost any factory with automated production lines..

Anyone got a clue??

Cherry,

This would be the next logical step in the proposal I made where the balls actually depart the wheel so there is no gravitational resistance on the ascending side. All weight on the wheel would only be on the descending side. It should be a pretty simple exercise for someone knowledgable about WM2D.

http://www.overunity.com/index.php?topic=7150.msg171469#msg171469

My initial request was for a WM2D model that can demonstrate how much momentum is available to a ball if it is released at the bottom. Once we have a better idea of the ball's velocity (speed and direction), we can design a more practical return mechanism (your feeding system) to get the balls back to the top and sync with the wheel.

A major consideration will be how to recover a maximum amount of energy from a recaptured ball and transfer that energy back to the wheel. The ball will escape with a certain speed. Raising the ball against gravity will reduce that speed to something less than what it initially had when it was slung out at the bottom.

But closer to the wheel's hub, the rotational speed is slower, so we may be able to synchronize better if the balls are recaptured closer to the hub.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on April 15, 2009, 06:17:47 PM
Correct form and smoothness of the egg-shaped groove in @AquariuZ' model seems to be the crucial step at this point. Seems that's the gist of Abeling's idea, if it's at all a working device. So how do we tweak the form of the egg-shaped groove and how do we make it smooth?
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on April 15, 2009, 06:59:27 PM
Here's the scaled down version of @AquariuZ' model, disassembled to work on the egg-shaped groove (see attached).
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: AquariuZ on April 15, 2009, 08:22:23 PM
You always use too much weight in your simulations !

A 19.5 Kg weight can not kick a 2000 Kg wheel as the simulation shows.. !
This would not work as the 2000 Kg weight would have much too much inertia.

I just tried to change the weight of the 2 wheels down to 1 or 10 Kg and
then it does not work.

You really need to watch out for your weights.

It seems WM2D has problems with big masses.

Regards, Stefan.

Stefan, In case you missed it....

It is essential to have a good look at this.

Imagine a weight receiving spin because it is pulled by gravity along a ramp. It hits a barrier at an angle and transfers the spin to that barrier. Experiment by turning the spoke more and more parallel to the ramp in small increments and watch V0 for the barrier. Pause directly after hit to see full translation of spin. At a certain angle, a significant "jolt" is given to the barrier, which is disproportionate to the momentum of the dumbbell axle.

Please review this model. Mondrasek Omnibus & Broli, please your opinion too.

There is no error in the model attached, unless someone tells me otherwise.

I am currently buidling a hollow wheel with angled weights.

Again, image the axle of a dumbbell rolling over a surface which will spin that axle. Image the spin on the outer ends of the weights. Now imaging those weights being launched into their (angled) slots.

I rest my case & will post it soon. I am also writing the wm2d engineer to have a look at the attached.


Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: hartiberlin on April 15, 2009, 08:37:20 PM
This is really strange. From all my experience with wm2d I have seen nothing like this. Usually the "bug" would go away with proper modeling but this remains consistent. Consistent to a point it makes unbelievable feats. It seems that the static-, kinetic friction and elasticity are the main parameters involved.

Even if the wheel weighs 10,000,000 kg, the 1kg weight manages for some reason to give it an extreme amount of energy on collision which is off the charts. In this specific case it's 7,222,243,630% overunity. But like I said those parameters are crucial. If you reduce them to 0 nothing out of the ordinary happens when you all max them out and make them 1 nothing out of the ordinary happens.

It's only when they reach a specific value where the cop is at its maximum.

Edit: Attached is another model clearly showing overunity instead of numbers. To stay true to the Bessler quote. The red weight is 4 times the yellow weight's mass. As you can see a small mass shoots up a heavy mass quite violently.

I'm on the fence with this one. Wm2d has it quirks but this is pretty amazing to me for such a simple model.

Well,yes,it seems to be the ELASTIC parameter inside the properties box of the masses.

I have also reedited this design to see, how it works, but if you set the elastic parameter to Zero
for both the colliding objects, the big acceleration effect goes away.

So another bug of WM2D we must pay attention to workaround.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on April 15, 2009, 08:43:08 PM
Check this out (see attached). Slightly improved @AquariuZ' model, scaled down, track somewhat smoothed out etc. Still not working but probably we should focus on the right form of the egg-shaped groove and tweak it a little here and there.

@AquariuZ, still couldn't look at your last model because I was working on this. Will do.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: hartiberlin on April 15, 2009, 08:43:31 PM
Stefan, In case you missed it....

It is essential to have a good look at this.

Imagine a weight receiving spin because it is pulled by gravity along a ramp. It hits a barrier at an angle and transfers the spin to that barrier. Experiment by turning the spoke more and more parallel to the ramp in small increments and watch V0 for the barrier. Pause directly after hit to see full translation of spin. At a certain angle, a significant "jolt" is given to the barrier, which is disproportionate to the momentum of the dumbbell axle.

Please review this model. Mondrasek Omnibus & Broli, please your opinion too.

There is no error in the model attached, unless someone tells me otherwise.

I am currently buidling a hollow wheel with angled weights.

Again, image the axle of a dumbbell rolling over a surface which will spin that axle. Image the spin on the outer ends of the weights. Now imaging those weights being launched into their (angled) slots.

I rest my case & will post it soon. I am also writing the wm2d engineer to have a look at the attached.




Sorry to burst your bubble,
but if you set both elastic parameters to Zero it does no longer work.

Have a look at this:
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: AquariuZ on April 15, 2009, 08:58:08 PM
Sorry to burst your bubble,
but if you set both elastic parameters to Zero it does no longer work.

Have a look at this:


You simply cannot set elasticity to zero, every material has a certain amount of elasticity...
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: hartiberlin on April 15, 2009, 09:09:31 PM
You simply cannot set elasticity to zero, every material has a certain amount of elasticity...

Okay, just set it to 0.1 and you see,
that there is no energy amplification then.

Regards, Stefan.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Justalabrat on April 15, 2009, 09:20:31 PM
Stefan, In case you missed it....

It is essential to have a good look at this.

Imagine a weight receiving spin because it is pulled by gravity along a ramp. It hits a barrier at an angle and transfers the spin to that barrier. Experiment by turning the spoke more and more parallel to the ramp in small increments and watch V0 for the barrier. Pause directly after hit to see full translation of spin. At a certain angle, a significant "jolt" is given to the barrier, which is disproportionate to the momentum of the dumbbell axle.


Just a note, if you set the barrier not to collide with the ramp, it will keep spinning forever. That might be a bug.

 But then I am Justalabrat
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on April 15, 2009, 09:21:26 PM
Stefan, set it to some large number (to model absolutely elastic collision; the absolutely non-elastic collision in you example is as expected -- the bodies remain stuck together). It goes berserk. Something isn't right.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: AquariuZ on April 15, 2009, 09:27:47 PM
Come on people.

You are basically saying that every model made in wm2d for e.g. collision analysis is wrong because the default elasticity settings for all materials are wrong.

That is quite a statement.

The angle of the spoke or sleeve is calibrated for standard materials at 0.579 rad. Differnt materials require different angles for optimal jolts.
 
Material ::::::: Jolt

standard::::::::::: -4.256 rad/s
steel::::::::::::::::: -0.049 rad/s BUT at P0 = 0.844 rad (steeper Spoke) already -0.249 rad/s!
ice:::::::::::::::::::: -0.055 rad/s
wood::::::::::::::::: -0.106 rad/s
plastic::::::::::::::: -0.057 rad/s
clay:::::::::::::::::: -0.191 rad/s
rubber::::::::::::::: -0.011 rad/s
rock ::::::::::::::::: -2.011 rad/s

Saying that a basic principle like elasticity may be the cause is simply ludricous, it would render the software completely useless for ANY modeling.

Well, it is easy enough to test in real world with some spinning pinballs and a ramp.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: AquariuZ on April 15, 2009, 09:29:34 PM
Stefan, set it to some large number (to model absolutely elastic collision; the absolutely non-elastic collision in you example is as expected -- the bodies remain stuck together). It goes berserk. Something isn't right.

What do you expect if you maximize elasticity.

Would be a hell of a cat toy though.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on April 15, 2009, 09:30:02 PM
The conclusion is the program doesn't work well with springs, as @mondrasek warned, with elastic collisions etc. In these cases, again as @mondrasek warned, we have to use palliative measures such as air resistance, dampers etc. Fortunately, we don't have these kinds of problems in our concrete example reproducing Abeling's patent. In our case, extra care should be taken only regarding the rigid joints which Stefan warned cause problems. These problems can be fixed by changing the properties of the rigid joint from Optimized to Measurable. That's all at this point, as far as I can see.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: broli on April 15, 2009, 09:38:07 PM
Lol this is indeed strange. The anomaly is back with that model. I even changed the pin joints with two rods and get the same numbers. Increased the accuracy and also get the same numbers. I'm clueless whether it's another wm2D quirk or the real deal. I'm going to do some force analysis to have an idea of the forces that are involved.

Attached is again a slightly tweaked model with energy calculation and more round up masses. At impact the cop is 2.2 or about 230% overunity.

Stefan even at 0.1 elasticity it gives overunity. If it doesn't just increase the mass of the spoke  ;D.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: AquariuZ on April 15, 2009, 09:42:45 PM
Lol this is indeed strange. The anomaly is back with that model. I even changed the pin joints with two rods and get the same numbers. Increased the accuracy and also get the same numbers. I'm clueless whether it's another wm2D quirk or the real deal. I'm going to do some force analysis to have an idea of the forces that are involved.

Attached is again a slightly tweaked model with energy calculation and more round up masses. At impact the cop is 2.2 or about 230% overunity.

Stefan even at 0.1 elasticity it gives overunity. If it doesn't just increase the mass of the spoke  ;D.

THANK GOD SOMEONE IS AWAKE.

It fits the Abeling setup.

He may not even know why it works.

The only suspicion I have is that if in the real world there is some unknown reaction to spinning bodies colliding why or how would this find its way into wm2d?

Unless it fits a mathematical model, which it does not seem to (from what I see broli)

Thanks for your help
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Cherryman on April 15, 2009, 09:44:39 PM
Hey can we make some glass with this?

Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Cherryman on April 15, 2009, 10:02:56 PM

THANK GOD SOMEONE IS AWAKE.

It fits the Abeling setup.

He may not even know why it works.

The only suspicion I have is that if in the real world there is some unknown reaction to spinning bodies colliding why or how would this find its way into wm2d?

Unless it fits a mathematical model, which it does not seem to (from what I see broli)

Thanks for your help

A way of thinking out of the box (I'm not a physist or something..  :):  :-\


Maybe the spinning is an acumulation.. you have a weight going down an angle, rotating (spinning) will help it going faster..  Thats is a force.. because when gravity is exactly straight downwards, even a round body would only goes down.. not sideways on a ramp. An object can go sliding.. thats a lot of friction an heat. But when it starts rotating it has almost no contact or loss.. it's gaining..  It's escaping downwards gravity..  by.. Rotating.. Spinnig. 

Hope it makes sence...

So spinning.. Aquariuz..    I Like it!  ;D
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on April 15, 2009, 10:03:49 PM
@All,

We have to solve the following problem: Is there an egg-shaped (this is how we chose to call it) contour which will ensure that at any position of the spheres in Abeling’s model the generalized mass times the generalized right-hand lever arm length (to the right of the center of mass, that is) will be persistently greater than that generalized product on the left hand side of the system center of mass. This is a slightly topological problem but also looks more like a variational problem. Wonder if that can be solved numerically by the method of least or boundary elements? Of course, an analytical solution would be much more preferable. If no such solution exists, we’re in serious trouble regarding this project. To put it bluntly, lack of a solution will simply kill the project.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: broli on April 15, 2009, 10:05:51 PM
To put it bluntly, lack of a solution will simply kill the project.

I agree. Someone needs to convince Sjack to disclose the mechanics behind his wheel and then we can live in peace  ;D.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Alexioco on April 15, 2009, 10:07:02 PM
Hi all  8), this topic seems to be getting more interesting as I read, i would help out with the modeling but every time i tried to get w2md, it failed...


Alex
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Cherryman on April 15, 2009, 10:11:37 PM
I agree. Someone needs to convince Sjack to disclose the mechanics behind his wheel and then we can live in peace  ;D.

You know what i think:

I Think he is watching this.. and smiling! .. Because when he speakes the truth.. He cannot talk about it himself due to contracts, but i think he is a kind of person who likes this.. and somewhere in his mind would like us to find the clue..  But not to soon ;-)

Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: broli on April 15, 2009, 10:14:06 PM
You know what i think:

I Think he is watching this.. and smiling! .. Because when he speakes the truth.. He cannot talk about it himself due to contracts, but i think he is a kind of person who likes this.. and somewhere in his mind would like us to find the clue..  But not to soon ;-)



I agree. I would be having the fun of my life seeing others trying to solve my riddle. But I think the world is in a too big of a shit hole to be playing games right now.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: hartiberlin on April 15, 2009, 10:24:54 PM
@All,

We have to solve the following problem: Is there an egg-shaped (this is how we chose to call it) contour which will ensure that at any position of the spheres in Abeling’s model the generalized mass times the generalized right-hand lever arm length (to the right of the center of mass, that is) will be persistently greater than that generalized product on the left hand side of the system center of mass. This is a slightly topological problem but also looks more like a variational problem. Wonder if that can be solved numerically by the method of least or boundary elements? Of course, an analytical solution would be much more preferable. If no such solution exists, we’re in serious trouble regarding this project. To put it bluntly, lack of a solution will simply kill the project.

Well, I guess there is no working solution for the egg shaped Abeling wheel.
Also if using elliptical pathes it just does not work.
It just comes down to keel itself and comes to a stillstand,
which is predicted by normal gravity science.


Maybe he has hidden in his patent, why he uses 2 wheels instead of one.
This could have an effect of transfering weights from one wheel to the other
or something simular.

Why would he otherwise use 2 wheels if one could also do it ??

I guess this is his secret if his 2 wheel devic really works.

Regards, Stefan.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: hartiberlin on April 15, 2009, 10:26:14 PM
Lol this is indeed strange. The anomaly is back with that model. I even changed the pin joints with two rods and get the same numbers. Increased the accuracy and also get the same numbers. I'm clueless whether it's another wm2D quirk or the real deal. I'm going to do some force analysis to have an idea of the forces that are involved.

Attached is again a slightly tweaked model with energy calculation and more round up masses. At impact the cop is 2.2 or about 230% overunity.

Stefan even at 0.1 elasticity it gives overunity. If it doesn't just increase the mass of the spoke  ;D.

xnonix_rueda_overunityV2.wm2d

Can you explain this xnonix_rueda_overunityV2.wm2d
a bit more ?

How did you model this and how did you set the calculation display boxes in there ?

Many thanks.

Regards, Stefan.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: broli on April 15, 2009, 10:27:49 PM
Can you explain this xnonix_rueda_overunityV2.wm2d
a bit more ?

How did you model this and how did you set the calculation display boxes in there ?

Many thanks.

Regards, Stefan.

Lol I was quite surprised you mentioned that as this is an ancient model that once got posted on this forum. So please ignore it. I will change the post with the correct model.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: hartiberlin on April 15, 2009, 10:52:14 PM
Lol I was quite surprised you mentioned that as this is an ancient model that once got posted on this forum. So please ignore it. I will change the post with the correct model.

Yes, I still remember it, but wasit ever validated, that it really worked with this overunity factor ?
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: broli on April 15, 2009, 10:58:59 PM
Yes, I still remember it, but wasit ever validated, that it really worked with this overunity factor ?

Nope it was heavily flawed. I was still a newbie back then.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on April 15, 2009, 11:28:32 PM
Well, I guess there is no working solution for the egg shaped Abeling wheel.
Also if using elliptical pathes it just does not work.
It just comes down to keel itself and comes to a stillstand,
which is predicted by normal gravity science.


Maybe he has hidden in his patent, why he uses 2 wheels instead of one.
This could have an effect of transfering weights from one wheel to the other
or something simular.

Why would he otherwise use 2 wheels if one could also do it ??

I guess this is his secret if his 2 wheel devic really works.

Regards, Stefan.


I'm not sure about that. Until I see a rigorous solution to this problem it isn't evident to me at all that there isn't a path which will ensure the mentioned non-equality. Seems there's something overlooked in these devices or deliberately withheld because of various social reasons. All is within classical mechanics, nothing fancy, but either overlooked or deliberately withheld and not pursued when found. As to why two wheels, well, maybe because if it's one wheel it will infringe on other patents or won't be novel since it resembles numerous well-known constructions, nonworking as they may be. Of course, I don't deny that he may be hiding something as most patentees do so that they can sell it as a trade secret. First, however, we have to find a rigorous answer to the obvious problem with the egg-shaped groove, I think, and then pursue the rest.

Thus, we already have in this thread two clearly defined problems for mathematicians versed in calculations in mechanics. These problems may be considered part of theoretical physics despite their practical aspect.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Philip Hardcastle on April 16, 2009, 02:11:20 AM
@omnibus,

I saw a post by you saying I broke my word.

I take exception at that, it is not the case.

I said ok to you using my email.

I did not agree to be silenced however I did respect your wish not to debate that rubbish.

I have left you to your quest in peace but do not go about attacking my good name.

My problem with you is that you lead a lot of people on with your claim that gravity energy is proved when the paper you showed me is not a proof, it is an opinion, not a good one in mine.

You should not claim to have proof when you do not then you would advance sensible debate on this forum.

Simply saying to all around you that a b or c is proved so lets move on is wrong unless a b or c is actually proved.

Now you gave me a document that you said proved such and then you expect me to agree by being totally quiet about it, well that is simply wrong omni and unfair for you to expect such.

Like I said I wish you luck but my opinion is the same that I believe you are wasting a lot of time when you could pursue better ideas.


Phil
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: mrsean2k on April 16, 2009, 03:31:50 AM
@omnibus,

I saw a post by you saying I broke my word.

I take exception at that, it is not the case.

I said ok to you using my email.

I did not agree to be silenced however I did respect your wish not to debate that rubbish.

I have left you to your quest in peace but do not go about attacking my good name.

My problem with you is that you lead a lot of people on with your claim that gravity energy is proved when the paper you showed me is not a proof, it is an opinion, not a good one in mine.

You should not claim to have proof when you do not then you would advance sensible debate on this forum.

Simply saying to all around you that a b or c is proved so lets move on is wrong unless a b or c is actually proved.

Now you gave me a document that you said proved such and then you expect me to agree by being totally quiet about it, well that is simply wrong omni and unfair for you to expect such.

Like I said I wish you luck but my opinion is the same that I believe you are wasting a lot of time when you could pursue better ideas.


Phil

A simple apology for breaking your word would be a lot more palatable than this inelegant wriggle.

You agreed not to debate it here. You insisted on debating the matter despite giving your word - in other words you broke it.

You even apologised for doing so before you started, it's not as if it was accidental:

"Sorry to be blunt, and I know you do not want a debate, but anyone saying that it is proved by that essay is not being rational."

That you decided in retrospect that what you read wasn't worth the promise you made isn't a defence of any kind.

A bit rich to be getting on your high-horse; you did break your word, plain and simole.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: hartiberlin on April 16, 2009, 04:51:14 AM
Hi All,
I have tried to model the Bob machine over here:
http://www.overunity.com/index.php?topic=2326.msg171876#msg171876

Still need some help with the model.
There is still a motor attached to get the disc to speed
and the rope pulleys are not yet correct, so the weights are not yet
pulled up correctly.

Maybe someone can fix it.
Many thanks in advance.

Regards, Stefan.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: LarryC on April 16, 2009, 05:02:54 AM
The statements of the main two inventors about CF slam energy should also be ignored.

I'm sorry Mr. Omnibus, I did not know. If I understand you correctly, the inventors of OU devices should pass their statements by you for approval.

I sure wish that Stefan would post this info on the home page, so that the poor ignorant hardworking, actual builders, inventors understand the rules.

Regards, Larry
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: X00013 on April 16, 2009, 06:16:30 AM
@Omni , ur havin too much fun with this, I just had to chime in. If you want to draft try http://www.solidedge.eu.com/isapi/pagegen.dll/pages?page=free_2d

Its a free full working 30 day trial, save as dxf, then import from working model. I've been running all the various models, in 2d and 3d, with better physics engines than wm2d. If I find somthing  I will post it. I have found the wheel wants to run backwards, kinda reminds me off the "ball race", shorter path or greater distance with gravityt? Speed and distance wins every time! Like u said somewhat, the math of my pc is determining the physics, which reminds me, u all need a kick ass graphics card and kick ass processer and tons of memory to get good results in ANY physics program. thank u n good nite
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: X00013 on April 16, 2009, 06:24:23 AM
Hi All,
I have tried to model the Bob machine over here:
http://www.overunity.com/index.php?topic=2326.msg171876#msg171876

Still need some help with the model.
There is still a motor attached to get the disc to speed
and the rope pulleys are not yet correct, so the weights are not yet
pulled up correctly.

Maybe someone can fix it.
Many thanks in advance.

Regards, Stefan.

Sorry but your efforts r valient and fruitless with wm2d on this build, wm2d cannot emulate pneumatics, nor there delayed response to CF forces.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on April 16, 2009, 06:33:19 AM
@Omni , ur havin too much fun with this, I just had to chime in. If you want to draft try http://www.solidedge.eu.com/isapi/pagegen.dll/pages?page=free_2d

Its a free full working 30 day trial, save as dxf, then import from working model. I've been running all the various models, in 2d and 3d, with better physics engines than wm2d. If I find somthing  I will post it. I have found the wheel wants to run backwards, kinda reminds me off the "ball race", shorter path or greater distance with gravityt? Speed and distance wins every time! Like u said somewhat, the math of my pc is determining the physics, which reminds me, u all need a kick ass graphics card and kick ass processer and tons of memory to get good results in ANY physics program. thank u n good nite

Thanks, buddy. Will have to try it sometime. I have SolidWorks but haven't tried it either. Now I'm struggling with AutoCAD. Not a straightforward thing. Anyway. Hope all is well with you and good night 2 u 2.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on April 16, 2009, 06:38:13 AM
Hi All,
I have tried to model the Bob machine over here:
http://www.overunity.com/index.php?topic=2326.msg171876#msg171876

Still need some help with the model.
There is still a motor attached to get the disc to speed
and the rope pulleys are not yet correct, so the weights are not yet
pulled up correctly.

Maybe someone can fix it.
Many thanks in advance.

Regards, Stefan.

Stefan, this device, unfortunately, has elements such as springs as well as collisions which cannot be modeled well with wm2d, as was found out. Wonder how fruitful it would be to pursue modeling it? Seems like the worst kind of example there could possibly be to model w/ wm2d.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: X00013 on April 16, 2009, 07:12:18 AM
@ all, dont put to much merit in ur PC's ability to calculate fictitious forces (IE. CF, ), just a heads up, it's not a "bug" in the program. It's a combination of the PC's inability to calculate school book numbers with what really happens. Game engines rock, wm2d suks, to put it lite--lee!!!!!
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: xnonix on April 16, 2009, 08:29:31 AM
For all of you making models with wm2d keep this into account.

Rigid joints have a bug I demostrated long time ago. The thing is to use 2 pin joints instead separated as much as posible one another.

The model is beatifull but I don't trust wm2d for all the experiments I did.

When I have the time I will do an power study in your models.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: AquariuZ on April 16, 2009, 08:57:46 AM
When I have the time I will do an power study in your models.

If you could have a look at the list of same models with all possible materials I posted that would be great

This remains unanswered as far as I am concerned.

Thanks
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on April 16, 2009, 10:13:52 AM
If you could have a look at the list of same models with all possible materials I posted that would be great

This remains unanswered as far as I am concerned.

Thanks

I thought it's already established that wm2d is unfit for models with elastic collisions and with springs. To obtain physically consistent results in such cases palliative measures such as turning on air resistance, adding bumpers etc, have to be taken. Also, the rigid joints must be Measurable and not Optimized.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: AquariuZ on April 16, 2009, 01:38:42 PM
I thought it's already established that wm2d is unfit for models with elastic collisions and with springs. To obtain physically consistent results in such cases palliative measures such as turning on air resistance, adding bumpers etc, have to be taken. Also, the rigid joints must be Measurable and not Optimized.


No that is not established at all, what gives you that idea?

If you look again you will find that all real world settings are active.

All default material matching elasticity used.

So again, not answered.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on April 16, 2009, 01:51:02 PM
No that is not established at all, what gives you that idea?

If you look again you will find that all real world settings are active.

All default material matching elasticity used.

So again, not answered.

It's not a matter of whether or not the settings are correct. There are intrinsic problems with the algorithm of the program itself which were demonstrated by several examples, including yours. Whenever springs or elastic collisions are involved additional measures have to be taken, such as turning on air resistance, adding bumpers and who knows what else to obtain a physically meaningful result. In your case to have the model exhibit the behavior known for ideally elastic collision the elasticity number you have to plug in is physically unrealistic, that is, has to be much less than 1. So, in your case, you have to plug in a physically unrealistic value in order to get a physically meaningful result. Same thing with springs -- you have to exclude the machine from working in vacuum in order to have a physically consistent result. That's non-physical and demonstrates the weakness of the program in such cases. I don't think we should continue with these curiosities whose only merit is revealing the weaknesses of wm2d. At this point the sensible path is to deal with your egg-shaped examples where practically there are no elastic collisions essential for the model and there are no springs and other known issues with wm2d. Besides, these are the models applicable to the discussion at hand -- Abeling's patent.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Alexioco on April 16, 2009, 02:00:41 PM
Would it just be better if the design was built and tested? After all, trying to get peretual motion on wm2d is harder than real life because not only do you have to solve the problem, but work around the faults of the program.

Alex
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on April 16, 2009, 02:09:25 PM
Would it just be better if the design was built and tested? After all, trying to get peretual motion on wm2d is harder than real life because not only do you have to solve the problem, but work around the faults of the program.

Alex

In the case of @AquariuZ' egg-shaped model the program hasn't shown faults. Knowing this, it's obviously better to try the various forms of the track, weights, materials, dimensions etc. first on a computer model rather than spend money and effort on innumerable real world models.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Alexioco on April 16, 2009, 03:00:35 PM
In the case of @AquariuZ' egg-shaped model the program hasn't shown faults. Knowing this, it's obviously better to try the various forms of the track, weights, materials, dimensions etc. first on a computer model rather than spend money and effort on innumerable real world models.

Oh, well yes, if theres no faults then it is better, hows it coming anyway, I havnt seen it because I dont have the program, wont let me have it...


Alex
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on April 16, 2009, 03:21:02 PM
Oh, well yes, if theres no faults then it is better, hows it coming anyway, I havnt seen it because I dont have the program, wont let me have it...


Alex

No joy yet. If there's anything noteworthy we would post it on youtube for people like you who don't have wm2d.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: mondrasek on April 16, 2009, 03:27:15 PM
Missed a day due to a real life work trip.  But here is the first of two post for you all:

With regards to WM2D.  It is a very valuable tool that can be very helpful if used correctly.  To use it correctly you have to have some engineering knowledge of the parameters.  Please do not dismiss it as causing errors or having bad algorithms.  That simply is not the case.

Springs.  Using an ideal spring in WM2D can cause issues.  But then again, there is no such thing as an ideal spring in real life!  If so, you would be able to deflect such a spring (in a vaccum) and watch it oscillate forever.  But it will not.  That is because in the case of all real springs there is an internal resistance/friction that causes some sort of dampening.  Using dampeners and/or air resistance in WM2D makes their theoretical (yet impossible) springs actually behave more like real world springs.  So using dampeners is not a bug work around.  Using springs without dampeners can create sim world instabilities that can be corrected with proper engineering knowledge.

Collisions.  Elasticity is an actual property of every real material.  And no material has a value or 0 or 1 elasticity.  So again, if you model with elasticity of 0 and/or 1 you should expect results that are also fictional.

Pins vs. Rigid joint.  WM2D must calculated interactions through an iterative process, one by one.  This induces error and cannot be avoided.  But the error can be minimized.  Using two pins spread as far apart as possible will minimize the error.  I won't go into the reasons again, but just understand that it is a more robust way to model the behavior of fixing the three degrees of rotation we deal with in 2D sims.  Again, not a bug.  Just a mathematical fact.  As with every sim, there are various ways to model each interaction.  It may take some engineering knowledge or experience to figure out the best method.  Modeling exactly how you would expect to build a device in the real world is not necessarily the best way to model something in a sim.  This is because the sim has the limitations of working calculations one by one using a relatively large time step.  In order to get the best results, the time step must be made so small that you would need supercomputer processing speeds in order to see a sim in anything close to real time.  Simulations are what supercomputers are used for!  So don't expect your PC to be able to keep up.  But do learn the best way to model each interaction to minimize the errors.  Note:  Why are solid joints so hard to model?  Because in the real world everything (EVERYTHING!) bends a bit when subjected to a force.  So the rigid joints in the sim are also something that does not exist in the real world.

M.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: mondrasek on April 16, 2009, 03:40:51 PM
Now for the fun post! 

AquariuZ appears to have begun to investigate this idea already:  What if the missing interaction comes from the weights being gyroscopes?  Take the dumbbell shape and let it spin around the axis of the handle.  Why?  Because gyros still have mass and therefore their whole body will react to gravity and fall and cause a wheel to rotate like any other weight.  But when a force is applied to a gyro the equal and opposite reaction force is in a 90 degree direction to the force on a regular object.  So when you push a gyro it does not move in the direction of the force.  It moves to the side.

In the lifting portion of Abeling's (and others) gravity wheel design the wheel, ramps, etc. are pushing on the weights in order to lift them up again.  If those weights were gyros the reaction of the wheel, ramps, etc would not be in the expected direction, but 90 degrees to it.

How to model a gyro in WM2D?  Replace the current round weights with two concentric circles attached at the center with a pin joint.  The smaller inner wheel is the axle/dumbbell handle and should collide with the wheel, ramps, etc.  The bigger, outer circle should be free to spin and not collide with anything (or just some things).

Do gyros react correctly to applied forces in WM2D?  I do not know.  But I can think of some simple tests to try. 

M.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on April 16, 2009, 04:11:20 PM
@mondrasek,

Using “air resistance” to model behavior of springs in vacuum still sounds like workaround, unless “air resistance” is just used as a figure of speech and turning it on in fact means turning on in the model the inevitable internal resistance in real springs. But then, what would it be if real air resistance is needed to be turned on. Does it mean that in addition to the “air resistance” used to mimic the internal resistance of a real spring one should add additional air resistance. This is a workaround in my book.

As for collisions, the only physically realistic result in @AquariuZ’ model was obtained by Stefan when he set it to 0, that is, modeling ideally non-elastic collision. Results with elastic collisions, not even ideally elastic (1), gave funny results. So, the program has to be used very carefully with collisions, again with workarounds, it seems.

The rigid joints. I think the problem was fixed by changing Optimized to Measurable in Properties. Forgot who suggested it. This was one of the most useful little tips, resolving a lot of confusion here. Otherwise, the points you make about sims are quite correct.

I didn’t get the gyro part of your posting, though. Why divert attention to that? It is indeed a very interesting phenomenon to investigate, but separately, I think. A spinning gyro requires spending of energy while here we’re interested in producing energy without spending any. So, investigating gyros makes the same sense as investigating centrifugal forces. These may have cursory importance here because the certain amount of energy spent for them (for spinning the gyro or for the force that has CF as a reaction) may reshuffle the parts of the construction favorably so more energy be produced as a result. This is the only role of discussing gyros or CF here although at this moment I don’t see any use for them in optimizing the device. The problems with the device at hand seem to be elsewhere.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: mondrasek on April 16, 2009, 04:50:56 PM
Using “air resistance” to model behavior of springs in vacuum still sounds like workaround, unless “air resistance” is just used as a figure of speech and turning it on in fact means turning on in the model the inevitable internal resistance in real springs. But then, what would it be if real air resistance is needed to be turned on. Does it mean that in addition to the “air resistance” used to mimic the internal resistance of a real spring one should add additional air resistance. This is a workaround in my book.

I said, using dampeners and/or air resistance makes the behaiour of modeled spings more realistic and fixes the ill effects of siming with ideal (impossible) springs.  You may notice that springs with built in dampeners are one of the building elements in WM2D and could be used instead of ideal springs.  Turning on air resistance is a way to apply a global dampening effect without having to work with the dampening characteristics of individual springs.  So you can call either a workaround.  I call it proper engineering.

As for collisions, the only physically realistic result in @AquariuZ’ model was obtained by Stefan when he set it to 0, that is, modeling ideally non-elastic collision. Results with elastic collisions, not even ideally elastic (1), gave funny results. So, the program has to be used very carefully with collisions, again with workarounds, it seems.

Proper material properties, including elasticity, and small time step and integration error give proper collision results.

I didn’t get the gyro part of your posting, though. Why divert attention to that? It is indeed a very interesting phenomenon to investigate, but separately, I think. A spinning gyro requires spending of energy while here we’re interested in producing energy without spending any. So, investigating gyros makes the same sense as investigating centrifugal forces. These may have cursory importance here because the certain amount of energy spent for them (for spinning the gyro or for the force that has CF as a reaction) may reshuffle the parts of the construction favorably so more energy be produced as a result. This is the only role of discussing gyros or CF here although at this moment I don’t see any use for them in optimizing the device. The problems with the device at hand seem to be elsewhere.

Because it fits with the rest of the "facts".  Let's start with the web page:

This new physical theory will explain how to generate energy by rotating two bodies with the same mass/weight. The weight of the bodies together with ... (intentionally omitted) and the rotational velocity determine the amount of energy that can be generated.

Now replace (intentionally omitted) with Gyrospopic Effects.

I do not propose that the gyros are to be spun up by external forces.  They should be spun up by the device as the device turns, storing some of the gravitational potential energy of the weights at the top of the wheel as it is converted to kinetic energy through falling.

Gyroscopes add an element not yet considered by this forum.  It is an effect where the reaction force is not opposite in direction.  It also fits easily into the patent design and would not need to be disclosed to secure a patent on a working device.  It could be the "hidden" item some are looking for.  So that is why I bring it up here.  I wonder if it could be a way to have the weights move through the prescribed path without absorbing all of the energy of the wheel on the raising side.

What's your idea?
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on April 16, 2009, 05:17:47 PM
@mondrasek,

See, I don’t buy this “new theory” thing but your idea makes sense intuitively, I think. I say intuitively because I don’t see exactly how it will work putting it in concrete terms.

My idea, which doesn’t exclude gyro effects of the type you mention, if plausible, is that all is overlooked classical mechanics and what we need to do is find the conditions whereby the rule for a balanced lever will be persistently violated. I wonder if you know of a mathematician dealing with mechanics who might help us in the analytical part of solving such a problem. First, finding out whether or not that’s at all possible. We already have two somewhat well defined mathematical problems – this one and the one presented here in a gif by the Japanese guy at the beginning of the thread (forgot what his handle was). If we resort to only trial and error modeling with wm2d we won’t get too far. What is needed is a bit, and probably more than a bit, of a scientific approach. Someone to help in writing the Lagrangian of the system and then helping in solving it for various conditions. Someone did a similar analysis of the Milkovic contraption (can’t find the paper right now) by writing the equations governing the device when activated on its one side, obtaining the analytical expression for the response on the other side. Unfortunately, he didn’t finish the analysis by observing it in a reverse direction. Something similar has to be done here to see first whether or not there would be realistic analytical solutions of that purported motor or generator of free energy or whatever one may wanna call it. This  will give us a clue as to what direction the construction efforts should go.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on April 16, 2009, 05:43:11 PM
@mondrasek,

Here is an idea of what needs to be done: http://www.veljkomilkovic.com/Images/Mathematical_analisys_Tosic_english.pdf. This is analysis of the Veljko Milkovic machine. I'm not endorsing the analysis, let alone the machine itself may not even be original. As Hans pointed out it may be a take on Constantinesco's ideas. This, however, has to be studied more which isn't the purpose of our current efforts. I'm citing this link just as a rough idea as to what should be done regarding the current project.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: i_ron on April 16, 2009, 07:12:34 PM
. As Hans pointed out it may be a take on Constantinesco's ideas.

I have had some experience with Veljko Milkovic’s pendulum and have studied Constantinesco’s work. I don’t think Han’s references to these gentlemen are correct and should not be repeated willie nillie. 

It would be more correct to just say that Constantinesco, Milkovic and Würth’s field of endeavor are related, without the put down implied in Han’s remarks.

Ron
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on April 16, 2009, 07:29:55 PM
I have had some experience with Veljko Milkovic’s pendulum and have studied Constantinesco’s work. I don’t think Han’s references to these gentlemen are correct and should not be repeated willie nillie. 

It would be more correct to just say that Constantinesco, Milkovic and Würth’s field of endeavor are related, without the put down implied in Han’s remarks.

Ron

OK, fair enough. I've visited Veljko Milkovic personally and find his devices interesting and worth further study. One thing that one may think would be easy to do, given the claimed output/input ratio, is closing the loop. The fact that it hasn't been done yet, of course, doesn't mean the claim is false but probably the technical issues for actually achieving it are not as straightforward as they seem to be at first sight. The rigorous analysis I gave link to in my previous post is also interesting but is unfinished. On the other hand, Constantinesco's work was unknown to me until couple of days ago when Hans sent me some texts. I haven't studied them, so I'm taking Hans' word for it. I hear what you're saying too. All this is to be discussed at some other time, though. We have other things to worry about in this thread (unless you provide an argument that the phenomenon Milkovic demonstrates is reflected here in some way because of the levers involved).
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Cherryman on April 16, 2009, 07:56:28 PM
I made a simple test setup to see the difference in the spinning effect.


- All circumstances are equal
- Weight and shape dont change
- Dumbell touches underground and object in 4 different ways
- Intresting results

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b8oAN5cKHu8&feature=channel_page
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Cherryman on April 16, 2009, 08:03:39 PM
Here is the file:

Edit:

More options added

File attached.

Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: mondrasek on April 16, 2009, 08:49:57 PM
Here is the same file with the roller axle not fixed to the roller.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Cherryman on April 16, 2009, 09:28:52 PM
Here is the same file with the roller axle not fixed to the roller.

Nice!  Intresting differences.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Cherryman on April 16, 2009, 09:47:58 PM
So this is what we learnt:

- The weights (and/or largest diameter) gives the best result when used as the contact service with the track
- The rod (And/or smallest diameter) Works best as the deliverer of the weight to a third object.

Edit: And as Mondrasek showed, it works best with the bar and weights able or turning freely from eachother.

Do we need to sort the diameter difference also, and how?

(I'm not a mathematician or fysicks , etc.. , so i try to make this Auquariuz effect visible, explainable by graphics)

Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: AquariuZ on April 16, 2009, 09:51:08 PM
Now for the fun post! 

AquariuZ appears to have begun to investigate this idea already:  What if the missing interaction comes from the weights being gyroscopes?  Take the dumbbell shape and let it spin around the axis of the handle.  Why?  Because gyros still have mass and therefore their whole body will react to gravity and fall and cause a wheel to rotate like any other weight.  But when a force is applied to a gyro the equal and opposite reaction force is in a 90 degree direction to the force on a regular object.  So when you push a gyro it does not move in the direction of the force.  It moves to the side.

In the lifting portion of Abeling's (and others) gravity wheel design the wheel, ramps, etc. are pushing on the weights in order to lift them up again.  If those weights were gyros the reaction of the wheel, ramps, etc would not be in the expected direction, but 90 degrees to it.

How to model a gyro in WM2D?  Replace the current round weights with two concentric circles attached at the center with a pin joint.  The smaller inner wheel is the axle/dumbbell handle and should collide with the wheel, ramps, etc.  The bigger, outer circle should be free to spin and not collide with anything (or just some things).

Do gyros react correctly to applied forces in WM2D?  I do not know.  But I can think of some simple tests to try. 

M.

I LOVE IT

Thanks M
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: AquariuZ on April 16, 2009, 09:56:59 PM
I made a simple test setup to see the difference in the spinning effect.


- All circumstances are equal
- Weight and shape dont change
- Dumbell touches underground and object in 4 different ways
- Intresting results

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b8oAN5cKHu8&feature=channel_page

Thanks for calling it the Aquariuz effect  8)

This is the dawning of a new age

Please mention me in your physics Nobel Prize acceptance speech  next year

 :)
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: AquariuZ on April 16, 2009, 10:01:37 PM
Nice!  Intresting differences.

It is simple: the more spin, the more kinetic energy is passed on to the barrier, so when spin is created in the Abeling setup BY GRAVITY and centrifugal forces in a sufficient way the dumbbells WILL interact with the wheel upon impact.

The gyroscopical effect is so very interesting and opens a whole new can of.... possibilities
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: AquariuZ on April 16, 2009, 10:03:42 PM
If all goes well I can produce my first real world test results with dumbbells and a ramp this weekend
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on April 16, 2009, 10:31:53 PM
@AquariuZ,

Quote
t is simple: the more spin, the more kinetic energy is passed on to the barrier, so when spin is created in the Abeling setup BY GRAVITY and centrifugal forces in a sufficient way the dumbbells WILL interact with the wheel upon impact.

I hope you don’t understand this in a sense that upon impact the spinning ball possess more kinetic energy than the ball not spinning. The well-established physical truth in the situation of this simulation is that the total sum of translational kinetic energy and the rotational energy (plus the heat losses) must be equal to the gravitational potential energy the ball had at the apex. If the program shows otherwise, it’s a flaw in the program and not a new discovery.

In this sense, it isn’t true that the more spin the more kinetic energy is passed on to the barrier. If you think the program is showing otherwise it’s an error in the program.

What may differ probably is the resultant velocity induced on the body being impacted upon after the impact by the moving body – the magnitude and direction of that velocity while preserving the amount of the total energy. I don’t see, however, how this will solve the problem of closing the loop in Abeling’s device.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: hansvonlieven on April 16, 2009, 11:15:15 PM
When you guys are talking about spin combined with a drop maybe you should be looking at something like a Yo-Yo.

Just a thought

Hans von Lieven
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: AB Hammer on April 16, 2009, 11:22:59 PM
When you guys are talking about spin combined with a drop maybe you should be looking at something like a Yo-Yo.

Just a thought

Hans von Lieven

Hans

Water wheels have spin combined with drop.

 
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: hansvonlieven on April 16, 2009, 11:37:17 PM
No Alan, they don't.

The drop causes rotation in a separate device in a water wheel. In a Yo-Yo the drop actually causes the weight to rotate as it unwinds from the string. Different thing altogether.

Hans von Lieven
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: AB Hammer on April 16, 2009, 11:45:51 PM
OK Hans

I stand corrected, I was thinking out of context. :-[ LOL
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on April 17, 2009, 12:03:02 AM
@mondrasek,

Could you please continue your thought from here: http://www.overunity.com/index.php?topic=7150.msg171965#msg171965. Probably you recall my post to you http://www.overunity.com/index.php?topic=7150.msg171005#msg171005 in which, although no gyro effect was involved, nevertheless shows how the same gravitational potential energy can be spent once for a vertical displacement and, if appropriate construction is available, for a displacement sideways, at 90 degrees. So, suppose we spend part of the gravitational energy which the sphere had at the top to convert it into rotational at the bottom, what will be the construction for turning the wheel such that, by repeating this with each one of the spheres, it will accomplish a full turn (will close the loop). See, what I'm getting at is to explore the practical application for our purposes of the fact mentioned by you that the gyro will be deflected at 90 degrees compared to non-gyro impact. Do you have any concrete ideas in this practical aspect or you're just mentioning that 90 degree deflection as just food for thought? At this point I don't see any practical ramification for our purposes of that fact.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: AquariuZ on April 17, 2009, 01:02:10 AM
LOL

This has more thrills in it than Indiana Jones

Look out for the wheel! Watch the ramp! Noo.

....just......cant......yes

 Cherrymans gears BTW enjoy the show

OK back to the egg...
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: mondrasek on April 17, 2009, 01:05:44 AM
@mondrasek,

Could you please continue your thought from here: http://www.overunity.com/index.php?topic=7150.msg171965#msg171965. Probably you recall my post to you http://www.overunity.com/index.php?topic=7150.msg171005#msg171005 in which, although no gyro effect was involved, nevertheless shows how the same gravitational potential energy can be spent once for a vertical displacement and, if appropriate construction is available, for a displacement sideways, at 90 degrees. So, suppose we spend part of the gravitational energy which the sphere had at the top to convert it into rotational at the bottom, what will be the construction for turning the wheel such that, by repeating this with each one of the spheres, it will accomplish a full turn (will close the loop). See, what I'm getting at is to explore the practical application for our purposes of the fact mentioned by you that the gyro will be deflected at 90 degrees compared to non-gyro impact. Do you have any concrete ideas in this practical aspect or you're just mentioning that 90 degree deflection as just food for thought? At this point I don't see any practical ramification for our purposes of that fact.

It's definitely just food for thought, but with a few spices added that, though probably ground from the ignorant root, I thought intriguing.

In the current embodiments of the Abeling patent the weights encounter a force near the bottom of their fall through the right side of the wheel (in a clockwise turning wheel example like in the patent).  The force is due to the ramps that start to bring the weight closer to the axle.  When this ramp force is pushing straight up, the 90 degree reaction force could be straight to the left, aiding with the wheel's rotation.  As the weight rises up the ramp towards the 9 o'clock position the ramp is exerting a force on the weight that is to the right.  The 90 degree reaction force is now straight up, assisting in raising the weight:  Effectively lightly lifting the weight.  After this point, CF should push the weight back out to the rim in the sling shot trajectory.  I have not thought that through.  I'm not sure where the real force vectors acting on the weights are in this area.

I understand the concept of precession as it applies to gyroscopes and the 90 degree displacement reactions that result due to forces applied to one end of a gyroscope axle.  I have no idea how they apply if a force acts on both ends of the axle equally, or, in our case, if applied to the center of the axle with two weights spinning on the ends.

It was just food for though in the "How the hell could this work?" department.  I think we all agree the patent is for a non working devise *or* something is not disclosed in the patent.  This is one idea that is not disclosed that is also not ruled out by the patent.  Take from it what you will.

BTW, another work related road trip tomorrow so I do not know when I can respond to questions, criticism, and/or attacks.

M.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: mondrasek on April 17, 2009, 01:09:24 AM
... enjoy the show

This is one most excellent adventure!
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: AquariuZ on April 17, 2009, 01:19:37 AM
This is one most excellent adventure!

I was laughing all the way up to frame 8000

Poor little ball
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: hansvonlieven on April 17, 2009, 01:19:57 AM
Neat AquariuZ,

Have a look at this one. Here we separate the centrifugal force from the force imparted by the drop. Notice how the wheel keeps spinning while the released centrifugal force propels the ball up a ramp.

Question is: Are the two forces added together more than the potential energy from the drop? You be the judge.

Hans von Lieven
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: broli on April 17, 2009, 01:23:00 AM
Has anyone contacted Sjack directly yet?
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: noonespecial on April 17, 2009, 01:34:18 AM

In the current embodiments of the Abeling patent the weights encounter a force near the bottom of their fall through the right side of the wheel (in a clockwise turning wheel example like in the patent).  The force is due to the ramps that start to bring the weight closer to the axle.  When this ramp force is pushing straight up, the 90 degree reaction force could be straight to the left, aiding with the wheel's rotation.  As the weight rises up the ramp towards the 9 o'clock position the ramp is exerting a force on the weight that is to the right.  The 90 degree reaction force is now straight up, assisting in raising the weight:  Effectively lightly lifting the weight.  After this point, CF should push the weight back out to the rim in the sling shot trajectory.  I have not thought that through.  I'm not sure where the real force vectors acting on the weights are in this area.


My question is with regard to the above is: After the weight develops it potential energy prior to the 6:00 position, isn't most (if not all) of that potential energy alledgedly transferred to the wheel in the form of kinetic energy? Also, as the weights travel in toward the center from 6:00 to 9:00 they lose acceleration. With regard to both of these points, how is it that there is any energy left to create any forward momentum beyond the 9:00 point, let alone any centrifugal acceleration?

Regards,
Charlie
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: persume on April 17, 2009, 01:36:23 AM
You boys are deluded. Enjoy the drinks cause the show aint free.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Cherryman on April 17, 2009, 01:52:43 AM
LOL

This has more thrills in it than Indiana Jones

Look out for the wheel! Watch the ramp! Noo.

....just......cant......yes

 Cherrymans gears BTW enjoy the show

OK back to the egg...

Geweldig!   ;D
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: hartiberlin on April 17, 2009, 02:59:52 AM
LOL

This has more thrills in it than Indiana Jones

Look out for the wheel! Watch the ramp! Noo.

....just......cant......yes

 Cherrymans gears BTW enjoy the show

OK back to the egg...

Well, a 20 Kg weight,
getting almost 3000 kG of 3 wheels running in an instant fast like this via a small
impact is probably a programm error.
IMO, The inertia with the 3 wheels is just too big to get them going this fast...

Regards, Stefan.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: rlortie on April 17, 2009, 03:47:25 AM
Hans

Water wheels have spin combined with drop.

Alan,

The question is: what is the difference in spinning, rotating and revolving

Spin: to rotate or cause to rotate swiftly; twirl... To reel; whirl.
 
Rotate: To turn on an axis.

Revolve; To orbit a central point.

Water wheels exhibit rotation, they do not drop from their axis or orbit a central point which in this case is elliptical. .

Ralph 
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: fletcher on April 17, 2009, 03:47:53 AM
I think you are absolutely right Sefan - I played around with various weights etc & the inertia didn't appear to be calculating correctly as you suggest - even though some of us are looking for unusual results to peak our interest & suspicions the mundane chore of applying common sense can kill the party mood - that's why if you have something interesting & simple in wm you should build it & then input the data into the sim & tweak it till results match, IMO - if there truly is an unexpected result the real world build should show the effect & it should be able to be duplicated in the sim program reasonably accurately.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Dusty on April 17, 2009, 03:58:56 AM
Since my last video of my theory of operation, I have built a device.  It is not finished and that will take a few more days.  I changed some of my thinking on how it works since the patent was released just a couple days after my last video.  I need to build the tracks next and that will take a bunch of experimenting.  You have to realize this device is only a starting point.  If it works right off the bat, well fine, but otherwise I will rebuild the wheels and tracks as necessary.  There are several factors to consider such as diameter of wheel, placement of slots and their shape, weight of the dumbells and probably most important is the shape of the tracking system.

Video here:  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZAjWbVwmcXc

Thanks, Dusty.

(I have that user name because of all my woodworking I do.)
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: AquariuZ on April 17, 2009, 04:19:49 AM
Last motor-less toy for now.

I gave up watching after 40 minutes or so...

Gets stuck now and again then starts again. Lost the beginning so no clue how it started..

The roof is to prevent the spheres going airborne

Bug or not, would make a nice screensaver

Ill send this to the guy at wm2d as well for comment (Yeah like he is going to state wm2d cannot handle elasticity in collissions)

Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: LarryC on April 17, 2009, 04:31:11 AM
Since my last video of my theory of operation, I have built a device.  It is not finished and that will take a few more days.  I changed some of my thinking on how it works since the patent was released just a couple days after my last video.  I need to build the tracks next and that will take a bunch of experimenting.  You have to realize this device is only a starting point.  If it works right off the bat, well fine, but otherwise I will rebuild the wheels and tracks as necessary.  There are several factors to consider such as diameter of wheel, placement of slots and their shape, weight of the dumbells and probably most important is the shape of the tracking system.

Video here:  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZAjWbVwmcXc

Thanks, Dusty.

(I have that user name because of all my woodworking I do.)

Hi Dusty,

Very nice build and good looking shop. I'm glad someone is building and nice to see that you're using one of Eisenficker2000 design and Sjack's Fig 8. When I'm freed up again, I wanted to start building again. Right now it is a toss up between continuing on Bob K's machine or starting with Sjack's. Bob K's design is more expensive (large pneumatic cylinders) than Sjack's so your attempt will help me decide. Please let us know both the successes and failures as it will be of great help to other physical builders.

Best of Success,
Larry 
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on April 17, 2009, 04:34:18 AM
Wow, @Dusty, you’re not kiddin’. Very skillfully crafted. I’m impressed. Wish you all the luck. Will be following your progress closely.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: AquariuZ on April 17, 2009, 04:36:32 AM
Since my last video of my theory of operation, I have built a device.  It is not finished and that will take a few more days.  I changed some of my thinking on how it works since the patent was released just a couple days after my last video.  I need to build the tracks next and that will take a bunch of experimenting.  You have to realize this device is only a starting point.  If it works right off the bat, well fine, but otherwise I will rebuild the wheels and tracks as necessary.  There are several factors to consider such as diameter of wheel, placement of slots and their shape, weight of the dumbells and probably most important is the shape of the tracking system.

Video here:  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZAjWbVwmcXc

Thanks, Dusty.

(I have that user name because of all my woodworking I do.)

Awesome

Please keep in mind that the patent does not appear to display any design which would provide acceleration from gravity..Probably for a reason

Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: AquariuZ on April 17, 2009, 04:47:33 AM
Neat AquariuZ,

Have a look at this one. Here we separate the centrifugal force from the force imparted by the drop. Notice how the wheel keeps spinning while the released centrifugal force propels the ball up a ramp.

Question is: Are the two forces added together more than the potential energy from the drop? You be the judge.

Hans von Lieven

In theory, no. But to show you the math I am not the one to do so..
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Justalabrat on April 17, 2009, 04:49:21 AM
Since my last video of my theory of operation, I have built a device.  It is not finished and that will take a few more days.  I changed some of my thinking on how it works since the patent was released just a couple days after my last video.  I need to build the tracks next and that will take a bunch of experimenting.  You have to realize this device is only a starting point.  If it works right off the bat, well fine, but otherwise I will rebuild the wheels and tracks as necessary.  There are several factors to consider such as diameter of wheel, placement of slots and their shape, weight of the dumbells and probably most important is the shape of the tracking system.

Video here:  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZAjWbVwmcXc

Thanks, Dusty.

(I have that user name because of all my woodworking I do.)

Nice build Dusty! :)

   Justalabrat
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on April 17, 2009, 04:49:57 AM
Hi Hans,

Rigid joints on 'Measurable' and air-resistance on 'Low speed' (after all, despite vacuum, there are internal losses, as @mondrasek emphasized on several occasions), ignoring the non-physical weight of the ball holder, and all is well and good. (see attached).
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: X00013 on April 17, 2009, 05:48:42 AM
@ Hans, valid point point about the yoyo. Its all connected. If only you could find a video about a build researching gravity induced cf forces.   http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E2LxSGlLvL8
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: i_ron on April 17, 2009, 05:53:53 AM
My question is with regard to the above is: After the weight develops it potential energy prior to the 6:00 position, isn't most (if not all) of that potential energy alledgedly transferred to the wheel in the form of kinetic energy? Also, as the weights travel in toward the center from 6:00 to 9:00 they lose acceleration. With regard to both of these points, how is it that there is any energy left to create any forward momentum beyond the 9:00 point, let alone any centrifugal acceleration?

Regards,
Charlie

Charlie,

I am glad you have come around to agreeing with me.  It is hard to follow mondrasek in the above as he (they) were mixing in gyros. But the basic statement as to 6:00 to 9:00 in Abeling's wheel is that
once started up the ramp the weight, because it is having it's orbit made smaller, will increase its
velocity. This will drive the wheel in this 6:00 to 9:00 position.

But as I suggested before, there is no centrifugal sling effect between 9:00 and 12:00, (as you now
ask). If there were, the weights would fly out at 10:00 and beyond, right? They don't. Witness the
ramp changes from an outside ramp at 9:00 to an inside ramp so as the weight won't FALL into
the the axle end of the slot.

The unbalance drives the wheel in the 2:00 to 5:00 position, the 'orbit change' drives the wheel in the
6:00 to 9:00 position and the wheel uses these two forces to lift the weights from 9:00 to 12:00.

Ron



Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on April 17, 2009, 06:47:12 AM
@All,

In a slight, what may may seem as, support of @mondrasek's gyroscope conjecture. Does anyone recall the controversy started with the paper by Hayasaka H. and Takeuchi S., Phys.Rev.Lett., 63, 2701-2704 (1989) and its suspiciously fast "debunking", at that not even using the same setup (Fuller J.E. et al, Phys.Rev.Lett., 64, 825-826 (1990); Quinn T.J. and Picard A., Nature, 732-735 (1990))? Hayasaka and Takeuchi claimed experimental mass reduction in spinning gyroscopes for one sense of rotation. One should note, however, that even if such effect were real it isn't likely to be applicable in our case where the induced spinning can hardly be of a magnitude for the above mass reduction effect, even if real, to be detectable.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: AquariuZ on April 17, 2009, 02:22:27 PM
@All,

In a slight, what may may seem as, support of @mondrasek's gyroscope conjecture. Does anyone recall the controversy started with the paper by Hayasaka H. and Takeuchi S., Phys.Rev.Lett., 63, 2701-2704 (1989) and its suspiciously fast "debunking", at that not even using the same setup (Fuller J.E. et al, Phys.Rev.Lett., 64, 825-826 (1990); Quinn T.J. and Picard A., Nature, 732-735 (1990))? Hayasaka and Takeuchi claimed experimental mass reduction in spinning gyroscopes for one sense of rotation. One should note, however, that even if such effect were real it isn't likely to be applicable in our case where the induced spinning can hardly be of a magnitude for the above mass reduction effect, even if real, to be detectable.

YES

This does ring a bell, thanks for posting the details about this.  Again all the more interesting when taking all factors into account .

I am currently working on the initial "egg" model to see if I can find the optimal configuration where hopefully we should see something extraordinary. Note I do not expect to see any Hayasaka / Takeuchi mass reduction effect in a model. I do however expect to see "something" in a correct real world setup.

But hopefully modeling can be used in finding this setup including the correct paths the weights need to travel to achieve the imbalance which will accelerate the carrier.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on April 17, 2009, 02:35:46 PM
YES

This does ring a bell, thanks for posting the details about this.  Again all the more interesting when taking all factors into account .

I am currently working on the initial "egg" model to see if I can find the optimal configuration where hopefully we should see something extraordinary. Note I do not expect to see any Hayasaka / Takeuchi mass reduction effect in a model. I do however expect to see "something" in a correct real world setup.

But hopefully modeling can be used in finding this setup including the correct paths the weights need to travel to achieve the imbalance which will accelerate the carrier.

Yes. The "egg" model is the way to go. The devil is in the proper form of the track, if that is to be real. Hayasaki-Takeuchi mass-reduction effect is just a curiosity and is irrelevant here even it it's real.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: AquariuZ on April 17, 2009, 02:49:54 PM
Yes. The "egg" model is the way to go. The devil is in the proper form of the track, if that is to be real. Hayasaki-Takeuchi mass-reduction effect is just a curiosity and is irrelevant here even it it's real.

I disagree because I think it could cause an imbalance in a spinning carrier

Acceleration...!
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: 3decimal14 on April 17, 2009, 03:48:04 PM
Take a look at this pages, could that be the right egg-shape?
http://www.evert.de/eft778e.htm
http://www.evert.de/eft782e.htm

/Tommy
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: noonespecial on April 17, 2009, 03:53:16 PM
Since my last video of my theory of operation, I have built a device.  It is not finished and that will take a few more days.  I changed some of my thinking on how it works since the patent was released just a couple days after my last video.  I need to build the tracks next and that will take a bunch of experimenting.  You have to realize this device is only a starting point.  If it works right off the bat, well fine, but otherwise I will rebuild the wheels and tracks as necessary.  There are several factors to consider such as diameter of wheel, placement of slots and their shape, weight of the dumbells and probably most important is the shape of the tracking system.

Video here:  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZAjWbVwmcXc

Thanks, Dusty.

(I have that user name because of all my woodworking I do.)

I'd like to echo the positive sentiment with regard to someone finally attempting to biuld one of these. You've done a fantastic job so far. My only suggestion might be with regard to the ends of the 'hockey-stick' cutouts. There doesn't appear to be a lot of 'meat' left between the cutout and the edge of the wheel. If these 5 pound weights get flying with any force, they could easily break this area out. You might want to add some strapping along the edge in these areas. Just a suggestion.....

Charlie
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: AquariuZ on April 17, 2009, 04:05:22 PM
Take a look at this pages, could that be the right egg-shape?
http://www.evert.de/eft778e.htm
http://www.evert.de/eft782e.htm

/Tommy

Very, very interesting, especially the second link. Just take the RV claim with a grain of salt it looks interesting..

So much to read, so little time.  :(

Thanks Tommy

edit: look at this too:
http://www.evert.de/eft784e.htm

Especially the inward swing on counter clockwise motion.

Wow
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on April 17, 2009, 04:27:25 PM
Take a look at this pages, could that be the right egg-shape?
http://www.evert.de/eft778e.htm
http://www.evert.de/eft782e.htm

/Tommy

That's indeed very interesting. Would it be possible to invite this guy over here in this forum to have him aid us in constructing what he calls potatotrack? The solution is in the proper form of the track, nothing else, if there's something to Abeling's claim, this is how I see it. Probably Stefan can get in touch with him and invite him over here. The guy is in Germany, isn't he?
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: AquariuZ on April 17, 2009, 04:37:15 PM
That's indeed very interesting. Would it be possible to invite this guy over here in this forum to have him aid us in constructing what he calls potatotrack? The solution is in the proper form of the track, nothing else, if there's something to Abeling's claim, this is how I see it. Probably Stefan can get in touch with him and invite him over here. The guy is in Germany, isn't he?

Agree 100%

And, if you choose to venture into the gray, you may ask him & his people to Remote View the Abeling device.

No joke, he claims this is how they go the plans, by RV.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: AquariuZ on April 17, 2009, 04:40:16 PM
The potato shape reminds me of Ralph Love´s 2004 Patent (6,694,844)

This one..
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on April 17, 2009, 04:48:57 PM
Wonder if Abeling has read this guy's account prior to constructing his wheel?

As for remote viewing you should ask the greatest expert on the subject - Hal Puthoff. I don't think it's applicable here, though, despite what Evert says. Some of his physical considerations, however, are worth looking into, There's slight language barrier, however, making his points not always clear enough.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: AquariuZ on April 17, 2009, 04:58:52 PM
Wonder if Abeling has read this guy's account prior to constructing his wheel?

If you mean Evert´s: unlikely.

If you mean Ralph Love: you bet.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: hansvonlieven on April 17, 2009, 05:16:58 PM
In theory, no. But to show you the math I am not the one to do so..

Yes, perhaps so from a standing start, however as the speed increases the CF increases exponentially, then the picture is quite different.

Is gravity enough to reach a speed high enough to cause a surplus?

Hans von Lieven
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: pstroud on April 17, 2009, 09:53:44 PM
I have created a new page on www.peswiki.com for the SJack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the worlds first Weight Power Plant.

Please help to update the page with new content.

http://peswiki.com/index.php/Directory:SJack_Abeling_-_Gravity_Wheel_-_Weight_Power_Plant (http://peswiki.com/index.php/Directory:SJack_Abeling_-_Gravity_Wheel_-_Weight_Power_Plant)

Preston

Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: AquariuZ on April 18, 2009, 12:36:32 AM
I have created a new page on www.peswiki.com for the SJack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the worlds first Weight Power Plant.

Please help to update the page with new content.

http://peswiki.com/index.php/Directory:SJack_Abeling_-_Gravity_Wheel_-_Weight_Power_Plant (http://peswiki.com/index.php/Directory:SJack_Abeling_-_Gravity_Wheel_-_Weight_Power_Plant)

Preston

Excellent Preston, great to see the materials getting around...

Hopefully we can "nudge" Sjack into publishing his theory soon.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: AquariuZ on April 18, 2009, 12:47:50 AM
@all

Could this be a clue in our quest?

Weights hitting padded versus unpadded surfaces creating an imbalance in the rotation

Video of rotating wheel by L. Tseung

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zykButGc22U&feature=channel

Another thing:

Did anyone ever try the Wang Shum Ho experiment?

Take a glass bowl with water
Take a four legged stool and place it upside down on the bowl
Have four people put their right hand on the tip of one leg each of the stool
what should happen is that the water starts to spin
then the bowl and stool
Now switch hands and use left hand to change direction of spin

Sounds so far fetched it is probably true  8)

Quote
The “mysterious movement of water in a bowl under a 4 legged stool” is real and logical. Hundreds of tests at Tsing Hua University successful

I am falling deeper and deeper into the rabbit hole here
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: 0c on April 18, 2009, 02:01:05 AM
Nobody seems to think the idea I posted earlier is worth modeling. So I took the time to do a crude GIF animation to illustrate what I was trying to say. There are several ways to improve on the design. It is not self-starting, but needs to be spun up fast enough that balls will exit with enough momentum to get back up to the top.

There are several ways this design can be optimized. Adding some padding where the ball hits the hub will allow more kinetic energy transfer from the impact. The number of spokes might need to be changed to allow the ball more (or less) time to hit. The tube or chute curvature and length can be modified to shorten the path back to the top, could even be shortened more so the balls impact the spokes horizontally instead of vertically.

It's just a start. It should be modeled with a reliable simulation software to see just how feasible it really is.

Bessler Wheel Concept animation
http://www.overunity.com/index.php?action=tpmod;dl=get267
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: AquariuZ on April 18, 2009, 02:40:05 AM
Nobody seems to think the idea I posted earlier is worth modeling. So I took the time to do a crude GIF animation to illustrate what I was trying to say. There are several ways to improve on the design. It is not self-starting, but needs to be spun up fast enough that balls will exit with enough momentum to get back up to the top.

There are several ways this design can be optimized. Adding some padding where the ball hits the hub will allow more kinetic energy transfer from the impact. The number of spokes might need to be changed to allow the ball more (or less) time to hit. The tube or chute curvature and length can be modified to shorten the path back to the top, could even be shortened more so the balls impact the spokes horizontally instead of vertically.

It's just a start. It should be modeled with a reliable simulation software to see just how feasible it really is.

Bessler Wheel Concept animation
http://www.overunity.com/index.php?action=tpmod;dl=get267

Hi 0c,

Sorry I must have missed your design.

It looks original, but I have my doubts as to how the balls leaving the wheel will get back to the top again because the acceleration required is not enough to overcome the gravitational pull to bring the ball back to the start position. I´ll try and model it if you can be a little more specific on the return path.

To add: you can naturally spin the wheel up to get enough momentum to bring a single ball back to the top, but it will slow down if you do not pulse it with an external force and will slow down eventually because the balls can no longer reach the top for the lack of momentum, and I do not see this wheel permanently accelerating (yet)
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: 0c on April 18, 2009, 03:28:57 AM
I have my doubts as to how the balls leaving the wheel will get back to the top again because the acceleration required is not enough to overcome the gravitational pull to bring the ball back to the start position. I´ll try and model it if you can be a little more specific on the return path.

To add: you can naturally spin the wheel up to get enough momentum to bring a single ball back to the top, but it will slow down if you do not pulse it with an external force and will slow down eventually because the balls can no longer reach the top for the lack of momentum, and I do not see this wheel permanently accelerating (yet)

The return path can be much shorter and more efficient than I showed in my animation. I drew it that way so it would be easier to see that the return chute is completely independent of the wheel. In my mind, the chute should curve up sharply and should return the ball to the wheel just above the hub, at a 45 degree angle to a spoke that is just past vertical. This would allow the ball to retain some of its vertical momentum and transfer it directly to the wheel.

But to get started, you could just model what I showed. The wheel will need to be spun up to a speed where the balls will exit with enough momentum to carry them back to the top before the balls start dropping. The wheel should weigh more than the sum of the balls. A shorter return path will have less losses.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: AquariuZ on April 18, 2009, 03:34:53 AM
The return path can be much shorter and more efficient than I showed in my animation. I drew it that way so it would be easier to see that the return chute is completely independent of the wheel. In my mind, the chute should curve up sharply and should return the ball to the wheel just above the hub, at a 45 degree angle to a spoke that is just past vertical. This would allow the ball to retain some of its vertical momentum and transfer it directly to the wheel.

But to get started, you could just model what I showed. The wheel will need to be spun up to a speed where the balls will exit with enough momentum to carry them back to the top before the balls start dropping. The wheel should weigh more than the sum of the balls. A shorter return path will have less losses.

Ok a quick one done. Crude wm2d model attached.

It fails (sorry) because the wheel needs to spin in such a rate to bring the ball back up that on the downpath the ball does not impose a downward force on the wheel (moves faster than gravitational acceleration of the falling balls)

Hence it will slow down to a point where the wheel is no longer able to bring the balls back up.

In other words, the balls cannot keep the wheel spinning at such a rate as is required to bring even one back up.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: 0c on April 18, 2009, 04:07:14 AM
Ok a quick one done. Crude wm2d model attached.

It fails (sorry) because the wheel needs to spin in such a rate to bring the ball back up that on the downpath the ball does not impose a downward force on the wheel (moves faster than gravitational acceleration of the falling balls)

Hence it will slow down to a point where the wheel is no longer able to bring the balls back up.

In other words, the balls cannot keep the wheel spinning at such a rate as is required to bring even one back up.

If a tight curve is used for the chute and it only returns to just above the hub of the wheel, is there enough energy left in the ball for it to catch up with the rotation of the inner part of the wheel?

PS: I don't have WM2D, so if anything looks promising please post an image or video.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: hansvonlieven on April 18, 2009, 05:07:27 AM
Ok a quick one done. Crude wm2d model attached.

It fails (sorry) because the wheel needs to spin in such a rate to bring the ball back up that on the downpath the ball does not impose a downward force on the wheel (moves faster than gravitational acceleration of the falling balls)

Hence it will slow down to a point where the wheel is no longer able to bring the balls back up.

In other words, the balls cannot keep the wheel spinning at such a rate as is required to bring even one back up.

I guess that answers my earlier question.  >:(

Hans von Lieven

BTW. How come we are still hoping when we really know better.

Go figure   ??? ???

Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on April 18, 2009, 05:23:00 AM
I guess that answers my earlier question.  >:(

Hans von Lieven

BTW. How come we are still hoping when we really know better.

Go figure   ??? ???



These ideas are an obvious dead-end and no time and effort should be wasted on them. The only hope in Abeling's case is whether or not there can be a combination of proper wheel spokes and what we call here “egg”-shaped groove, which would ensure persistent violation of the lever balance rule. If you can prove that no such combination can exist then this project is a goner.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: hansvonlieven on April 18, 2009, 06:46:25 AM
G'day Omnibus,

As long as there is a black box in the system that supposedly does something unknown to science but the principle of which is not revealed by the inventor there is no way to prove that such a system cannot work.

All scam merchants rely on this.  >:(

Hans von Lieven
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on April 18, 2009, 07:20:07 AM
G'day Omnibus,

As long as there is a black box in the system that supposedly does something unknown to science but the principle of which is not revealed by the inventor there is no way to prove that such a system cannot work.

All scam merchants rely on this.  >:(

Hans von Lieven

I don't think the fact that something is unknown to science can be an argument invalidating it. Every discovery has been unknown to science. This seems more like, if I may offer an analogy, proving that a given polynomial can never have certain types of roots. Until that's rigorously proven opinions that because it hasn't been known to science (hasn't been proven so far) it obviously is so have no merit. In our case, we have to prove that there can never be a combination of any form of the egg-shaped track with any form of the wheel spoke which will ever produce a persistent violation of the lever balance rule. The solution to this problem isn't evident.

That's the nature of what scientists do -- offer solutions that thus far have been unknown to science. Only engineers tackle problems based on phenomena known to science.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: khabe on April 18, 2009, 09:15:51 AM
15 days - 90 pages  and ... not any working models?
Come on, guys!
 8)
cheers,
khabe
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: AquariuZ on April 18, 2009, 11:28:58 AM
I guess that answers my earlier question.  >:(

Hans von Lieven

BTW. How come we are still hoping when we really know better.

Go figure   ??? ???



Because Bessler did it.

Or do you have doubts he did?
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: AquariuZ on April 18, 2009, 11:37:14 AM
G'day Omnibus,

As long as there is a black box in the system that supposedly does something unknown to science but the principle of which is not revealed by the inventor there is no way to prove that such a system cannot work.

My thoughts exactly.

Quote
All scam merchants rely on this.  >:(

Hans von Lieven

Abeling does not match the scam profile, so I disagree.

As I posted earlier:

A) Has money
B) You cannot invest (at least not as individual) anymore
C) He has proven deals with known companies
D) He may or may not have an agreement for an experimental setup by the government (waiting response)
E) I believe in him  8)

There is no reason for a scam, hence there is no scam.

The Netherlands are not the U.S. or Australia, and Ter Apel, well, ask any dutchman.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: AquariuZ on April 18, 2009, 11:43:25 AM
15 days - 90 pages  and ... not any working models?
Come on, guys!
 8)
cheers,
khabe

There are working models flying around everywhere, just none that display consistent acceleration.

But by all means, feel free to jump in anytime...

AZ  8)
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: canam101 on April 18, 2009, 12:32:15 PM
15 days - 90 pages  and ... not any working models?
Come on, guys!

You are looking at this the wrong way: the 90 pages are a sign of a successful overunity.com thread. The 230 pages at the mylow thread show an even greater success story.

The object of this site is not to build OU devices, it is to fantasize about them, and the two threads have been very successful in that regard.

Personally, I prefer the mylow thread because of the complexity of the magnetic fields. There is a lot of room for mystery and fantasy.

This thread is a little too simple: a wheel and slots and guides. There is not enough mystery about it. Still, it is enjoyable and doing well.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on April 18, 2009, 12:56:49 PM
@canam101,

Quote
the object of this site is not to build OU devices, it is to fantasize about them

So, where’s your proof that a contraptions such as the one offered by Abeling can never work so that we can believe you that this thread is only about fantasizing about it working? Don’t tell me, however, that the proof is because someone has told you that such contraptions have never worked before.

Now, because I don’t expect such proof from you, my conclusion is that the object of your participation in this thread is to blabber nonsense and share it with others having the same inclination. The most such activity can achieve is clutter the thread but you obviously don’t mind it.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on April 18, 2009, 01:01:37 PM
15 days - 90 pages  and ... not any working models?
Come on, guys!
 8)
cheers,
khabe

Oh, sure. Propaganda says it has been tried for several centuries and hasn't worked. Propaganda is right -- new 15 days and 30 pages and nothing. Propaganda is always right -- centuries have passed and there was no radio and airplanes, therefore, there cannot be such a thing, as we all know.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: canam101 on April 18, 2009, 01:24:47 PM
@canam101,

So, where’s your proof that a contraptions such as the one offered by Abeling can never work

I am not talking about Abeling's wheel, but about this site. Not one of the hundreds of devices that have been discussed here has turned out to be OU.

That doesn't mean the site is useless. It is a great place to fantasize about OU; it is one of my favorite places on the internet.

As far as Abeling's wheel goes, people have been trying to get work out of unbalanced wheels for 200 years: they did not succeed and there is not the slightest reason to think that Abeling will succeed either. If you think there is some reason that his wheel will do work, let's hear it.

Another thing: Abeling hasn't even shown the wheel turning has he? At least mylow shot some video showing his wheel turning, even if he was obviously deluded or faking.

Abeling at least owes us a little more for our fantasies to feed on.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on April 18, 2009, 02:13:39 PM
@canam101,

Quote
people have been trying to get work out of unbalanced wheels for 200 years: they did not succeed

You’re just repeating what the propaganda says. There’s no proof that that is true.
It very well may be that such devices have existed in the past but have been suppressed. A lot of nasty nonsense is going on in the world of science as we speak,  that people such as those participating in this forum can do nothing about. The fact, however, that people in this forum can do nothing about the blatant nonsense going on in the world of science right now, as we speak, in no way means that everything is OK. If you don't have agenda or anything to gain from serving the propaganda, leave advocating that propaganda crap to its own lackeys and try to think with your own head.

Quote
there is not the slightest reason to think that Abeling will succeed either. If you think there is some reason that his wheel will do work, let's hear it.

A form of the egg-shaped groove, combined with a particular form of the wheel spokes may exist which will ensure permanent violation of the level balance rule. If you disagree prove rigorously that such combination yielding said result can never exist. If you can’t prove that rigorously and just keep on repeating what you’ve heard from the propaganda is simply useless.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: canam101 on April 18, 2009, 02:19:22 PM
@canam101,

A form of the egg-shaped groove, combined with a particular form of the wheel spokes may exist which will ensure permanent violation of the level balance rule.

And pigs may fly.  Enjoy your fantasies, but try to recognize that they _are_ fantasies.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on April 18, 2009, 02:25:27 PM
And pigs may fly.  Enjoy your fantasies, but try to recognize that they _are_ fantasies.

Not at all. Pigs don't fly doesn't cut the mustard. I told you what the condition for you is to become trustworthy. Until then restrain from calling fantasies something which you have no clue about.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: AquariuZ on April 18, 2009, 02:29:42 PM
Omnibus, you are cracking up my friend. Hang in there I value your input more than you may think...

@canam101 I know I live in lala land. If you want hard evidence to that effect turn on your television and take your pick from 258 channels of mind spam.

Omnibus is right about the propaganda.

The static imbalance in the egg setup though: I fear the worst.... but keep trying anyway, my current hopes are experimentation with the hockeystick holders. If it can be reproduced in wm2d is another matter but we use what we have...

My real world attempts with ramp are not underway yet, I cannot get decent weights (out of stock)
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: AquariuZ on April 18, 2009, 02:32:40 PM
Not at all. Pigs don't fly doesn't cut the mustard. I told you what the condition for you is to become trustworthy. Until then restrain from calling fantasies something which you have no clue about.

You wouldn´t believe all the stuff I have waded through the last 30 or so hours. An introduction to Lawrence Tseung almost made me get a bowl of water and put a stool on top of it to see if the water starts spinning.

I said almost.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on April 18, 2009, 03:01:43 PM
@AquariuZ,

Quote
my current hopes are experimentation with the hockeystick holders.

Of course. That's what I'm saying -- the proper combination of the holders and the track is what is being sought.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on April 18, 2009, 03:10:57 PM
I'm afraid the proper combination I'm talking about cannot be found just by trial and error. Not only it has to be found analytically but machining has to be very precise. If Abeling has really done it, I think he's had unusual luck. To find the proper relationships and make it is not less than winning the lottery, it seems. One can hardly make even a Porsche in his kitchen and even in his home workshop in the basement.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: AquariuZ on April 18, 2009, 04:00:16 PM
I'm afraid the proper combination I'm talking about cannot be found just by trial and error. Not only it has to be found analytically but machining has to be very precise. If Abeling has really done it, I think he's had unusual luck. To find the proper relationships and make it is not less than winning the lottery, it seems. One can hardly make even a Porsche in his kitchen and even in his home workshop in the basement.

You are again right ofcourse, but I am hoping to be extremely lucky too.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: X00013 on April 18, 2009, 06:41:10 PM
I always think of what works already, so maybe for the egg shape, try the elliptical pattern of the moon ( an ellipse of 5.1 degrees I think ). And a cool picture if the pattern.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: 3decimal14 on April 18, 2009, 07:16:05 PM
Just thinking out load...

...what if the dumbells weights around the wheel is unbalanced. Like wobbling when going in the loop.

/Tommy
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: persume on April 18, 2009, 07:49:09 PM
Because Bessler did it.

Or do you have doubts he did?
\
Directed at you AquariuZ, because Bessler did it is by far a proper answer and is no proof at all.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: AquariuZ on April 18, 2009, 08:29:20 PM
\
Directed at you AquariuZ, because Bessler did it is by far a proper answer and is no proof at all.

It does set a precedent, doesn't it?

Come to think of it - I am taking a break from Abeling.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: persume on April 18, 2009, 08:37:57 PM
It does set a precedent, doesn't it?

Come to think of it - I am taking a break from Abeling.

Damm, sorry AquariuZ, I meant to say not a proper answer. Anyway, sorry to take a shot at you but, seriously, I find these kinds of replys, and there are many of them from a lot of people, really really silly.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: X00013 on April 19, 2009, 02:43:37 AM


Come to think of it - I am taking a break from Abeling.
[/quote]


Dont "brake" now , try the moons pattern, it's been working for the moon for a very long time. I say this because it's easier to ask than to do  ;D
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Dusty on April 19, 2009, 03:02:14 AM
Just another update.  I found some old plywood curve shapes and tried them on the wheel.  Like I say this is all guess work which will give me ideas to build the next test.  This video is just to show what I'm working on because once I make a big change it will be too late to see what I've tried.  If you see something I should try, just let me know.  The weight only needs to go 1 1/4" higher to reach the hockey stick slot.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=THC9mx7W1hg

Dusty
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: LarryC on April 19, 2009, 06:18:33 AM
Just another update.  I found some old plywood curve shapes and tried them on the wheel.  Like I say this is all guess work which will give me ideas to build the next test.  This video is just to show what I'm working on because once I make a big change it will be too late to see what I've tried.  If you see something I should try, just let me know.  The weight only needs to go 1 1/4" higher to reach the hockey stick slot.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=THC9mx7W1hg

Dusty

Very good Dusty,

But could you try to cut your guides closer to Eisenfickker2000's shape.

I also don't think your double pillows are a problem with friction. There friction ratio should be extremely low and a non issue. In fact, based on my testing, they should reduce any warping pressure that would result in much higher friction.

Regards, Larry



 
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Philip Hardcastle on April 19, 2009, 06:26:13 AM
Anyone here remember Dr. Eugene Podkletnov?

He reported that a spinning superconductor disc would reduce gravity by a few percent.

Not wishing to throw in a red herring it does seem to me that if he were right then one side of the wheel could get 10% less gravity and perhaps somehow the other side get 10% more gravity.

Whatever happend to Eugene.

He actually rang me from Finland when I suggested there could be a reason for the effect based upon differential electrostatics. He was most interested that I predicted certain phenomena with a theory that said gravity might not be just about mass to mass attraction.

Phil
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Philip Hardcastle on April 19, 2009, 06:31:46 AM
He asked me to talk to some italian mathematician (modonese or something) but I did not.

I cannot recall but I think the Italian professor published a paper trying to explain the effect and how it would fit in with conservation of energy. I guess (and I have not read the paper) he must have suggested energy came from the universe in the direction of the gravity reduction.

Perhaps someone might dig and find more.

I however still hold the view that a simple lever etc wheel will not work, so I feel perhaps we should think outside the circle, so to speak.

Phil
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Philip Hardcastle on April 19, 2009, 06:45:16 AM
I found this article about gravity and some experiments to show gravity might be modified.

http://www.newscientist.com/article/mg19225771.800


Also Eugene Podkletnov is on wikipedia
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Philip Hardcastle on April 19, 2009, 06:50:25 AM
I never published my theory but for what it is worth I argued that at a particular frequency (not calculated) of an electrostatic field a superconductor would exhibit a shielding effect to gravity.

I note that since then there have been tests to look at a magnetic inflluence. It seems to me that such would be interchangeable with electric fields. The critical frequency would be a sort of resonance of the material with respect to the time constant of electron orbitals. Perhaps if someone is up to date with the research they might care to let me know if I was on the right track.

Phil
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on April 19, 2009, 06:53:01 AM
Like I said, anyone who holds the view that a simple lever wheel, especially in Abeling's embodiment, will not work should prove that rigorously. Stating over and over again that such wheel will not work, only based on hunch, is meaningless.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Philip Hardcastle on April 19, 2009, 06:57:59 AM
@omnibus

Was the previous comment referring to me?

Phil
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: AquariuZ on April 19, 2009, 11:58:17 AM
It will not work for now because something is missing.

I am looking for that something

@moon orbit: No, because the force of gravity between these two bodies is not unidirectional like on earth you cannot translate these orbits to a wheel on earth. Well, you can, but it will not work

There is something else

You cannot have a constant imbalance in a wheel unless....

Talk to me Bessler, you greedy bastard.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: pstroud on April 19, 2009, 03:35:48 PM
Hi Dusty!

I'm very impressed with your replication build.  You are off to an excellent start.  Nice work!

I have been posting your videos on the www.peswiki.com website for all to see.

http://peswiki.com/index.php/Directory:SJack_Abeling_-_Gravity_Wheel_-_Weight_Power_Plant

When I read the Sjack patent english details, I had the understanding that there is a center rod that connects the opposing weights for a dual lift system.  If you added the connecting rod into your test, it may eliminate some of the friction you refer to by allowing the two lifting systems to work together.

Just a thought.  Keep up the good work.  I'm looking forward to seeing your end results.

Preston
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Alexioco on April 19, 2009, 03:41:32 PM
It will not work for now because something is missing.

I am looking for that something

@moon orbit: No, because the force of gravity between these two bodies is not unidirectional like on earth you cannot translate these orbits to a wheel on earth. Well, you can, but it will not work

There is something else

You cannot have a constant imbalance in a wheel unless....

Talk to me Bessler, you greedy bastard.

LOL you have it in for poor Bessler now you do haha 10 years of study before he got the answer, he must of worked very hard to find that the answer was simple  ???

edit: IMHO I dont think bessler used a ramp to guide the weights up the wheel, I think they purly lifted themselves up and dropped down by some special mechanism that he sought, we need to study his MT (the wheel drawings that he left us) he hints at certain ones giving us a good idea which ones need combining so then making it possible to look for the movement... if you look at MT 20, I think I may have worked it out when he says about putting the horse before the cart, I think it means swap the two weights around, not the levers, just the weights, because a weight on a longer axle has more force near the axle that it pivots on meaning a light weight can lift a heavy one, there is also reference to it on the apologia...

Alex
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: broli on April 19, 2009, 05:34:00 PM
Here is the proof of how some can ruin it for the whole world;

http://www.besslerwheel.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=2874

This is the kind of attitude that disgusts me, having it unfold before my eyes is even worse.

Here you have a lad that is a bit shy to share then come in these money hungry old farts and ruining it for everybody else. How can the world progress like this? I'm sick and tired of these people.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: AquariuZ on April 19, 2009, 05:44:59 PM
Here you have a lad that is a bit shy to share then come in these money hungry old farts and ruining it for everybody else. How can the world progress like this? I'm sick and tired of these people.

If it is any consolation: I do not think "BAR" has anything spectacular. He has not even a prototype or model yet and claims he has found the "secret" of gravitation. and a bridge to sell in IRAQ.

Maybe for the "Truth" section, but believe me, we do not need money nor government to survive.
If the long fingers keep it up more and more people will disconnect and stop playing the game voluntarily. (easy)
Look for Jacques Fresco & Peter Joseph.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: AquariuZ on April 19, 2009, 05:56:36 PM
edit: IMHO I dont think bessler used a ramp to guide the weights up the wheel, I think they purly lifted themselves up and dropped down by some special mechanism that he sought, we need to study his MT (the wheel drawings that he left us) he hints at certain ones giving us a good idea which ones need combining so then making it possible to look for the movement... if you look at MT 20, I think I may have worked it out when he says about putting the horse before the cart, I think it means swap the two weights around, not the levers, just the weights, because a weight on a longer axle has more force near the axle that it pivots on meaning a light weight can lift a heavy one, there is also reference to it on the apologia...

Sidestepping to Bessler here (basically trolling my own thread  ;D )

The key seems to store the kinetic energy generated by the gravitational pull on the weights and share it back between the lifting process and the rotation of the wheel.

Springs come to mind.

Just for reference, MT20 here: http://www.orffyre.com/MTHard020.gif
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on April 19, 2009, 06:06:49 PM
Ignore the new clone of @alsetalokin with the new handle @BAR. Don't be gullible. These @Tinsel Koala's of the world are paid (maybe not only monetarily but in various other ways) to act in these "innovative" ways of fighting for the party line, so that the rest of the incredible nasty nonsense going on in science, massively misappropriating billions of dollars in public funds, is well protected. Obviously, the powers that be, elaborately stealing from the public billions of dollars under the pretense of doing "proper science", have found out that in the age of internet that's one way to fight what they perceive as the wide-eyed garage-geniuses who, God knows, may suddenly stand in their way if something not under their control pops up in their basements and home workshops.   
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: persume on April 19, 2009, 07:33:21 PM
Here is the proof of how some can ruin it for the whole world;

http://www.besslerwheel.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=2874

This is the kind of attitude that disgusts me, having it unfold before my eyes is even worse.

Here you have a lad that is a bit shy to share then come in these money hungry old farts and ruining it for everybody else. How can the world progress like this? I'm sick and tired of these people.

Want to know the type of people I am sick and tired of? Trolls that frequent forums like Bessler wheel, who look and look because they lack creative initiative, who might offer a service or advice just to gain some trust to reap an idea here or there from an unwitting suspect. People crying, it's all about sharing, lets do it together, please help me, or, I'll help you friend - pat on the back, now what do I get in return...don't worry our secrets safe with me...etc. It's disgusting, and yeah I hate the kind of people you are refering to as well the, I know I know, so here it is...Greedy swine broli, greedy swine who have the audacity to call Bessler greedy when it took over ten years to get to what he did.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: overtaker on April 19, 2009, 07:41:03 PM
I bet Broli was a tattle tale as a child!
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: AquariuZ on April 19, 2009, 07:43:34 PM
Just thinking out loud: If Abeling is using springs where would he put them?
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: i_ron on April 19, 2009, 07:58:36 PM
Just another update.  I found some old plywood curve shapes and tried them on the wheel.  Like I say this is all guess work which will give me ideas to build the next test.  This video is just to show what I'm working on because once I make a big change it will be too late to see what I've tried.  If you see something I should try, just let me know.  The weight only needs to go 1 1/4" higher to reach the hockey stick slot.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=THC9mx7W1hg

Dusty

Very good indeed Dusty, my couple of thoughts are as follows...

The axle should go right the way through both discs ...with just the two pillow blocks as Larry
suggests. But most importantly your upper ramp needs to be just a little longer and have the
flat of the hockey stick slot contact the bearing as it leaves the ramp. You don't want it to stall but
it needs to give it a little bat or squeeze as it leaves the ramp to shoot the axle and weight to
the end of the slot..."If the system would fail to catch the propelled weight, the weight would be ejected from the system with force." there is nothing propelling your weight out, right?

The space between the ramp and the slot at the final moment must be just smaller than the
bearing diameter, so that the axle is propeller that final inch or two to the end of the slot, like
standing on the tooth paste tube...like cutting on a round rod with scissors....your final contact
angles need to be like a pair of scissors....

You have remarkable travel as it is with only two weights and I am almost sure with more weights
that it might even be greater, good work!

Ron

Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: AquariuZ on April 19, 2009, 08:13:09 PM
Want to know the type of people I am sick and tired of? Trolls that frequent forums like Bessler wheel, who look and look because they lack creative initiative, who might offer a service or advice just to gain some trust to reap an idea here or there from an unwitting suspect. People crying, it's all about sharing, lets do it together, please help me, or, I'll help you friend - pat on the back, now what do I get in return...don't worry our secrets safe with me...etc. It's disgusting, and yeah I hate the kind of people you are refering to as well the, I know I know, so here it is...Greedy swine broli, greedy swine who have the audacity to call Bessler greedy when it took over ten years to get to what he did.

I have no idea what the hell you are talking about. The people who should get their heads out of their arses are the ones who think they can get away with a patent on an overunity device.

Anyone who is not willing to share an invention which will profoundly further mankind is either too dumb to realise he or she will bathe in riches regardless of patent or money for selling or not because the CREDIT will be linked to them, are too greedy or simply have nothing to show and are looking for attention.

Bessler falls into the second category.

Genius or not, Bessler was a greedy bastard and I do blame him for not disclosing his invention.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: i_ron on April 19, 2009, 08:18:35 PM
Very good indeed Dusty, my couple of thoughts are as follows...
snip
You have remarkable travel as it is with only two weights and I am almost sure with more weights
that it might even be greater, good work!

Ron

I have to say that again, great work, you are doing every thing right! To see the weight climb as high
as it does is amazing... I thought it would be all over at 9:00, this is good news.

Your ramps are working, and with more weights on the down side and more weights on the up ramp
it will work just fine.

How much nicer to see an actual build like this, rather than the waste of time wm2D crap, lol

Ron


Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: AquariuZ on April 19, 2009, 08:29:20 PM
Dusty, fantastic work.........!
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: i_ron on April 19, 2009, 08:41:05 PM

Genius or not, Bessler was a greedy bastard and I do blame him for not disclosing his invention.

Maybe in reality it is the greedy bastard that wants something for nothing.

But it was his decision, made for reasons that he considered valid.

Maybe he read the book where JC says, "don't throw pearls before swine"

I accept his decision, quit monday morning quarter backing and get on with it...

Ron
 
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: persume on April 19, 2009, 08:44:18 PM
I have no idea what the hell you are talking about. The people who should get their heads out of their arses are the ones who think they can get away with a patent on an overunity device.

Anyone who is not willing to share an invention which will profoundly further mankind is either too dumb to realise he or she will bathe in riches regardless of patent or money for selling or not because the CREDIT will be linked to them, are too greedy or simply have nothing to show and are looking for attention.

Bessler falls into the second category.

Genius or not, Bessler was a greedy bastard and I do blame him for not disclosing his invention.

Spend ten plus years trying to develop something, put all of your time into it, then speak up and see if greed has anything to do with it. Be attacked by others who want what you've done, not respecting how much work you've done, then speak up and say "I'm being greedy". Better yet put your money where your mouth is and take all of earnings you've made for the last ten years and give it all away. Then throw the stone that shows how charitable you have been.
Don't blame Bessler for your lack of appreciation for hard work done. Show me truly how heroic you are by following the exact same path but by deviating at the end and giving it all away. Finally, don't you dare and try to compare a society and a lifestyle of 300 years ago with today. Bessler had nothing to do with todays situation we are in.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: persume on April 19, 2009, 08:46:11 PM
Maybe in reality it is the greedy bastard that wants something for nothing.


Maybe he read the book where JC says, "don't throw pearls before swine"



Ron
 

Exactly and you've read my mind with that last part, only I decided not to say it.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: overtaker on April 19, 2009, 08:47:24 PM
AquariuZ,  Automobiles were beneficial to mankind, should they not be patented?  High efficiency products ( ac,  hot water tanks, appliances, etc. etc. etc. )  are beneficial to mankind,  should they not be patented?   Medicine is beneficial to mankind, should they not be patented?  Why be so harsh on someone who would want to patent a gravity wheel?  By the way you don't seem to be upset that Sjack has patented his wheel.  Patenting something MAKES it public. 
Burying this technology is a different story.   Am I wrong?
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Alexioco on April 19, 2009, 09:06:40 PM
Dusty, may i just say, that is fantastic work, I could not build half as good as you, I cant wait to see when you have all the weights in, seems promising to me...

Alex
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: AquariuZ on April 19, 2009, 09:52:04 PM
...and the left hand shakes the right hand.

And why -do tell- did he not reveal the secret on his death bed then?

Mankind are swine?

And yes if I find something like this I will shove it down your throaths free of charge and happy to do it. As my "getting on" with it:

How much are YOU going to pay me?

Pathetic closed source thinking.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: AquariuZ on April 19, 2009, 09:56:01 PM
AquariuZ,  Automobiles were beneficial to mankind, should they not be patented?  High efficiency products ( ac,  hot water tanks, appliances, etc. etc. etc. )  are beneficial to mankind,  should they not be patented?   Medicine is beneficial to mankind, should they not be patented?  Why be so harsh on someone who would want to patent a gravity wheel?  By the way you don't seem to be upset that Sjack has patented his wheel.  Patenting something MAKES it public. 
Burying this technology is a different story.   Am I wrong?

You are right in the context of a monetary based society

You are dead wrong in a resource based technological society, where all advances are for the benefit of all mankind, not just the individual who makes the discovery.

The Abeling patent only reveals he is holding back something, unless unbalanced gravity wheels suddenly decided to start working.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: overtaker on April 19, 2009, 10:31:19 PM
Why did Bessler not reveal his secrete on his death bed?  Maybe cause he died on impact!  I wasn't there so that's my guess.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: eisenficker2000 on April 19, 2009, 10:32:40 PM
@Dusty, very good setup!

Try to get at least one more pair of weights (and hockeysticks) in at 90 degees . To use a part of their inequal moment to get over the dead point  (near top point of the track) of the first set.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: persume on April 20, 2009, 01:56:50 AM
...and the left hand shakes the right hand.

And why -do tell- did he not reveal the secret on his death bed then?

Mankind are swine?

And yes if I find something like this I will shove it down your throaths free of charge and happy to do it. As my "getting on" with it:

How much are YOU going to pay me?

Pathetic closed source thinking.

I guess you don't know that much about Bessler. He died falling from a roof of a building. I'm asking you to give up ten years of your lifes work and all money you've made. Will you do it? Live the comparison, walk in the shoes before you comment.

Left hand shaking what right hand?

The swine comment comes from the bible, but the understanding is a human one and probably a lot older than that. It means the average couch potato, you know ...the kind that want thier fast food and want it now, appreciates and respects very little. Yet they always have some kind of idealistic comment ( if they even think at all ) about society. Easy to judge.  Try putting some experience behind it, it won't make you bitter if your, well...pure souled, if you have a good intent, it will make you better. How easy to smash a glass window, how hard to create. "Swine" will never consider that before picking up a rock.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: hansvonlieven on April 20, 2009, 03:01:59 AM
I have no idea what the hell you are talking about. The people who should get their heads out of their arses are the ones who think they can get away with a patent on an overunity device.

Anyone who is not willing to share an invention which will profoundly further mankind is either too dumb to realise he or she will bathe in riches regardless of patent or money for selling or not because the CREDIT will be linked to them, are too greedy or simply have nothing to show and are looking for attention.

Bessler falls into the second category.

Genius or not, Bessler was a greedy bastard and I do blame him for not disclosing his invention.

You really don't understand Bessler very well, do you?

Bessler was not motivated by greed.

Bessler was a complex man. He was a fundamentalist Christian fanatic. His religious convictions controlled everything in his life. There was one thing he was aiming for. He believed he had been chosen by God to create a technical school that would teach advanced technology to students while primarily instilling into his students the "fear of God". (This was meant literally, he actually says this).

For this he needed money. The outrageous sum he asked for his invention was to pay for just this. He believed that God had given him the plans for his wheel to make this project possible. Any amount of money insufficient to do this was not acceptable.

When things started going against him he probably saw in this a sign that the time for this revelation was not right and destroyed all evidence of his machines awaiting a new sign by God when to begin again in earnest. It never arrived, he died. I think that is mainly why he never wrote his secret down for future generations, probably believing that if God really wanted it He would find another vessel.

There is much evidence of this. Few scholars are aware of Bessler's religious writings, fewer have studied them. None of his books on Christianity, to my knowledge, have been translated.

Hans von Lieven
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: oscar on April 20, 2009, 05:15:10 AM
sorry, was double
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: oscar on April 20, 2009, 05:16:48 AM
Take a greasy cherry pit between the thumb and bent finger… yes?  It goes a long way, does it not?  This is, or must be, the final action as the slow moving weight is feed back into the high velocity circuit…
Yes, these concepts are intriguing:
- scissors cutting round rod and
- fingers squeezing cherry pit, ejecting it

And then we also should remember Netwon's law that for every action there is an equal and opposite reaction.

The equal and opposite reaction in the cases mentioned above, would be to observe the round rod squeezing back onto the pair of scissors.
That is probably not a good way to put it, but nevertheless the scissors do change shape and (relative) position  due to the collision with the rounded object, no?

What if not cherry stones or dumbbells are used as a weights but scissor shaped objects?
A crazy thought?

Please consider: a scissors looks like an X.
And scissors (or call them Xes or call them 'two rods with a pin-joint') can shape shift from being tall/long (=small angle between the legs) to broad/short (=big angle between the legs).
They are forced to do this, when put under pressure (or when meeting a barrier).

Maybe one can imagine a chain of Xes, arranged in a circle or rather in a D-shape so that there are 9 on the descending and only 7 on the ascending side.

There might even be a missing link (in the chain).
Should this be the case, one X  - at a certain point in the cycle - might have to actually jump places, in addition to doing shape shift trickery.

edit: I envisage the Xes to be individually hanging in the wheel, when on the descending side and to be somehow stacked and resting on top of each other while pressed against the outer and inner barrier(s) on the ascending side.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: skippy on April 20, 2009, 06:50:49 AM
Hello, 

Great concept model dusty.  I have an idea about what might be missing. (Why the weights won't make it all the way through one cycle)  To over come gravity acceleration is needed.  In fact Sjack, talks about acceleration in this diagram. (The green acceleration lines) It seems he deliberately left this part of the mechanism out of his patent application.

http://peswiki.com/index.php/Image:Abeling_Weight_Path.jpg (http://peswiki.com/index.php/Image:Abeling_Weight_Path.jpg)

If you look at some of the still pictures taken out of Sjack's movies, the wooden prototype has several symmetrical holes evenly spaced around it. They are illustrated in this drawing.

http://peswiki.com/index.php/Image:Abeling_Wheel_Side_Drawing.jpg (http://peswiki.com/index.php/Image:Abeling_Wheel_Side_Drawing.jpg)

I have attached a hand drawn diagram that was sent to me years ago in an E-mail. I don't remember by whom, or even if I had requested the diagram in the first place.  It was almost like I got an E-mail that was meant for someone else. This hand drawn sketch illustrates a mechanical concept that at certain degrees of rotation could provide a lot of acceleration to the weights in this machine. I built a small model of this concept several years ago, and was amazed at the swiftness that the device moves at when the critical angles are reached. The two arms in the diagram (some might even call them warped boards) might be engineered to lift the weight in your machine both to the center axle, and back to the rim very violently and very quickly,  providing the acceleration to push the machine through one full cycle.

                                                                    Skippy

                                                                                     

Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Tink on April 20, 2009, 07:13:03 AM
How about using at least 8 weights?

(Harti, I can only reply when I press the "quote" icon, because there is no reply icon (button) in any post left after the last update. Is it just me because I use Linux and Mozilla?)
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: mondrasek on April 20, 2009, 03:47:29 PM
Just thinking out loud: If Abeling is using springs where would he put them?

AquariuZ, you may remember this:  http://www.overunity.com/index.php?topic=7150.msg169744#msg169744  Stefan posted a screen shot a page or two later.  I gave this idea (too early I think) because it was the next logical step in the investigation of the Abeling web page and video as far as I could tell:  How to collect energy in the lower left of the wheel and use it to accelerate the weights in the upper left?

This was just a rough idea how a spring could be loaded in the lower left and then be allowed to release in the upper right.  Of course this doodle was just "food for thought" and not intended as a full working concept.

I did not pursue this idea further since it should fail for the same reasons:  Energy into the spring = energy out.  So we still do not have additional energy.

The mental search for an energy surplus brought about the idea that the weights could be spinning and possibly have gyroscopic effects that could somehow be useful.  I still have not research gyros enough to satisfy my own questions, but the concept of precession is what I think might be useful.  The gyro concept is not a way to add or gain energy in the wheel cycle.  But precession in a gyro causes forces not to act in equal and opposite directions.  Instead they are equal and at 90 degrees.  Could this be useful?  I'll study it more when I can.

This has been posted several times before.  Those interested in gyros should check out:  http://www.gyroscopes.org/1974lecture.asp

M.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: AquariuZ on April 20, 2009, 09:45:42 PM
AquariuZ, you may remember this:  http://www.overunity.com/index.php?topic=7150.msg169744#msg169744  Stefan posted a screen shot a page or two later.  I gave this idea (too early I think) because it was the next logical step in the investigation of the Abeling web page and video as far as I could tell:  How to collect energy in the lower left of the wheel and use it to accelerate the weights in the upper left?

This was just a rough idea how a spring could be loaded in the lower left and then be allowed to release in the upper right.  Of course this doodle was just "food for thought" and not intended as a full working concept.

I did not pursue this idea further since it should fail for the same reasons:  Energy into the spring = energy out.  So we still do not have additional energy.

The mental search for an energy surplus brought about the idea that the weights could be spinning and possibly have gyroscopic effects that could somehow be useful.  I still have not research gyros enough to satisfy my own questions, but the concept of precession is what I think might be useful.  The gyro concept is not a way to add or gain energy in the wheel cycle.  But precession in a gyro causes forces not to act in equal and opposite directions.  Instead they are equal and at 90 degrees.  Could this be useful?  I'll study it more when I can.

This has been posted several times before.  Those interested in gyros should check out:  http://www.gyroscopes.org/1974lecture.asp

M.

The AbelingMO model, I missed that. Have it now and will play with it for a while because I like the concept. He did say that acceleration is generated in the lower left part of the wheel.

With regards to the gyroscopes, please have a look at the Hayasaka-Takeuchi thesis where the claim is a mass reduction in gyroscopes under certain circumstances.

http://www.earthtech.org/experiments/tajmar/papers/p2701_1.pdf

If this mass reduction is a phenomenon in spinning bodies in general I think there is something here. Even Tesla did something extraordinary back then with a copper egg:

http://www.overunity.com/index.php?action=tpmod;dl=item31

AZ
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on April 20, 2009, 11:36:02 PM
@All,

Check this out. If I haven't overlooked something then that's it. And, let me add, if that's it then @eisenficker2000 rulez!
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: hansvonlieven on April 21, 2009, 12:00:17 AM
@All,

Check this out. If I haven't overlooked something then that's it. And, let me add, if that's it then @eisenficker2000 rulez!

Another quirk of WM2D. The device cannot possibly work as drawn. If you imagine a vertical line through the axle you will see that there is more torque on the right hand side than on the left, yet the device rotates to the left. And that is without taking friction into account.

Hans von Lieven
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: broli on April 21, 2009, 12:08:48 AM
Another quirk of WM2D. The device cannot possibly work as drawn. If you imagine a vertical line through the axle you will see that there is more torque on the right hand side than on the left, yet the device rotates to the left. And that is without taking friction into account.

Hans von Lieven

I believe you are wrong. If you draw a curved line and do the torque analysis you will be surprised at what you get. Even though it's closer to the center its torque contribution is higher than the one that is further away. I posted the same answer in another thread;

http://www.overunity.com/index.php?topic=7262.new
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on April 21, 2009, 12:10:45 AM
Another quirk of WM2D. The device cannot possibly work as drawn. If you imagine a vertical line through the axle you will see that there is more torque on the right hand side than on the left, yet the device rotates to the left. And that is without taking friction into account.

Hans von Lieven

The question is why isn't the same quirk showing itself here (see attached)?
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on April 21, 2009, 12:16:47 AM
That link you gave is from the days when the basic flaws in wm2d were still unknown. In the present case there are no rigid joints, air resistance is on, there are no springs and we have a similar model (non-working) with everything else the same but the grooves on the rotor.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on April 21, 2009, 12:22:53 AM
Here it is for those who don't have wm2d: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9-dT4MZCtYo
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: hartiberlin on April 21, 2009, 12:28:45 AM
Hans and all,
You must calculate into it the small ramp inside the cannel,
as there the forces split into vectors for the horizontal and vertical values.

This also plays a big role, how the balls lay and roll on these small ramps...
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: broli on April 21, 2009, 12:29:25 AM
Hans and all,
You must calculate into it the small ramp inside the cannel,
as there the forces split into vectors for the horizontal and vertical values.

This also plays a big role, how the balls lay and roll on these small ramps...


Exactly Stefan. Doing some simple vector analysis shows this.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on April 21, 2009, 12:34:15 AM
One thing I've just noticed. I've forgotten to delete the earlier construction. It's to the left of the main contraption. I don't see how this would affect the running of the wheel in question, though.

Here it is, corrected (see attached). Renders very slowly so I'm attaching it befire actually running it.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: hansvonlieven on April 21, 2009, 12:34:25 AM
The problem lies with complex shapes like the one below. WM2D goes haywire if you do this. The curved or straight polygon tool in WM2D is unreliable.

Hans von Lieven
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: hansvonlieven on April 21, 2009, 12:39:55 AM
Stefan and Broli,

If you don't believe my torque analysis simply print it out, glue it on a piece of cardboard, cut it out, stick a small coin over where the weights are and put a pin through the centre. You will soon find out which way it wants to turn.

Hans von Lieven
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on April 21, 2009, 12:40:23 AM
The problem lies with complex shapes like the one below. WM2D goes haywire if you do this. The curved or straight polygon tool in WM2D is unreliable.

Hans von Lieven

Well, again, why would the one polygon be preferable before the other in terms of complexity. Both seem pretty complex. Besides, what is the role of the polygon in the calculations? What is being calculated, it seems, are the trajectories of the balls with the corresponding constraints. So, you mean, wm2d prefers given constraints before others? This has to be understood better.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on April 21, 2009, 12:42:51 AM
Stefan and Broli,

If you don't believe my torque analysis simply print it out, glue it on a piece of cardboard, cut it out, stick a small coin over where the weights are and put a pin through the centre. You will soon find out which way it wants to turn.

Hans von Lieven

Well, better yet, replicate Aneling's device. I think @Dusty is doing that and we'll know soon of the outome. The question here is why shouldn't wm2d be of any use for the analysis of a device such as the discussed one?
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: broli on April 21, 2009, 12:42:53 AM
Well, again, why would the one polygon be preferable before the other in terms of complexity. Both seem pretty complex. Besides, what is the role of the polygon in the calculations? What is being calculated, it seems, are the trajectories of the balls with the corresponding constraints. So, you mean, wm2d prefers given constraints before others? This has to be understood better.

Omnibus, are you saying that you believe this model works? What makes it different from any other ramp model? You could use slots to remove the whole complexity at once and see it has no tendcy to rotate either way.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: AquariuZ on April 21, 2009, 12:42:58 AM
@All,

Check this out. If I haven't overlooked something then that's it. And, let me add, if that's it then @eisenficker2000 rulez!

This should not turn to the left...

 ???

O, Hans already said that
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: hansvonlieven on April 21, 2009, 12:43:28 AM
What I am saying Omnibus is that the more complex the polygon the weirder the programme reacts. I have given up on the polygon tool after too many failures.

Hans
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on April 21, 2009, 12:47:10 AM
What I am saying Omnibus is that the more complex the polygon the weirder the programme reacts. I have given up on the polygon tool after too many failures.

Hans

Well, then, how do you propose this to be modeled.

As far as the failures go, all I've seen so far is due to springs, improper settings of the rigid joints and ignoring air resistance (which models internal friction losses). All these problems are excluded in the last model.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on April 21, 2009, 12:51:58 AM
Omnibus, are you saying that you believe this model works? What makes it different from any other ramp model? You could use slots to remove the whole complexity at once and see it has no tendcy to rotate either way.

See, I've expressed this belief many times. The crux of the matter is nothing else but the proper construction which would enable displacement under the action of a force. If a proper construction is found that displacement can go on as long as the force is there (and it's always there because it's gravity). Construction is crucial.

As for the slots, you have to show what you mean by that. Could you redraw it with slots?

Oh, and another thing, if you notice the system center of mass is slightly to the right of rotor's axis of rotation.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: hansvonlieven on April 21, 2009, 01:03:25 AM
Here is the proof. What I am saying is correct.

I have mounted the weights on a straight wheel in the correct positions relative to the axle.

If you click run it will turn to the right initially and wobble until it finds its balance as expected.

Hans von Lieven
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: AquariuZ on April 21, 2009, 01:05:40 AM
OK, cleaned it up a little, resetting speeds and just two balls so you can see.

Goes CCW, slows down, goes CW, slows down. Then the top ball starts spinning on its own.

Hans is right... However, if you made each arm into a single polygon you may get more accurate results.

I do not know why but as I mentioned way back the shape of the curve of the holders is inverted and should be curved towards the outside of the rim, not the other way around.

Omnibus, what were you seeing that prompted you that this may be it?

What were you seeing?
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: AquariuZ on April 21, 2009, 01:08:45 AM
Well, then, how do you propose this to be modeled.

As far as the failures go, all I've seen so far is due to springs, improper settings of the rigid joints and ignoring air resistance (which models internal friction losses). All these problems are excluded in the last model.


...and elasticity appearantly.

No wonder they stopped developing wm2d?
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: broli on April 21, 2009, 01:14:22 AM
Here is the most simplest model you can make. No collisions, no polygonal shapes. As you can see it just oscillates back and forth. With friction added it will find equilibrium and stop.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on April 21, 2009, 01:14:34 AM
Here is the proof. What I am saying is correct.

I have mounted the weights on a straight wheel in the correct positions relative to the axle.

If you click run it will turn to the right initially and wobble until it finds its balance as expected.

Hans von Lieven

The example you give is obvious but it differs from the example we're discussing. Constraints are different. Besides, we already know that rigid joints should never be Optimized and the air resistance should always be turned on.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on April 21, 2009, 01:19:47 AM
Here is the most simplest model you can make. No collisions, no polygonal shapes. As you can see it just oscillates back and forth. With friction added it will find equilibrium and stop.

That isn't the same either. Constraints differ. We already know that constraints such as these don't lead to a working model.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: broli on April 21, 2009, 01:20:59 AM
That isn't the same eithe. Constraints differ. We already know that constraints such as these don't lead to a working model.

Are you looking for a real working model or how far you can squeeze wm2d to give you a working model?
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on April 21, 2009, 01:21:36 AM
OK, cleaned it up a little, resetting speeds and just two balls so you can see.

Goes CCW, slows down, goes CW, slows down. Then the top ball starts spinning on its own.

Hans is right... However, if you made each arm into a single polygon you may get more accurate results.

I do not know why but as I mentioned way back the shape of the curve of the holders is inverted and should be curved towards the outside of the rim, not the other way around.

Omnibus, what were you seeing that prompted you that this may be it?

What were you seeing?

No, that isn't it either. The common action of all the spheres is needed.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on April 21, 2009, 01:24:55 AM
Are you looking for a real working model or how far you can squeeze wm2d to give you a working model?

I'm looking for an analytical solution. I've said that many times. In lack of analytical solution the palliative solution is to try to model it somehow. Analytical solution is the answer and it will solve a lot of trial and error which will lead us nowhere.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: AquariuZ on April 21, 2009, 01:26:18 AM
No, that isn't it either. The common action of all the spheres is needed.

It would help if you disclosed what the model runs like... With all the balls it renders veeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeery slooooooooooooooooowly.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on April 21, 2009, 01:28:05 AM
@broli,

That way of forcing the balls along a trajectory is very interesting. How did you do it?
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: hansvonlieven on April 21, 2009, 01:32:46 AM
The example you give is obvious but it differs from the example we're discussing. Constraints are different. Besides, we already know that rigid joints should never be Optimized and the air resistance should always be turned on.

No it does not. All your constraints do is they cost you energy. If there isn't any surplus without constraints there will be less with. You show me how a constraint can add energy into a system and I will be converted.

Hans von Lieven
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on April 21, 2009, 01:34:18 AM
It would help if you disclosed what the model runs like... With all the balls it renders veeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeery slooooooooooooooooowly.

Yeah, it renders it very slowly. Don't know why.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: broli on April 21, 2009, 01:34:53 AM
@Omnibus: Closed curved slot joint and copy/paste.

I have to make another one that acts more like the complex models you guys have made. That is one that falls a few degrees at the top, but that's for tomorrow
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: AquariuZ on April 21, 2009, 02:00:52 AM
No it does not. All your constraints do is they cost you energy. If there isn't any surplus without constraints there will be less with. You show me how a constraint can add energy into a system and I will be converted.

Hans von Lieven

If you put somebody in a constraint they will go red with rage and generate heat.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: hansvonlieven on April 21, 2009, 02:04:11 AM
They still have to be fed though to keep it up  ;D ;D ;D

Hans
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on April 21, 2009, 02:10:38 AM
No it does not. All your constraints do is they cost you energy. If there isn't any surplus without constraints there will be less with. You show me how a constraint can add energy into a system and I will be converted.

Hans von Lieven

It's not a matter of energy spent. I gave an example somewhere in the earlier pages (don't remember what page it was) with a ball losing the same energy but when constraints are imposed the ball is displaced substantially sideways which doesn't occur without constraints. Modeling the same constraints is crucial.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on April 21, 2009, 02:11:36 AM
@Omnibus: Closed curved slot joint and copy/paste.

I have to make another one that acts more like the complex models you guys have made. That is one that falls a few degrees at the top, but that's for tomorrow

Please explain it in more detail. That's a very useful tool.

OK, here's how it works. A trajectory is drawn using Closed Curved Slot joint. Each such trajectory has one point that characterizes it. Separately draw a circle and then move the center of the circle and overlay it over the said characteristic point. Then go to Object>Attach To Body (or Ctrl+B) and you're done with one ball constrained along the given trajectory. If you want more balls constrained along the same trajectory just copy/paste the first one and overlay them.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: hansvonlieven on April 21, 2009, 02:44:10 AM
It's not a matter of energy spent. I gave an example somewhere in the earlier pages (don't remember what page it was) with a ball losing the same energy but when constraints are imposed the ball is displaced substantially sideways which doesn't occur without constraints. Modeling the same constraints is crucial.

Displacing a weight horizontally takes very little energy, it is still a loss situation though and does not gain you anything.

Hans von Lieven
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on April 21, 2009, 03:01:19 AM
Displacing a weight horizontally takes very little energy, it is still a loss situation though and does not gain you anything.

Hans von Lieven

Gains you displacement. It's all about displacement under the action of a force. Nothing more than that.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: persume on April 21, 2009, 05:50:18 AM
AquariuZ, great video links at the bottom of your posts.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on April 21, 2009, 07:41:13 AM
@All,

Here's a model using @broli's method with forced trajectory (see attached). This doesn't work. A counter clockwise tendency at the start is again observed, however. Also, could it be that this forced trajectory is constraining too tightly the spheres, compared to the previous example where spheres had some leeway within the grooves?
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: fletcher on April 21, 2009, 07:50:39 AM
If you get a 'zero runner' i.e. something that turns [due torque] then measure its velocity in rpm - see if it accelerates then slows etc - if it holds its rpm or increases then add a torque motor to the sim with a few Newtons of load - if it still accelerates then you have a good chance that you have a winner - OR - you may have to look even more closely at the logic of the build ....
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: hansvonlieven on April 21, 2009, 09:22:14 AM
Gains you displacement. It's all about displacement under the action of a force. Nothing more than that.

In a gravity device only upward vertical displacement injects energy. The question is how much does it cost you to do it. Horizontal displacement gets you nothing.

Hans von Lieven

EDIT:

Below there is a way to achieve the same trajectory for the weights in a way that WM2D can cope with. It still does not work though.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: AquariuZ on April 21, 2009, 12:22:21 PM
AquariuZ, great video links at the bottom of your posts.

It´s up to us.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: AquariuZ on April 21, 2009, 12:51:31 PM
Below there is a way to achieve the same trajectory for the weights in a way that WM2D can cope with. It still does not work though.

That´s creative, thanks.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on April 21, 2009, 01:04:59 PM
Quote
In a gravity device only upward vertical displacement injects energy.
...
Horizontal displacement gets you nothing.

Exactly. What we’re looking for here is to find a construction which, at the expense of no energy will constantly bring a given generalized weight in a position to be displaced downwards under the force of gravity.

As for the construction you’re offering, it obviously isn’t the one we’re looking for and has long been out of consideration. Neither is it reproducing what’s being discussed. Do it properly, get rid of the driving weight, turn on air resistance (AR), as an already known requirement for a realistic model, set the rigid joints (RJ) to Measurable, as an already mandatory requirement for a proper rendering of a model, and you’ll get what’s trivially expected from weights constrained to a circular pattern (see first attachment). That isn’t the case discussed here.

As was shown, even a construction with somewhat more relaxed rigid constrains than yours, that using @broli’s forced trajectory, doesn’t work (see second attachment).

What seems to work is a model which allows somewhat looser behavior (up to a point) of the weights at certain sections of the trajectory, as in the third attachment.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on April 21, 2009, 01:08:15 PM
Another quirk of WM2D. The device cannot possibly work as drawn. If you imagine a vertical line through the axle you will see that there is more torque on the right hand side than on the left, yet the device rotates to the left. And that is without taking friction into account.

Hans von Lieven

Let me mention once again. The vertical you've drawn is to the left of the vertical passing through the constantly changing its position center of mass of the system. It is that second vertical that you should use in setting up your inequality.That's a remark in addition to the difference-in-constraints remark and to what Stefan said.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on April 21, 2009, 01:26:39 PM
@AquariuZ,

Whatever happened to that governmental official? Seems like he went back to sleep on his desk. Didn't they say that by law the answer will be given in two days?
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on April 21, 2009, 03:25:07 PM
@AquariuZ and @Cherryman,

Would be interesting to replace the wheel in what seems to be the working model (per @eisenficker2000 design) with a hockey-stick grooved wheel, to get a slight idea where @Dusty might be heading.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Cherryman on April 21, 2009, 03:25:33 PM
@AquariuZ,

Whatever happened to that governmental official? Seems like he went back to sleep on his desk. Didn't they say that by law the answer will be given in two days?

I Think the MIB stept in  :o
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on April 21, 2009, 03:29:53 PM
I Think the MIB stept in  :o

Well, MiB's are Mylow's specialty. As a MiB free country such as Holland, the only possibility are bureaucrats sleeping on their desks (bureaus), it seems.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: mondrasek on April 21, 2009, 04:03:42 PM
@All,

Check this out. If I haven't overlooked something then that's it. And, let me add, if that's it then @eisenficker2000 rulez!
This looks like a classic case of having the Animation Step and Integration Error too high.  In this case they are set at their defaults, but the model has features that are of a smaller scale.  So the allowable calculation error set by these parameters is large in proportion to the balls in the model.

I first erased the extraneous geometry out of frame to the left of the wheel shown when the file opens.  Then I changed the Integration Error from .01 down to .0001.  Doing so immediately pops up an error that one of the balls is overlapping the edge of a slot.  Fix the location of that ball and a second allarm for another ball overlap occurs.  Fix that one and a third pops up.  Fix this final overlap issue and the models is now okay to run.  Then changed the Animation Step from .05 to .001 and let it run.  I moves CCW a small amount, finds it's equilibrium point, and stops.

With the error allowed to be so high, there is always a few balls in collision with the slot walls.  I believe WM2D tries to work through these collisions by increasing the repulsive force between he two objects in an effort to have them separate on the next iteration.  This model cannot get out of the collision state and always has an extra repulsive force between balls and some slots.  This pushes the wheel around backwards.  Lowering the error allows for a better approximation of reality and no rotation.

Thanks,

M.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on April 21, 2009, 05:30:10 PM
@mondrasek,

That extraneous geometry was removed promptly. I posted a follow-up corrected file. So, that's out.

The decreased error limits cause the run (forget rendering) to be excruciatingly slow. That doesn't correspond to the physical situation. Even worse, around frame 2100, I guess, when the wheel is still moving CCW, that nasty inconsistency error pops up telling you that if you continue some of the restraints will be ignored. That's unacceptable because that ignoring of restraints is what maybe causing the apparent finding of its equilibrium. In the "original" file with less restrictive limits there was no such error. So, I'm not sure how that narrowing of the error limits improves things. This has to be understood better.

As for the initial overlap and the program adding collision forces due to it, that's a legitimate concern which is easy to fix (while retaining the old error limits). I'm running it now again with the old error limits but after fixing the three overlaps. Rendering is very slow and I still don't know the outcome.

EDIT: Also, why should the factors you mention are acting in this case and not in the case with @broli's method of forced trajectory? Elements are of the same size (small) in the @broli method, error limits are the same but the outcome is negative there.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: AquariuZ on April 21, 2009, 05:35:55 PM
Then changed the Animation Step from .05 to .001 and let it run.  I moves CCW a small amount, finds it's equilibrium point, and stops.

Exactly my experience with cleaned up model
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: AquariuZ on April 21, 2009, 05:37:46 PM
@AquariuZ,

Whatever happened to that governmental official? Seems like he went back to sleep on his desk. Didn't they say that by law the answer will be given in two days?

The communication service answered they couldn't answer and that they redirected my question to the ministry directly. They complied, but the ministry does not have to, or can stall.

I am pretty certain he has approval for an experimental setup, but certainly not for mass production.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on April 21, 2009, 05:40:11 PM
Exactly my experience with cleaned up model

@AquariuZ,

What cleaned up model? Did you change the error limits? If you did other non-physical things start to happen -- as I already said, non-physically slow motion as well as ignoring constraints. Things are not as straightforward as they seem with this wm2d either way (pro and con).
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: AquariuZ on April 21, 2009, 05:40:32 PM
Well, MiB's are Mylow's specialty. As a MiB free country such as Holland, the only possibility are bureaucrats sleeping on their desks (bureaus), it seems.

It may seem MiB free to you, but ask this question:

Who founded the Bilderberg group?

"You may smile and smile and still be a villain"

There is corruption everywhere you look...
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: AquariuZ on April 21, 2009, 05:46:04 PM
@AquariuZ,

What cleaned up model? Did you change the error limits? If you did other non-physical things start to happen -- as I already said, non-physically slow motion as well as ignoring constraints. Things are not as straightforward as they seem with this wm2d either way (pro and con).

Integrator error, Frame rate.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: AquariuZ on April 21, 2009, 05:48:00 PM
@AquariuZ and @Cherryman,

Would be interesting to replace the wheel in what seems to be the working model (per @eisenficker2000 design) with a hockey-stick grooved wheel, to get a slight idea where @Dusty might be heading.

You did not reply to the fact that these hockeysticks seem curved the wrong way around on the long end
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on April 21, 2009, 05:50:36 PM
Integrator error, Frame rate.

No, that doesn't seem to be the case.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on April 21, 2009, 05:54:26 PM
You did not reply to the fact that these hockeysticks seem curved the wrong way around on the long end

That's why I'd like to try it with "proper" hockey stick grooves.

Something funny is going on with the seemingly working model -- the balls around 8 o'clock in the lower left part suddenly find more freedom and escape from the, let's call it, @broli's forced trajectory. The inverted hockey stick form seems to help in securing favorable timing. The balls on the right-hand side are always in fixed positions.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: AquariuZ on April 21, 2009, 06:04:29 PM
That's why I'd like to try it with "proper" hockey stick grooves.

Something funny is going on with the seemingly working model -- the balls around 8 o'clock in the lower left part suddenly find more freedom and escape from the, let's call it, @broli's forced trajectory. The inverted hockey stick form seems to help in securing favorable timing. The balls on the right-hand side are always in fixed positions.

Fair enough. I would advise using Hans' method of trajectories to recreate the exact paths
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on April 21, 2009, 06:14:33 PM
Fair enough. I would advise using Hans' method of trajectories to recreate the exact paths

Not at all. Like I said, it's too restrictive and doesn't reflect @eisenficker2000's embodiment. Closer to @eisenficker2000's is that with @broli's forced trajectory but it's still too restrictive and still doesn't reflect @eisenficker2000's rendition. I already mentioned these things.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on April 21, 2009, 06:21:54 PM
Back to these accuracy issues. It appears that there should be an optimum accuracy in the integration error and animation step. If it's too crude or too fine calculations out of order take place and the whole picture gets skewed. Probably what should be done is always calculate with the default values and have a common ground for comparison (all other errors such as those due to springs, lack of air resistance or rigid joints at Optimized excluded). I guess they were chosen for a reason to be this much.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: AquariuZ on April 21, 2009, 06:39:24 PM
@broli

How do I preserve the "grooves" when I reshape the rectangles into polygon hockeysticks in your model?

Attached
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on April 21, 2009, 06:48:39 PM
@broli

How do I preserve the "grooves" when I reshape the rectangles into polygon hockeysticks in your model?

Attached

That's a waste of time to deal with this model. It doesn't reflect what we're trying to accomplish. Let's get back to Abeling's contraption. Also, @broli's way of forcing the trajectory is too restrictive. It seems there has to be some leeway for the balls at certain parts of the trajectory.

Oh, as for the seemingly working model -- after fixing the overlaps and retaining 0.05AS and 0.011IE the model behaves as already seen. The additional collision force supposedly added by the algorithm is out.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Cherryman on April 21, 2009, 07:05:08 PM
Some more input..

http://www.dumpert.nl/mediabase/478071/bcc5ec2a/fietswiel_vergeet_zwaartekracht.html
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: broli on April 21, 2009, 07:06:37 PM
It's good to have come this far but we have reached a point where Sjack must disclose his contraption already. Some numerous old farts can't even decipher Besslers wheels after decades of experience so I doubt we will see the light in here using wm2D  ;D. I do agree on using the tools and technology of current times. It would be stupid to not use any hand drill for instance because Bessler didn't  :P. Or to not use computer simulation to optimize the device quickly.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: mondrasek on April 21, 2009, 07:12:00 PM
Oh, as for the seemingly working model -- after fixing the overlaps and retaining 0.05AS and 0.011IE the model behaves as already seen. The additional collision force supposedly added by the algorithm is out.

For the last time:  Decreasing the Animation Step and Integration Error increases the accuracy of the sim!  As both of those factors approach zero, the sim approaches reality.  That is how these things work.   It is similar to integrating the area under a curve.  The smaller the quadrangles used to approximate the area under a curve, the better the accuracy.  As the quadrangles approach infinity (time step approaching zero), the result approaches the exact area.

You can blow up any sim by raising the Integration Error and Animation Step.

The effect of the Integration Error is related to the size/mass of the object you are simulating.  So large wheels do fine with larger values.  This wheel is smaller and requires smaller values.  So there is not a correct default value for each sim.  The program allows for you to change these values based upon your need (gross visualization vs. exact analysis), the size of objects, and your CPU speed and patience.

In this case the Integration Error and Animation Step are just too high.  Since the sim process is iterative, it must calculate the positional change and forces due to one object at a time.  If it gets to object #7 (for example) and this causes a huge overlap with #1 that was calculated previously, you get crap results.  So you need smaller values as you increase the number of components as well.

As was stated several times, when you are narrowing in on a specific action or see something unexpected, always decrease the size of the Animation Step and Integration Error to increase sim accuracy and check your results.

M.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: broli on April 21, 2009, 07:18:17 PM
For the last time:  Decreasing the Animation Step and Integration Error increases the accuracy of the sim!  As both of those factors approach zero, the sim approaches reality.  That is how these things work.   It is similar to integrating the area under a curve.  The smaller the quadrangles used to approximate the area under a curve, the better the accuracy.  As the quadrangles approach infinity (time step approaching zero), the result approaches the exact area.

You can blow up any sim by raising the Integration Error and Animation Step.

The effect of the Integration Error is related to the size/mass of the object you are simulating.  So large wheels do fine with larger values.  This wheel is smaller and requires smaller values.  So there is not a correct default value for each sim.  The program allows for you to change these values based upon your need (gross visualization vs. exact analysis), the size of objects, and your CPU speed and patience.

In this case the Integration Error and Animation Step are just too high.  Since the sim process is iterative, it must calculate the positional change and forces due to one object at a time.  If it gets to object #7 (for example) and this causes a huge overlap with #1 that was calculated previously, you get crap results.  So you need smaller values as you increase the number of components as well.

As was stated several times, when you are narrowing in on a specific action or see something unexpected, always decrease the size of the Animation Step and Integration Error to increase sim accuracy and check your results.

M.

It's hard for me to say this but you are completely wrong.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: mondrasek on April 21, 2009, 07:27:29 PM
Broli, that's a very provocative and otherwise pointless statement, wouldn't you agree?  If you have some knowledge to share, please do so.  I'm not into playing the "Yes it is!", "No it isn't!" argument game.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: persume on April 21, 2009, 08:15:31 PM
It's good to have come this far but we have reached a point where Sjack must disclose his contraption already. Some numerous old farts can't even decipher Besslers wheels after decades of experience so I doubt we will see the light in here using wm2D  ;D. I do agree on using the tools and technology of current times. It would be stupid to not use any hand drill for instance because Bessler didn't  :P. Or to not use computer simulation to optimize the device quickly.

Who are you calling an old fart? Just how old are you?
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: AquariuZ on April 21, 2009, 08:17:53 PM
@omnibus

That was a lot of work... Hopefully not in vain

Have not tested it yet.

AZ
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on April 21, 2009, 08:26:57 PM
@mondrasek,

Like I said, I’m still not convinced that in this particular case introducing finer accuracy steps is beneficial and that the finer it is the more it approaches reality. Case in point – rotation becomes un-physically slow, to mention an example. Let alone that at finer accuracy limits constraints are ignored. I understand where you’re coming from and indeed you’re right regarding the integrating the are under a curve. Unfortunately here we have integrations and solving difference equations in real time in a serial fashion at that. As you correctly pointed out earlier one of these serial steps may take longer (especially if more iterative cycles are to be carried out to reach the accuracy limit) than some other step and the result is out of sequence calculation. That it’s a sequence problem may be seen when you put very crude limits, just for the heck of it. You’ll see this disjointing visually. I’m still not sure the solution isn’t a matter of optimization rather than getting into the accuracy limits.

I also addressed the mass/size argument pointing out that a model with the exactly same size of balls and wheel performs differently. So, this (mass/size impact on running the algorithm) also isn’t something we should take for granted.

Therefore, as I already said, the problems don’t seem straightforward on both sides of the issue (both on the pro and on the con side). We really need to know what exact methods (Monte-Carlo, Runge Kutta, finite (boundary) elements or what have you) are used and exactly how they are applied. Otherwise the story will be similar to what’s being done in Quantum Mechanics – we’ll have to see it experimentally and then adjust the parameters of the wm2d simulation to appear it’s a great engineering software that “always works” (as they usually refer to QM when “proving” its usefulness in this way, which is almost all they do).
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on April 21, 2009, 08:31:21 PM
@omnibus

That was a lot of work... Hopefully not in vain

Have not tested it yet.

AZ

Thanks @AquariuZ. Will take a look at it a little later and will let you know what happened. One thing that is seen at once is that the grooves aren't the hockey stick ones @Dusty is cutting into his wheel. Didn't we already explore this form of the grooves you have in your last model?
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: AquariuZ on April 21, 2009, 08:34:54 PM
Some more input..

http://www.dumpert.nl/mediabase/478071/bcc5ec2a/fietswiel_vergeet_zwaartekracht.html

It's a gyroscope.

A very large gyroscope.

Cool vid, thanks
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: AquariuZ on April 21, 2009, 08:36:28 PM
Thanks @AquariuZ. Will take a look at it a little later and will let you know what happened. One thing that is seen at once is that the grooves aren't the hockey stick ones @Dusty is cutting into his wheel. Didn't we already explore this form of the grooves you have in your last model?

They are mirrors of eisenacks....

So far no joy..

Dusty has straight ones, but are they pointing to the axle or are they offset like in the abeling patent figure 8?
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: AquariuZ on April 21, 2009, 08:40:23 PM
It's hard for me to say this but you are completely wrong.

No he's not.

Peace ;D
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: AquariuZ on April 21, 2009, 08:41:29 PM
Who are you calling an old fart? Just how old are you?

I am twelve years old and broke into my daddys office to access overunity.com

You?

 ;D ;D ;D
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: AquariuZ on April 21, 2009, 08:41:45 PM
Never mind
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: mondrasek on April 21, 2009, 09:22:44 PM
I’m still not sure the solution isn’t a matter of optimization rather than getting into the accuracy limits.

One of the things that is very easy to see that may help all visualize the effects of proper Integration Error in WM2D.  Please take the file below.  It has a flat surface onto which two spheres fall.  One sphere is small, the other is relatively large.  I have started with an Integration Error of .3.  When you run this you will see both spheres fall, bounce, and come to rest.  They come to rest with a portion of the spheres *below the surface*.  This interference is allowed by the high Integration Error.  If you look closely, you will see that they both interfere the same distance or depth into the surface.  So even though the depth of interference is the same the % of the small sphere in interference with the surface is much greater than that of the large sphere.  This causes the difference in results seen with identical models with different Integration Errors.  It also illustrates why smaller Integration Errors are necessary when working with smaller model elements.

Now decrease the Integration Error to the default 0.01m, run, and observe.  Identical interference depths for both spheres, but now much less depth.

Decrease the Integration Error to .0001.  Interference depths decreasing.  Less error.  More accuracy.

Yes, as you decrease Integration Error and Animation Step the sim runs slower.  It is requiring more calculations per second of animation.  And your computer may not be able to calculate and render the results at anything near real time.  This is a limitation of your CPU (and GPU), not the sim.  If you need to "see" an effect in real time, this can become a problem.  But you can always use measurement window graphs instead of trying to "watch" for something.  Also, simplify the model.  Why look at interactions of 8 balls and slots when only two are needed?  So, yes, optimization is always a consideration.

M.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: hansvonlieven on April 21, 2009, 09:23:08 PM
Let me mention once again. The vertical you've drawn is to the left of the vertical passing through the constantly changing its position center of mass of the system. It is that second vertical that you should use in setting up your inequality.That's a remark in addition to the difference-in-constraints remark and to what Stefan said.

Incorrect. When calculating torque in a system such as this the only thing of relevance is the distance between the centre of gravity of the individual weight to the fulcrum measured along the x-axis. The centre of gravity of the entire device is a resultant of all masses present.

The whole idea of having the weights run on a excenter is as old as the hills. There are hundreds of variations that have been tried, none if them have worked for very obvious reasons.

You can use all kinds of fancy mathematics to show that there is a surplus like that idiot that wrote the paper for Milkovic. In the end only the correct mathematical procedure will give correct results.

Hans von Lieven
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Dusty on April 21, 2009, 10:12:23 PM
I've been working on many tests.  One test was adding more weight on the dumbells.  I added 5 lbs. on each and it made no difference.  The wheel came to the exact stopping point as with the original 5 lb dumbell weight.  Then I took off all the weight, left just the shaft and bearings only and it came to almost the same spot within 1/2".  The wheel spun slightly faster with the extra 5 lbs and slower with just the basic weight of 2.5 lbs.

Then I tested different slopes on the lower ramp and that didn't make much difference.  I also tried taking out all the bearings and in place I made up a nylon sleeve which fit loosely over the dumbell shaft, that was just no good.  So bearings seem to be the ticket.  It's hard to explain all this without a video but from what I see I will need to make a much larger wheel and have all eight weights in place.  The only slow down right now is I had to order more bearings and they will be here in a few days.

The slots in the wheel are angled, not direct towards the shaft.  I also need to change the hockey stick shape to hold the dumbell more at the 12:30 position so it won't fall back out.

So, I'm having fun. That's what it is all about, right?  I love engineering and tackling a problem.  I'd be fun to see some simulations showing wheel movement with a small wheel as compared to a very large wheel with the purpose of seeing the leverage factor of the outer weight.  I'm thinking this thing might have a minimum diameter wheel to work according to the amount of leverage that is produced, with all eight weights. Right now with just two weights I'm missing out on the extra helpful leverage of the missing six weights.  I'm not sure if my thinking is correct on that idea but I'm going to try it and see what happens.  Besides it will just be that much closer to the original.

Dusty

Edit to add five videos

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fNbsCAkQiv8&feature=channel_page
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wW_djFz0OZw&feature=channel_page
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ts0TLn_2tPE&feature=channel_page
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D-jpZ3vm45w&feature=channel_page
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9G5jDZsLxc0&feature=channel_page
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: AquariuZ on April 21, 2009, 11:32:44 PM
I've been working on many tests.  One test was adding more weight on the dumbells.  I added 5 lbs. on each and it made no difference.  The wheel came to the exact stopping point as with the original 5 lb dumbell weight.  Then I took off all the weight, left just the shaft and bearings only and it came to almost the same spot within 1/2".  The wheel spun slightly faster with the extra 5 lbs and slower with just the basic weight of 2.5 lbs.

Then I tested different slopes on the lower ramp and that didn't make much difference.  I also tried taking out all the bearings and in place I made up a nylon sleeve which fit loosely over the dumbell shaft, that was just no good.  So bearings seem to be the ticket.  It's hard to explain all this without a video but from what I see I will need to make a much larger wheel and have all eight weights in place.  The only slow down right now is I had to order more bearings and they will be here in a few days.

The slots in the wheel are angled, not direct towards the shaft.  I also need to change the hockey stick shape to hold the dumbell more at the 12:30 position so it won't fall back out.

So, I'm having fun. That's what it is all about, right?  I love engineering and tackling a problem.  I'd be fun to see some simulations showing wheel movement with a small wheel as compared to a very large wheel with the purpose of seeing the leverage factor of the outer weight.  I'm thinking this thing might have a minimum diameter wheel to work according to the amount of leverage that is produced, with all eight weights. Right now with just two weights I'm missing out on the extra helpful leverage of the missing six weights.  I'm not sure if my thinking is correct on that idea but I'm going to try it and see what happens.  Besides it will just be that much closer to the original.

Dusty

Hi Dusty, is there a way for you to post a picture of your wheel so I can create a model? I am interested in the exact location of the hockey sticks

Thanks for all your efforts!
Title: WEBSITE MOOIEENERGIE.COM UPDATE
Post by: AquariuZ on April 22, 2009, 02:05:47 AM
Sjack Abeling is about to publish his new physical theory*.

This new physical theory will explain how to generate energy by rotating two bodies with the same mass/weight. The weight of the bodies together with ... (intentionally omitted) and the rotational velocity determine the amount of energy that can be generated.

The new physical theory explains the working of the Weight Power Plant ("Gewicht Energie Centrale") developed by Sjack Abeling. In this plant, the mass of the bodies is controlled in such a way that from a complete standstill to a rotation of 180 degrees, 80% more energy is generated than required to propel the system itself. The only source of energy required is the earth's gravity...

* Alas we had to postpone publication several times because of legal issues. Please check back soon!


We all get what we wish for it seems. Let´s hope it will be days and not months....

AZ

Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on April 22, 2009, 02:33:23 AM
@mondrasek,

Integration errors are indeed an issue in principle. However, you cannot deny the non-physicality of the slow motion when the accuracy is increased in the problem at hand (not in the last example you gave). Let alone that suddenly elimination of constraints starts to occur with that increased accuracy. Thus, when we observe the example at hand, not other examples, we encounter problems with increasing the accuracy of integration. This may be due to the concurrent calculations which by themselves may be of high accuracy but taken as a whole, because of other issues such as wrong sequence in solving the various parts of the problem, cause even greater deterioration of the final outcome than the less accurate but faster calculations otherwise. This is one possible way of explaining it. Maybe there are other reasons, but the fact that the outcome when increasing the accuracy in our case (not in other cases) is non-physical seems evident.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on April 22, 2009, 02:46:57 AM
Incorrect. When calculating torque in a system such as this the only thing of relevance is the distance between the centre of gravity of the individual weight to the fulcrum measured along the x-axis. The centre of gravity of the entire device is a resultant of all masses present.

The whole idea of having the weights run on a excenter is as old as the hills. There are hundreds of variations that have been tried, none if them have worked for very obvious reasons.

You can use all kinds of fancy mathematics to show that there is a surplus like that idiot that wrote the paper for Milkovic. In the end only the correct mathematical procedure will give correct results.

Hans von Lieven

The system center of mass changes its position (that part is demonstrable at once) which makes your way of determination the inequality with a fixed vertical inapplicable.

As for fancy mathematics, it isn't outside of what is known as laws of classical mechanics. The only problem is to have it applied correctly.  That's what's needed and that would significantly shorten the  trial and error efforts. This is the way to demonstrate why something will or will not work, not by just pronouncing that it won't work for very obvious reasons. There are subtleties in these matters which may remain undiscovered for a long time as happens with any discovery. Before a discovery is made many centuries have passed without it being known but that isn't a basis to discard the discovery. Lack of prior knowledge of a phenomenon isn't at all an argument in discussing its validity.
Title: Re: WEBSITE MOOIEENERGIE.COM UPDATE
Post by: Omnibus on April 22, 2009, 03:04:41 AM
Sjack Abeling is about to publish his new physical theory*.

This new physical theory will explain how to generate energy by rotating two bodies with the same mass/weight. The weight of the bodies together with ... (intentionally omitted) and the rotational velocity determine the amount of energy that can be generated.

The new physical theory explains the working of the Weight Power Plant ("Gewicht Energie Centrale") developed by Sjack Abeling. In this plant, the mass of the bodies is controlled in such a way that from a complete standstill to a rotation of 180 degrees, 80% more energy is generated than required to propel the system itself. The only source of energy required is the earth's gravity...

* Alas we had to postpone publication several times because of legal issues. Please check back soon!


We all get what we wish for it seems. Let´s hope it will be days and not months....

AZ



Abeling's theory about how his claimed device works is of no significance whatsoever and one couldn't care less about it. If he thinks he can substitute a demonstration of what he claims by what he imagines is a theory, he is badly mistaken. Nothing short of an open direct demonstration of the device and ensuring that it can be reproduced by others can be considered a proof of his claim. These games with first bluffing by claiming to have a working device only to substitute it later by a "theory" of how it works are too well known for Abeling to expect there are many gullible still left to be exploit. Without a demo and replication this would be one more addition to the numerous useless bogus claims Hans is constantly reminding us of.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Dusty on April 22, 2009, 03:15:42 AM
AquariuZ,

You wanted some shots of the hockey stick.  The diameter of this wheel is 36 1/2"

Dusty
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on April 22, 2009, 03:23:35 AM
Maybe it should be mentioned that it isn't at all certain that too much effort has been applied in building these devices, as we hear constantly from dome people here and in some other forums. Neither is it certain that there has been no success in building it. Pursuit of this area throughout the centuries has been severely discouraged and even suppressed and the organized, endowed structures have been under no less that a ban in dealing with it. Thus, it has been mostly in the hands of amateurs and mavericks with little or no resources, a situation similar to what we're experiencing now. Except that now there's internet and there are certain other technological advances which help a little the independent research -- the only possible research in this area throughout history. This is a basis of some hope that certain part of the truth may come out from this ocean of dishonesty, nonsense and stagnation the official science is engulfed in across the board.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on April 22, 2009, 03:26:41 AM
@Dusty,

I know these pictures are for @AquariuZ but I just want thank you too and say that you're doing great. Good luck.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: hansvonlieven on April 22, 2009, 03:37:46 AM
Quote
Sjack Abeling is about to publish his new physical theory*.

This new physical theory will explain how to generate energy by rotating two bodies with the same mass/weight. The weight of the bodies together with ... (intentionally omitted) and the rotational velocity determine the amount of energy that can be generated.

This reminds me very much of Getafix, the Gaul Druid in the Asterix comics. When asked about his magic potion he would tell the enquirer that it was secret but that it had mistletoe in it.

What good is a theory if the part that supposedly makes it work is intentionally omitted.

The guy is a jerk.

Hans von Lieven
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: persume on April 22, 2009, 04:14:18 AM
I am twelve years old and broke into my daddys office to access overunity.com

You?

 ;D ;D ;D

I'm ninty seven goddammed years old and I almost lost my teeth when I read your post before this one. :'( :-* :-X :-[ :-\ :P ::)
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: persume on April 22, 2009, 04:18:34 AM
Darnnit
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Dusty on April 22, 2009, 05:08:55 AM
I decided to add the videos that relate to post 1035.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fNbsCAkQiv8&feature=channel_page
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wW_djFz0OZw&feature=channel_page
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ts0TLn_2tPE&feature=channel_page
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D-jpZ3vm45w&feature=channel_page
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9G5jDZsLxc0&feature=channel_page

Dusty
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: AquariuZ on April 22, 2009, 01:24:31 PM
AquariuZ,

You wanted some shots of the hockey stick.  The diameter of this wheel is 36 1/2"

Dusty

Dusty, you are the man!

I will make a model using exactly these pictures, hopefully it will help..

Thanks again

AZ
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on April 22, 2009, 08:07:39 PM
@Dusty,

Here's my first attempt to draw your rotor (my buddy @X00013 will be proud of me, just kidding). It can be exported in a dxf format (haven't done that yet) to be used in a CNC machine. Wonder if CNC machines can handle details of 2m diameter? If you find that you may have any use for it just let me know and I'll try to send you the dxf file. Also, abviously, improvements have to be made as we go along.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: AquariuZ on April 22, 2009, 08:24:30 PM
@Dusty,

Here's my first attempt to draw your rotor (my buddy @X00013 will be proud of me, just kidding). It can be exported in a dxf format (haven't done that yet) to be used in a CNC machine. Wonder if CNC machines can handle details of 2m diameter? If you find that you may have any use for it just let me know and I'll try to send you the dxf file. Also, abviously, improvements have to be made as we go along.

Omnibus, nice, but the legs should not point to the axle, please check the pictures

If you have a DXF file you can import it in wm2d BTW.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on April 22, 2009, 08:32:42 PM
@AquariuZ,

Quite correct. That's inertia (no pun intended) from the wm2d modeling. Will have to figure out how this non-radial thing is done. Hockey stick grooves aren't right either.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: itanimuLLi on April 22, 2009, 10:39:45 PM
@ All ,
How about this concept applying on the Abeling wheel, can anyone make a simulation on this. I don't have wm2d so i couldn't follow everything maybe somebody came up with this...
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on April 23, 2009, 12:17:30 AM
@Dusty and @AquariuZ,

Here's a slightly improved depiction of Dusty's rotor.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on April 23, 2009, 01:37:48 PM
@AquariuZ,

Unfortunately,converting this to dxf file turns out not to be as straightforward as I initially thought. If you think you can convert any other type of file into dxf just let me know so that I can post it if I can save it in such format. Would be good to be able to import the above file and try to model @Dusty's device in wm2d.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: AquariuZ on April 23, 2009, 08:58:40 PM
@AquariuZ,

Unfortunately,converting this to dxf file turns out not to be as straightforward as I initially thought. If you think you can convert any other type of file into dxf just let me know so that I can post it if I can save it in such format. Would be good to be able to import the above file and try to model @Dusty's device in wm2d.

Sure, I'll try it. Just send what you have

Need a head on view, not slightly tilted to the right as previous
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: AquariuZ on April 23, 2009, 09:00:23 PM
@ All ,
How about this concept applying on the Abeling wheel, can anyone make a simulation on this. I don't have wm2d so i couldn't follow everything maybe somebody came up with this...

Can you please elaborate a little? it looks like gears in an inverted gear...

What exacty do you have in mind?
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on April 23, 2009, 09:29:18 PM
@AquariuZ,

Here are the possible extensions I can save it to:

sldprt
sldlfp
prtdot
sldftp
x_f
x_b
igs
step
sat
vda
wrl
stl
eprt
u3d
3dxml
cgr
prt
hcg
hsp

aside from tif and jpg. Which one of these would be appropriate to upload?
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: itanimuLLi on April 23, 2009, 10:04:42 PM
Can you please elaborate a little? it looks like gears in an inverted gear...

What exacty do you have in mind?

The small one with the circle is a cogwheel and the weight,  wile falling its accellerating and rotating on its own axis. when it comes at 6 o clock the outside of the  wheel takes over and rolls to the top, sorry for my bad english.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: AquariuZ on April 23, 2009, 11:35:18 PM
@AquariuZ,

Here are the possible extensions I can save it to:

sldprt
sldlfp
prtdot
sldftp
x_f
x_b
igs
step
sat
vda
wrl
stl
eprt
u3d
3dxml
cgr
prt
hcg
hsp

aside from tif and jpg. Which one of these would be appropriate to upload?


jpg,  just the wheel full side view without angles please

I´ll print & trace
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: AquariuZ on April 23, 2009, 11:38:40 PM
The small one with the circle is a cogwheel and the weight,  wile falling its accellerating and rotating on its own axis. when it comes at 6 o clock the outside of the  wheel takes over and rolls to the top, sorry for my bad english.

Do the smaller cogwheels touch the outside rim at all times or are we talking freefall here?

Is the kinetic energy from the fall stored somewhere?

Unless there is something special in the lift, I do not see how this will work, sorry.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on April 23, 2009, 11:50:16 PM
@AquariuZ,

Here it is (see attached). How do you make a dxf out of a jpg file?
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on April 23, 2009, 11:56:00 PM
Do the smaller cogwheels touch the outside rim at all times or are we talking freefall here?

Is the kinetic energy from the fall stored somewhere?

Unless there is something special in the lift, I do not see how this will work, sorry.

He's obviously relying on the centrifugal force but, as was explained, it is a force which requires energy to appear rather than the opposite. Centrifugal force may only be thought of as an augmenting force to help adjust the elements in a proper position. Not in this case, though. I agree, this won't work. His other idea with the lever was better and is worth analyzing further.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: AquariuZ on April 24, 2009, 12:01:05 AM
@AquariuZ,

Here it is (see attached). How do you make a dxf out of a jpg file?

Import in AutoCad? Sorry no experience there.

Jpg is fine for now
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on April 24, 2009, 03:58:10 PM
@AquariuZ,

So, it's already Friday and you've gotten no response from the Dutch government despite the two-day requirement you said the law mandates, if I understood you correctly? Isn't there any recourse that takes care of sleeping bureaucrats in Holland or there's something deeper than that? There was no response, he says, to @Paul Lawrance's e-mails directed to various representatives and officials regarding Mylow's MiB story either.So, is looks like we're living in some kind of a parallel world here.

By the way, I'll be in Europe for couple of months this summer and will be ready to visit Abeling at a moment's notice, if it's OK with him. If I do that I'll report here right away what the results from the visit were, the way I did when I visited Finsrud in Oslo.
Title: dxf-file of wheel
Post by: ruggero on April 24, 2009, 07:17:36 PM
AquariuZ:

Here are the dxf-file.

Just made a quick Illustrator drawing of the "dusty-jpg" wheel drawing.

;-)

regards
ruggero

BTW
It seems like the weights is disconnected from the wheel at 05:00 and 'shot' into the wheel again at 01:00.

If this is true, there will never be any weight on the wheel from 05:00 to 01:00.

Someone said that the weights are connected in pairs by a rod crossing the centre wheel:
That could very well be the starting point! – The weight of the falling weight + the weight of the wheel should be enought to 'push' the rising (left hand) weight up, as a small experiment easily would demonstrate:

Attach one end of a rod to the rim of a wheel and let the other end slide freely on the ground or even better, let it slide on a curved ramp.

Now try to turn the attached end to 01:00 and 'drop' it....


Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on April 24, 2009, 07:34:27 PM
Thanks, @ruggero. Can't import it inot the wm2d. It imports well into AutoCAD but then even when you save it back as dxf what is seen in wm2d is just an empty square. Have tried it yourself to import it into wm2d?
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: ruggero on April 24, 2009, 07:47:39 PM
Hi Omnibus,

I'm on a Mac - can't use the software.

But tell me what kind of import you can manage in w2... and I send it to you.

ruggero
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on April 24, 2009, 07:55:45 PM
@ruggero,

As far as I can see wm2d can only import it's own files with the extension wm2d as well as dxf files. Could it be that it is some different kind of dxf than the one you're preparing?
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: ruggero on April 24, 2009, 08:12:31 PM
;-) Omnibus

Looked at the support site from wm2d for import features:
"First, make sure that the DXF file was exported as one of the following DXF versions: 12, 13, 14, or 2000."

OK -  from the FAQ one quickly realize that wm2d got a huge problem concerning import from other formats...also dxf.

But but but...I've made a 2000-export which you can try out. Hopefully it works.

ruggero ;-)
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on April 24, 2009, 08:20:22 PM
@ruggero,

Now, upon trying to import it, the message that pops up reads: "Could not complete your request because no understandable objects were found in the document. This document may not contain any objects that Working Model understands",
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: 0c on April 24, 2009, 08:57:07 PM
Ok a quick one done. Crude wm2d model attached.

It fails (sorry) because the wheel needs to spin in such a rate to bring the ball back up that on the downpath the ball does not impose a downward force on the wheel (moves faster than gravitational acceleration of the falling balls)

Hence it will slow down to a point where the wheel is no longer able to bring the balls back up.

In other words, the balls cannot keep the wheel spinning at such a rate as is required to bring even one back up.
http://www.overunity.com/index.php?topic=7150.msg172368#msg172368

AquariuZ, there is a slight modification to my previous animation I would like to see modelled. It should be fairly trivial. I just want to see if this way manages to conserve enough momentum that the balls can keep up with the wheel. If it looks interesting, could you also post a video?

Thanks,
0c
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on April 24, 2009, 09:06:43 PM
@0c,

Yeah, that'll be interesting to see being modeled.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: AquariuZ on April 24, 2009, 09:56:59 PM
Sorry, count me out for the next few weeks.

I have studying to do... Serious studying...

Check my posts in Bendini and Magnet systems in relation with ECE which basically explains where energy from the "vacuum" comes from.

I must completely understand all this before I go on like a headless chicken.

http://aias.us

I know, I know, you cannot have it both ways, now I wish I had studied.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: AquariuZ on April 24, 2009, 09:57:53 PM
Double
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on April 24, 2009, 09:59:21 PM
Sorry, count me out for the next few weeks.

I have studying to do... Serious studying...

Check my posts in Bendini and Magnet systems in relation with ECE.

I must completely understand all this before I go on like a headless chicken.

http://aias.us

I know, I know, you cannot have it both ways, now I wish I had gone to college.

@AquariuZ, that's a waste of time. Simple as that ...
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: AquariuZ on April 24, 2009, 10:16:30 PM
@AquariuZ, that's a waste of time. Simple as that ...

Sure it is Omnibus...

Sure it is.

Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on April 24, 2009, 10:23:24 PM
I'm talking about Bedini/Bearden stuff --  sheer nonsense.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: AquariuZ on April 24, 2009, 11:23:33 PM
I'm talking about Bedini/Bearden stuff --  sheer nonsense.

I´m sure a lot of members will disagree, especially about Bendini....

But ECE: fascinating.. Especially the debunking brigade...

LOL

To all debunkers:

Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: hansvonlieven on April 25, 2009, 12:07:44 AM
I can imagine why Aquariuz is throwing in the towel. He finally found out that Sjack Abeling is full of shit, as I have said all along.

Hans von Lieven
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: AquariuZ on April 25, 2009, 12:19:14 AM
I can imagine why Aquariuz is throwing in the towel. He finally found out that Sjack Abeling is full of shit, as I have said all along.

Hans von Lieven

Incorrect, I simply have found something better to do for now.

Abeling will either come through with publication or not... Replication seems impossible if not all parameters are given.

On the contrary, I am still quite optimistic about Abeling for all reasons given earlier.

I have however given up on Bessler after studying most of the material including apologia poetica. Non disclosure in later life just does not make sense. He would have disclosed in later life after realizing he would never sell the concept. if only for the honor and his name in history books. He never did.

Now that I find suspicious.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: 0c on April 25, 2009, 12:55:21 AM
http://www.overunity.com/index.php?topic=7150.msg172368#msg172368

AquariuZ, there is a slight modification to my previous animation I would like to see modelled. It should be fairly trivial. I just want to see if this way manages to conserve enough momentum that the balls can keep up with the wheel. If it looks interesting, could you also post a video?

Thanks,
0c

http://www.overunity.com/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=7150.0;attach=33174

Any other wm2d guys willing to make some changes to AquariuZ' model and see how this design works? I know it's not a self starter, but once it gets up to speed, it just might keep going.

Thanks,
0c
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on April 25, 2009, 01:06:12 AM
@0c,

Quote
I know it's not a self starter, but once it gets up to speed, it just might keep going.

This is a misunderstanding of the essence of these devices. It was explained more than once why that's not the case and why the centrifugal force appearing when "it gets up to speed" isn't a producer but a spender of energy but obviously it isn't coming across to some people. If this device doesn't work because it is unbalanced to begin with then no "getting up to speed" will change that and turn it into a working machine.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: 0c on April 25, 2009, 01:39:44 AM
@0c,

This is a misunderstanding of the essence of these devices. It was explained more than once why that's not the case and why the centrifugal force appearing when "it gets up to speed" isn't a producer but a spender of energy but obviously it isn't coming across to some people. If this device doesn't work because it is unbalanced to begin with then no "getting up to speed" will change that and turn it into a working machine.

Even Bessler's wheel needed to be started.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on April 25, 2009, 01:43:16 AM
Even Bessler's wheel needed to be started.

That's no argument.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: hansvonlieven on April 25, 2009, 01:48:36 AM
Even Bessler's wheel needed to be started.

Incorrect.

Bessler, according to the writings, had two types of wheels. The first one could only move in one direction and was a self starter, in fact it had to be fettered when not in use. He was then asked to make a wheel which could move in both directions which he did. This type of wheel needed an initial push in the desired direction.

Hans von Lieven
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: 0c on April 25, 2009, 02:18:47 AM
Incorrect.

Bessler, according to the writings, had two types of wheels. The first one could only move in one direction and was a self starter, in fact it had to be fettered when not in use. He was then asked to make a wheel which could move in both directions which he did. This type of wheel needed an initial push in the desired direction.

Hans von Lieven

Thanks for the correction, Hans. I didn't recall hearing of the self starting wheel. My bad.

You seem fairly adept with wm2d. Care to give my idea a try? AquariuZ already has a start (see link above). It just needs a few tweaks.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on April 25, 2009, 02:51:29 AM
@0c,

Stop calling this your idea. This is Abeling’s idea and we’re all trying to figure out how to juxtapose a proper track with proper grooves on the wheel to get it going. Once is enough to instigate with your constant nagging a hoaxer such as @alsetalokin. Don’t try it again.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: 0c on April 25, 2009, 03:25:53 AM
@0c,

Stop calling this your idea. This is Abeling’s idea and we’re all trying to figure out how to juxtapose a proper track with proper grooves on the wheel to get it going. Once is enough to instigate with your constant nagging a hoaxer such as @alsetalokin. Don’t try it again.

Abeling's idea is the egg-shaped path dumbbell weights where the weights stay on the wheel.

My idea is where the weights actually depart from the wheel at the bottom and rejoin it at the top, thus providing the "overbalance". I have never seen a wheel like what I am proposing. If you know of one, give me a reference so I can give credit where credit is due. Maybe it has already been investigated somewhere.

To tell the truth, I don't care whose idea it is. I would just like to see it modelled to find out if it has any potential.

Model it yourself. I'm sure you aren't a hoaxer. Most of the work has already been done. It just needs a couple changes to the ball return. If I had the software and skills, I'd do it myself.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: i_ron on April 25, 2009, 04:21:46 AM
Sorry, count me out for the next few weeks.

I have studying to do... Serious studying...

Check my posts in Bendini and Magnet systems in relation with ECE which basically explains where energy from the "vacuum" comes from.

I must completely understand all this before I go on like a headless chicken.

http://aias.us

I know, I know, you cannot have it both ways, now I wish I had studied.

Are you not familiar with the methodology's of our ruling elite?  Einstein was one of their shills.
Do you not see the illuminati coat of arms on the ECE site?

This is just more nonsense, not unlike Bearden's gibberish, unless of course you like red herrings...

Ron

Adam Weishaupt, quotes about Illuminati: 
The great strength of our Order lies in its concealment; let it never appear in any place in its own name, but always concealed by another name, and another occupation. None is fitter than the lower degrees of Freemasonry; the public is accustomed to it, expects little from it, and therefore takes little notice of it. Next to this, the form of a learned or literary society is best suited to our purpose, and had Freemasonry not existed, this cover would have been employed; and it may be much more than a cover, it may be a powerful engine in our hands. … A Literary Society is the most proper form for the introduction of our Order into any state where we are yet strangers.





Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: skippy on April 25, 2009, 06:23:17 AM
Hello,  I posted this http://www.overunity.com/index.php?topic=7150.msg172954#msg172954 (http://www.overunity.com/index.php?topic=7150.msg172954#msg172954) on april 20th

Unfortunately no one seemed to have understood what I was trying to describe.  I apologise for the crudeness of this diagram, As drawn it will not work, but mearly illustrates the basic idea for an acceleration mechanism that I think could work for this wheel.  - Skippy
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: ruggero on April 25, 2009, 10:20:41 AM
Abeling's idea is the egg-shaped path dumbbell weights where the weights stay on the wheel.

My idea is where the weights actually depart from the wheel at the bottom and rejoin it at the top, thus providing the "overbalance". I have never seen a wheel like what I am proposing. If you know of one, give me a reference so I can give credit where credit is due. Maybe it has already been investigated somewhere.


Not correct.

I - for one - proposed such a 'depart and rejoin' wheel yesterday.

And Abeling could very well be doing the same (if you read carefully in his patent he says that "- at least one carrier disc (2) rotating around a horizontal axle (6), having at least one weight (3) attached which can move mainly radially outward in a predetermined path.")

But - as you say, oC - who cares who made the idea: Lets get it working!
regards
ruggero  ;-)
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on April 25, 2009, 10:39:08 AM
@ruggero,

I'm back to that dxf file you were creating. It appears that wm2d will not import curves which are not closed. Can you check again if all the curves in your dxf sketch are closed?
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: 0c on April 25, 2009, 05:57:27 PM
But - as you say, oC - who cares who made the idea: Lets get it working!

Looks like there is as much resistance to different ideas here as there is in the scientific community. Those who have the resources don't want to explore concepts that differ from their own.

I'd really like to see what a skilled wm2d user like Hans or Mondrasek could do with these proposals.

Oh well ...
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on April 25, 2009, 06:13:12 PM
Looks like there is as much resistance to different ideas here as there is in the scientific community. Those who have the resources don't want to explore concepts that differ from their own.

I'd really like to see what a skilled wm2d user like Hans or Mondrasek could do with these proposals.

Oh well ...

That's not true. Efforts are exerted here where it seems reasonable to do so. In general the same is true for the scientific community at large, except when basic ideas are challenged (not some detail in the idea under exploration, as your proposal). The effort at this point has to be directed towards @Dusty's contraption which seems the most plausible so far, let alone that @Dusty is making it in flesh and blood and we need to help him more than anybody else. Unfortunately we can't get to create the dxf file of the rotor that could be imported into wm2d. That's what the current state of the project looks like.

Like I said, stop nagging the way you did when you brought about the hoaxer @alsetalokin to teach you a lesson which you obviously haven't learned.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: hansvonlieven on April 25, 2009, 10:18:09 PM
Looks like there is as much resistance to different ideas here as there is in the scientific community. Those who have the resources don't want to explore concepts that differ from their own.

I'd really like to see what a skilled wm2d user like Hans or Mondrasek could do with these proposals.

Oh well ...

It isn't that Oc. Put quite brutally, the designs shown in this thread to date have simply no chance of working. Why make a simulation of something that obviously cannot work.

You must, in evaluating a design, look at what energy is available and how much energy is required to induce rotation. This is sometimes hard to see. In your design it is so obvious that it cannot work that it makes a good case to illustrate what I mean.

I have annotated your design below, it should be self explanatory.

Hans von Lieven
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: 0c on April 25, 2009, 10:59:57 PM
It isn't that Oc. Put quite brutally, the designs shown in this thread to date have simply no chance of working. Why make a simulation of something that obviously cannot work.

You must, in evaluating a design, look at what energy is available and how much energy is required to induce rotation. This is sometimes hard to see. In your design it is so obvious that it cannot work that it makes a good case to illustrate what I mean.

I have annotated your design below, it should be self explanatory.

Hans von Lieven

If gravity was the only mechanism to be considered, you would be correct ... and you may very well be correct anyway. When the ball exits the wheel at the bottom, its gravitational potential is pretty much spent. But it still has momentum, momentum that is dependent on the rotational speed of the wheel.

I have already stated this is not a self-starter. If it can work, it will also depend on having enough momentum to climb the chute to a point above the axle and still be moving faster than the spoke so when it is recaptured by the wheel, near the hub, the impact contributes a bit of positive energy in the direction of rotation. How fast does the wheel need to spin for the balls to gain enough momentum? Can the wheel rotation speed be maintained? Is there an optimum angle for the impact? Those are questions I would think the simulation could answer.

AquariuZ answered questions about my initial design, which used gravity to try and rejoin the wheel. Well gravity wasn't fast enough to keep up. So I have modified the concept to use residual momentum to rejoin the wheel at a point near the hub, where the rotational speed is slower. At some rotational speed, the balls should be able to rejoin and transfer some energy back to the wheel.

Gravity provides some rotational energy on the ride down. The impact as the ball rejoins the wheel provides additional energy. Is the sum of the energy inputs enough to keep the wheel rotating? That's my question. And I don't have the math background to calculate the answers.

If I had the software, I'd sure try. But I'm afraid I can't justify $3,000.00 just to satisfy my curiosity. I was hoping you might be curious enough to give it a whirl.

0c
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: hansvonlieven on April 25, 2009, 11:17:18 PM
Here is a simulation similar to Omnibus' "Hockey Stick". It is easy to see why that won't work either.

Hans von Lieven
Title: closed dxf-file
Post by: ruggero on April 26, 2009, 12:55:46 AM
Omnibus,

I know one meaning of 'closed' and sure, these drawings are closed path...but I think the wm2d cannot deal with open path (like a straight line or maybe two layered drawings.(?))

I made one more file as a 'compound' path (like clipping holes in paper) instead of layer.

If that doesn't work you might open the file in Text/Notebook (it's ascii) to see the element's measurement description (beware: it's a damn long textfile)

Hans: You are a skilled user of wm2d...Are you able to import this file into wm2d?

good luck

ruggero  ;-)
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on April 26, 2009, 01:59:33 AM
Hans,

The rigid joints in your model are again on Optimized. Why?
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on April 26, 2009, 02:11:21 AM
@ruggero,

Thanks for your effort but it doesn't works again. When trying to import it into wm2d the same error message appears as the one I posted above. I observed the sketch in SolidEdge 2D by removing everything else but the grooves which are the important part. The sketch appears as a sheet in which holes in the form of the grooves are cut through. Thus, you can't grab each closed line comprising a groove individually, independent of the rest of the grooves, if that makes it clearer. Try to move one of these groves and the entire set of grooves moves. It appears these grooves should be drawn differently. Just a guess.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: hansvonlieven on April 26, 2009, 02:22:14 AM
Hans,

The rigid joints in your model are again on Optimized. Why?
It worked like this, I saw no reason to change it  ;D

Hans
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on April 26, 2009, 02:32:26 AM
It worked like this, I saw no reason to change it  ;D

Hans

You have used Rigid Joints on Optimize,  Air Resistance Off, Animation Step 0.050s and Integration Error 0.010m. Under these conditions I can show you a sim of a perfectly working perpetuum mobile. Are you going to recognize the reality of such machine if unlike you I show you a working one?
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: hansvonlieven on April 26, 2009, 02:49:43 AM
That wasn't the idea Omnibus.

It was clear from the outset that such a device could not work. I merely simulated an ideal system to study it's behaviour under differing conditions.This was just the basic simulation which I kept changing as required dependent on what I wanted to have a closer look at. All my simulations start off like this. If it does not even work as an ideal system it has no chance to work in the real world, it cuts out a lot of deadwood if you start off like this.

Hans
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on April 26, 2009, 03:00:12 AM
That wasn't the idea Omnibus.

It was clear from the outset that such a device could not work. I merely simulated an ideal system to study it's behaviour under differing conditions.This was just the basic simulation which I kept changing as required dependent on what I wanted to have a closer look at. All my simulations start off like this. If it does not even work as an ideal system it has no chance to work in the real world, it cuts out a lot of deadwood if you start off like this.

Hans

Well, but I'm telling you that under these conditions it (by 'it' I mean the system that I can show you) does work. Therefore, using your logic, if it works under these conditions, cutting out a lot of deadwood, there's a chance to work in the real world.

However, as I said before, neither of these (pessimistic or optimistic) conclusions, based on such black box approach, is convincing, unless there's a rigorous analytical solution offered or at least if we know exactly what methods are implemented in that simulation program and how it really works.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: X00013 on April 26, 2009, 06:20:00 AM
@ Omni, ur 3d looks good!!,
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: hansvonlieven on April 26, 2009, 09:15:10 AM
Well, but I'm telling you that under these conditions it (by 'it' I mean the system that I can show you) does work. Therefore, using your logic, if it works under these conditions, cutting out a lot of deadwood, there's a chance to work in the real world.


Yes. but only a chance. Any balanced system once energised runs, under ideal conditions (ie. no opposing forces) forever. That does not mean it runs in the real world. As we go down the track with our investigation we throw things at it that the real world does in increasing intensity and see what it does.

This method of investigation in unique to simulation and an extra tool. No more than that. In the end the only thing of any value is a working prototype, I realise this.

But why throw away a method of inquiry? As far as I can see this is a perfectly valid approach.

Hans von Lieven
Title: Separate grooves dxf-file
Post by: ruggero on April 26, 2009, 09:39:58 AM
Omnibus

I think I know what you mean.
So - this time I give you a separate single groove plus center hole (just for alignment), by two dxf-files with different export options..

If you can import one of these this files (closed outline shape of the groove), you should be able to dublicate this item inside wm2d.

!! – I won't give up untill this 'error' is solved – !!

ruggero  ;-)

Edit: I've put one file more "expand.dxf" into the zip.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on April 26, 2009, 11:51:02 AM
@ Omni, ur 3d looks good!!,

Thanks, bud. Too bad didn't listen to you and didn't do it in SolidEdge which can export it in dxf. SolidWorks is great but having it as a dxf isn't an option there and one needs an add-on which I don't have.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on April 26, 2009, 11:54:39 AM
@ruggero,

Sadly, same error with all three. Could it be that the dxf generated by a Mac differs from a PC-generated dxf? Will have to see how this can be done in SolidEdge 2D and redraw it there.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on April 26, 2009, 01:21:38 PM
Tried it w/ SolidEdge. No good either. The dxf now can be imported but once in wm2d only the arcs can be selected and properties show numerous polygons for one single groove. Probably the dxf created, good for import into wm2d, should be native to AutoCAD. So we're stuck. If I have to do it myself will have to sit down and learn how to do it in AutoCAD, it seems, or find the dxf plug-in for SolidWorks which is still not a guarantee that it will be the native dxf.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: ruggero on April 26, 2009, 02:25:27 PM
Omnibus

Sorry to hear that.

Why don't we try this:

I give you a drawing in a format that you can import into SolidsWorks.
You export a dxf-file from SolidWorks and import that dxf into wm2d...?

Which format can you import into SolidWorks?

ruggero
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on April 26, 2009, 02:51:10 PM
Omnibus

Sorry to hear that.

Why don't we try this:

I give you a drawing in a format that you can import into SolidsWorks.
You export a dxf-file from SolidWorks and import that dxf into wm2d...?

Which format can you import into SolidWorks?

ruggero

@ruggero, the problem is that SolidWorks cannot export dxf files. Seems like there's no way out of AutoCAD.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: ruggero on April 26, 2009, 08:38:00 PM
Not Good Omnibus,

I tried import into SketchUp with no luck.
These software engineers really made a hell of a monolog system with NO import features at all but their own format.

I could try to build the wheel and grooves in SketchUp but I guess it's the same job as doing it in wm2d...?

ruggero  ;-)
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on April 26, 2009, 08:58:31 PM
Yes. but only a chance. Any balanced system once energised runs, under ideal conditions (ie. no opposing forces) forever. That does not mean it runs in the real world. As we go down the track with our investigation we throw things at it that the real world does in increasing intensity and see what it does.

This method of investigation in unique to simulation and an extra tool. No more than that. In the end the only thing of any value is a working prototype, I realise this.

But why throw away a method of inquiry? As far as I can see this is a perfectly valid approach.

Hans von Lieven

The problem is whether or not the conditions you’re applying to your models are actually ideal conditions or are just a mess. @mondrasek seems to think it’s the latter. However, his approach also doesn’t seem to bring about physically convincing behavior (motion too slow, dropping off constraints etc.) So far the outcome from these sims is dependent on the inclinations, pessimistic or optimistic, of whoever uses them. Rigor is still wanting which if theoretical solutions are sought for can only be analytical such. The real proof, of course, can only be a practically working device. We have already a practically functioning device producing excess energy discontinuously but continuous production of excess energy is still in the works. It is obviously possible but is very difficult, in its purely engineering aspect, to have it actually turning in one’s workshop or lab.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: hansvonlieven on April 26, 2009, 10:27:24 PM
@ Omnibus,

I have never seen in WM2D more than a rough guide. It is of limited usefulness.

Having said this, it is a quick way to mock something up and study its behaviour under differing conditions. Something that would take weeks with a real model can be done in a matter of hours. So what if it is not precise? It will give a good idea what to expect in a prototype.

When WM2D goes wrong it goes so wrong that it becomes obvious something is amiss.

The moment it starts dropping constraints for instance you know it goes haywire. The programme is a long way away from being a true simulation of real processes other than the simplest systems.

Hans von Lieven
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on April 27, 2009, 01:26:52 AM
@ruggero,

I finally found a way to save a drawing in SolidWorks as a dxf file. However, to have a functional drawing imported into wm2d turns out to be a very complicated task. If you draw the grooves in the Draw section of SolidWorks, the way they are drawn in the Parts section of SolidWorks (an image of which I already posted), these grooves appear as separate solid entities in wm2d and not as holes in the wheel. They have to be subtracted somehow from the wheel while still in the Draw section of SolidWorks (as they are extruded in the Parts section of SolidWorks). Don’t know how to do that yet, if it’s at all possible. Another approach would be to draw certain number of segments of proper form which when put together would make up the wheel w/ the grooves, if that makes sense to you. This is a hell of a job.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: AquariuZ on April 27, 2009, 01:51:37 AM
@ruggero,

I finally found a way to save a drawing in SolidWorks as a dxf file. However, to have a functional drawing imported into wm2d turns out to be a very complicated task. If you draw the grooves in the Draw section of SolidWorks, the way they are drawn in the Parts section of SolidWorks (an image of which I already posted), these grooves appear as separate solid entities in wm2d and not as holes in the wheel. They have to be subtracted somehow from the wheel while still in the Draw section of SolidWorks (as they are extruded in the Parts section of SolidWorks). Don’t know how to do that yet, if it’s at all possible. Another approach would be to draw certain number of segments of proper form which when put together would make up the wheel w/ the grooves, if that makes sense to you. This is a hell of a job.

If an imported polygon contains errors try converting that polygon to lines (Object -> convert to lines). Then make corrections to the object in line format and when done reconvert all the lines to a polygon by using a reverse conversion (Select all lines and then Convert object -> convert to polygon)

That´s how I basically make all grooves in wm2d

AZ
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on April 27, 2009, 02:07:08 AM
If an imported polygon contains errors try converting that polygon to lines (Object -> convert to lines). Then make corrections to the object in line format and when done reconvert all the lines to a polygon by using a reverse conversion (Select all lines and then Convert object -> convert to polygon)

That´s how I basically make all grooves in wm2d

AZ

Can't do it. Observe, for instance, a simple example -- I want to have a wheel with one small circular hole. No polygons. In the Part section of SolidWorks it's easy to do -- you just Extrude the hole through the entire body. That can't be done in the Draw section of SolidWorks. The two circles, the large, that is the wheel, and the small, that is the supposed hole appear as two separate solid entities in wm2d. The only way to do it is to have the wheel be composed of two halfs which when put together form a wheel with a hole.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: X00013 on April 27, 2009, 05:04:09 AM
Free demo Solid Edge to wm2d http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XPWdp08vLc4
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on April 27, 2009, 01:32:05 PM
Free demo Solid Edge to wm2d http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XPWdp08vLc4

Thanks @X00013. How can you make this detail have a, say, round opening in wm2d? All I get in wm2d when drawing in SolidEdge this detail with an opening, are two details in wm2d superimposed on each other -- one is the detail you show and the other is a detail with the form of the supposed opening -- and not the desired detail with an opening.
Title: a Flash drawing proposal
Post by: ruggero on April 27, 2009, 02:07:08 PM
Omnibus

Is this what we are aiming at?

Just a quick Flash animation of the wheel as proposed by dusty....

ruggero  ;-)
Title: Re: a Flash drawing proposal
Post by: Omnibus on April 27, 2009, 02:22:10 PM
Omnibus

Is this what we are aiming at?

Just a quick Flash animation of the wheel as proposed by dusty....

ruggero  ;-)

What do you play this with?
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: mondrasek on April 27, 2009, 03:34:18 PM
Oc,

I did not simulate your ideas for the reasons Hans has already given.  They would fail to run for reasons I can tell without a sim.  But I highly recommend you make the effort to sim them your self for your personal edification.  You can PM me if you want to learn how.

Omni,

WM2D cannot do open areas inside of a closed.  That is why all of cherryman's and others neat slots are always open shapes.  also, in AutoCAD I have to draw using single elements like lines and curves that are not all attached.  As a last step I convert them to a polyline which joins them into one element that WM2D can handle.

You also really need to get over your hang up with WM2D's apparent unrealistic slow downs!   That has absolutely no negative effect on the accuracy of the performance of a sim!  It is 100% dependant on how fast your CPU (and GPU) are.  So if you run a sim on a slow machine it will run slow.  Run the same on a fast machine and it will run fast.  But the interactions and forces calculated are the SAME.  Simulations are not animations.  They are not trying to show you a real time representation.  They are showing you the calculated results as fast as they can.  The speed they play back depends on how complex the sim as well as the accuracy and rendering parameters YOU enter.  A simple sim on a fast machine will run faster than real life just as a complex one or one on a slow machine will run slower.  Just like watching a car crash in slow motion, viewing it slower does not change the outcome.  So use the highest accuracy settings you can (slowing the sim down) to verify results.

Hans has already said this, but I will also emphasize that simulating with ideal conditions is a very valid method.  It is exactly how most simulations are initially run.  This is from many years of experience in industrial automation simulations, at least as many years as they have been able to be simulated with graphical representations.  Once the desired phenomenon is obtained through simple optimized sims, you can add complexity and real world losses to try and mimic a real world build, but usually it is time to move on to the real world build by then anyway.

So far I have not seen one WM2D sim that does not predict real world behavior unless grossly mis-model.  And those should and do usually make you look twice because you see behavior that should not happen.  It stands out that way.  And so you increase accuracy or look for other known sim busting techniques (like replacing solid joints with double pins).  If you cannot fix the unusual behavior this way, you might have something!  That is exactly what we are all looking for, right?  And so you should move on to real world experiments to verify.

M. 
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: ruggero on April 27, 2009, 03:38:59 PM
Omnibus

You play it with Flash Player (free player from Adobe.com)

ruggero  ;-)
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: mondrasek on April 27, 2009, 03:51:19 PM
Omnibus

You play it with Flash Player (free player from Adobe.com)

ruggero  ;-)

Or drag and drop into any Internet Browser window.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on April 27, 2009, 04:07:39 PM
@mondrasek,

If rigid joints are set to Optimized, Air Resistance is off, Animation Step is set to 0.050s and Integration Error set to 0.010m indeed represent ideal conditions as Hans considers them then perpetuum mobile under ideal conditions has been confirmed through sims. If that’s the case then it is very significant. Thus, it is very important to understand whether or not these conditions are indeed ideal conditions. Real world behavior is only a secondary consideration of purely engineering essence.

As for the slowness of the rendered slim, I’m not so sure how unimportant it is as to the physicality of the demonstration until I know what really is going on inside the program. Already rendered image should not depend on the speed with which the computer calculates (otherwise, say, videos will run at different speeds on different computers), only the calculation steps should. However, even if speed of the computer is important, you do not address the dropping out of constraints when decreasing the graininess of error limits. No matter what the accuracy, changing of constraints changes the model under simulation and the conclusions made, independent of how accurate the calculations, refer to a different model, not to the model under discussion.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: ruggero on April 27, 2009, 04:11:56 PM
Or drag and drop into any Internet Browser window.

I don't know how you manage that....: When I drag'n'drop the .swf-file into Firefox (or if I try to open it from within Firefox "Open File"), it just ask me to download or make me choose an appropriate program to run the file.

Maybe it's in the preferences... but if you've installed the player it just works.

ruggero ;-)
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on April 27, 2009, 04:21:49 PM
@ruggero,

Yes, that drag and drop worked really well. That's exactly what we need to accomplish. Now I understand what the whole story is but we don't want to do it the way @Cherryman did it because it isn't symmetric and accurate enough. What is needed, but probably unachievable, is to have a one single rotor (not a rotor made up of several parts put together as @Cherryman usually does it) with eight smooth grooves. So far the grooves and tracks with complicated form were always drawn approximately, containing bumps and other imperfections which disturbs the analysis. The most we can do at this point, as far as I can see it, is draw one closed curve of a proper form and then mirror it eight times, put all these eight parts together, import them in wm2d and then fasten them onto a background disc just as @Cherryman does. Not only this is a hell of a job, as I mentioned previously, but it isn't the accurate model we're aiming at.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: mondrasek on April 27, 2009, 05:42:27 PM
If rigid joints are set to Optimized, Air Resistance is off, Animation Step is set to 0.050s and Integration Error set to 0.010m indeed represent ideal conditions as Hans considers them then perpetuum mobile under ideal conditions has been confirmed through sims. If that’s the case then it is very significant. Thus, it is very important to understand whether or not these conditions are indeed ideal conditions. Real world behavior is only a secondary consideration of purely engineering essence.

Ridged joint (vs others, Optimized or not), Animation Step, and Integration Error are not values that have an ideal condition.  Using a method for modeling items that minimizes calculation errors is something that may differ based on the system you are modeling.  So trying alternates is always a good test procedure.  You should not expect to learn one way that works best for all cases.

And since as the Animation Step and Integration Error become ever smaller the sim becomes ever more precise (yet more computer hardware intensive) these cannot ever be ideal (set to zero).

The proper methodology is to make a simple model with the best known techniques and run at a reasonable time step.  Then if you witness strange behavior or need more precise measurements, try alternative modeling techniques (if they exist) and decrease the time step.  So far this method has worked to show exactly zero perpetual motion devices.  Only tricks to fool the sim have.

Running without friction, elasticity of 0 or 1, and without air resistance, are the examples of ideal conditions that can be used when first analysing a sim.

As for the slowness of the rendered slim, I’m not so sure how unimportant it is as to the physicality of the demonstration until I know what really is going on inside the program. Already rendered image should not depend on the speed with which the computer calculates (otherwise, say, videos will run at different speeds on different computers), only the calculation steps should.

The program is obviously not just rendering frames of a movie.  If it were, like you say, then it should be able to run near real time (at reasonable Animation Step setting) once it playing back already rendered frames.  But this is not the case.  In fact, the program taxes my CPU the same whether playing quickly through a previously calculated sequence, or chugging slowly through it the first time.  My guess here is that only portions of pre-calculated frames are saved, like a pre-pocessing step.  The results must still be finalized by the engine and rendered.

However, even if speed of the computer is important, you do not address the dropping out of constraints when decreasing the graininess of error limits.

I have not address this because I agree it is an issue.  But not a show stopper.  I believe this error might also not mean that a constraint is being dropped indefinitely, but only that one of two or more conflicting constraints must be ignored in any one iteration.  Allowing the sim to continue gives one of two outcomes:  Either it blows up noticeably, or continues on without any apparent ill effect.  So it handles the error just like it is doing with every calculation error it makes due to it's iterative structure.  And still, the program returns lifelike results.  If it showed something unexpected, it would be cause for further investigation, in the sim, and possibly in real life.

No matter what the accuracy, changing of constraints changes the model under simulation and the conclusions made, independent of how accurate the calculations, refer to a different model, not to the model under discussion.

No.  It changes the parameters under which you are testing the model.  The same way I can test a car in the heat of a desert or the Arctic cold and still be testing the same car.  I could even take the car to the moon and test it under lower gravity in theory.  The sim allows the same type of testing.  You just have a lot of control for parameters you may take for granted in real life testing, and that can be useful or harmful to your efforts based on your own testing methodology.

WM2D is a tool.  With proper methodology, it can be very useful for testing our wheel ideas.  The proper methodology will likely change depending on which design and characteristics are being analyzed.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: mondrasek on April 27, 2009, 05:45:34 PM
I don't know how you manage that....: When I drag'n'drop the .swf-file into Firefox (or if I try to open it from within Firefox "Open File"), it just ask me to download or make me choose an appropriate program to run the file.

Maybe it's in the preferences... but if you've installed the player it just works.

ruggero ;-)

Usually the plug-ins for Flash player are installed in your browser.  So drag and drop will play them.  Not sure if Firefox is different or if you do not have that plug in installed.  But it works for most IE users.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on April 27, 2009, 06:43:05 PM
@ruggero,

Something like this (see attached). Of course, it isn't perfectly symmetric, has to be scaled down, has unwanted elements (rigid joints) and so on. It it were the acceptable rotor the only remaining part (extremely important) would be the track.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on April 27, 2009, 06:51:22 PM
@mondrasek,

That's the problem. It isn't clear what proper methodology is and this is what the argument is all about. If what the proper methodology is isn't understood well wm2d being a tool isn't an argument. One think I'd do is compare two models under the same conditions but, as we saw, this works in favor of concluding that the sim confirms perpetuum mobile. Aside from a full fledged real life model, much more is needed if one is only to rely on theoretical considerations and sims.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: ruggero on April 27, 2009, 08:02:18 PM
Omnibus,

I can't read wm2d on a Mac X5 - sorry.
Quictime, AVI...well, allmost anything else would do fine...or even just a still image, please.

ruggero ;-)
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on April 27, 2009, 08:20:01 PM
@ruggero,

Here's a screenshot (see attached).
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: hansvonlieven on April 28, 2009, 12:53:47 AM
Can someone please tell me how the yellow weight can possibly get into this position in a rotating wheel?

See below natural distribution of weights if gravity is the determining factor.

Hans von Lieven
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: ruggero on April 28, 2009, 01:05:02 AM
Omnibus – thanks for the image ;-D

That's exactly how I thought it would look like.

Why do you make the grooves open ended and connected near the axis? Is that intentional or some software 'bug'?

Ruggero ‚-)
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: ruggero on April 28, 2009, 01:11:59 AM
Can someone please tell me how the yellow weight can possibly get into this position in a rotating wheel?

– I believe 'Dusty' made some video of his real-life model, that shows how...
– Gravity is NOT the determining factor ...momentum are
– Abeling's grooves has a 'dog' catch (closest to the rim)...(on his movie..not the hockey stick)
– Use of 'oval guided track'

ruggero ;-)
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: hansvonlieven on April 28, 2009, 01:24:50 AM
This I would like to see. If you can lift the weight the required vertical distance without expenditure of energy that would solve all problems. Water running uphill. Dream on!

Hans von Lieven
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: ruggero on April 28, 2009, 01:35:51 AM
That's what we are here for...aren't we?

ruggero ;-)
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: X00013 on April 28, 2009, 02:38:42 AM
@ omni or all http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ad3RZIwxQAM
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on April 28, 2009, 04:59:57 AM
Omnibus – thanks for the image ;-D

That's exactly how I thought it would look like.

Why do you make the grooves open ended and connected near the axis? Is that intentional or some software 'bug'?

Ruggero ‚-)

This is what I've been telling you. The wheel with these grooves can only be made in this way -- notice the closed-curve pattern which repeats eight times and is put together so that a wheel with grooves can be formed. Also, notice that each one of these eight parts is attached to an underlying compact wheel by rigid joints. In addition there's a small compact circular part in the center to "complete" the grooves.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: ruggero on April 28, 2009, 10:17:22 AM
OK Omnibus...I see what you mean: It's a software issue.

If we go to another detail of Abeling's wheel, concerning the "oval guided track".

Would it be possible to make a quick sim...only of the oval track?

I figure it possible to sim this, by making an open oval tube (as a incline plane track), and drop a rolling weight into it at 01:00.
Then to see the momentum and velocity of the (spinning) weight at different spots...and also to see where it stops.

Is that possible?

ruggero ;-)
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on April 28, 2009, 03:51:11 PM
@ omni or all http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ad3RZIwxQAM

Thank you very much. This really solves the problem. Now what remains is to implement it. Cheers.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on April 28, 2009, 03:56:47 PM
@ruggero,

That's the crux of the matter and we'll have to start working on that, now that we were shown by @X00013 how to make the compact disc w/ grooves properly. The correct juxtaposition of the grooves with respect to the track is what the real problem in this project is and what we need to do is to be able to change their shapes almost on the go. Obviously, it's more efficient than making them one after another from wood but still is a trial and error. Will have to see what can be done with the track now and if I find a solution will post it.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: ruggero on April 28, 2009, 05:25:08 PM
Very good, Omnibus.

If you need any help from my hand, please don't hesistate to ask for it.
Keep me posted on the drawings, please.

Another thing:

Do you have any thought about the "dog" catch at the rim end of the grooves?

From the video of Abeling's wheel it seems very clear that they are not hockey stick, but round holes that will fit the axis of them weights...the "dog" catch (and CF) would prevent the weight from falling back into the grooves between 01:00 and 04:00.

When the weight hit the "oval guided track" at 05:00 the force will push out the weight from the "dog" catch.

Which bring me to another thought:

Could it be, that the weight was attached inside the grooves by a spring (tension spring mounted close to wheel axis)?

ruggero  ;-)
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on April 29, 2009, 03:18:24 AM
@X00013,

I'm ready with one example of @Rusty's rotor, following your instructions (see attached). You explanation was very clear and everything went well until I got into the need to scale it down. That was the most difficult part.

Now, next, it has to be understood how the track is to be drawn conveniently and I'll appreciate it very much if you could help with that too. I'm stuck with the following problem (it applies to the rotor too but now that it's done, I'm focusing on the track) -- the dimensions in SolidEdge are in mm while when saved as dxf and imported into wm2d they are automatically converted into meters. So, OK, I'm considering that when I get to draw in SolidEdge the mm are in fact meters and I draw everything accordingly. Further, if I consider the lower left edge as the beginning of the coordinate system and draw everything around it, the sketch is imported all right into wm2d. Here's the problem, however. Together with the sketch this nasty form with the various details about the drawing at the lower right corner is also imported and there's no way in the world it can be scaled down. Thus, my question is, is there a way to get rid of this useless mess and have only the desired drawing be saved as dxf so that the importing and further dealing with it in wm2d become straightforward? Also, would it be easier to do it in SolidWorks? I'd like to avoid AutoCAD altogether. Thanks.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on April 29, 2009, 03:20:19 AM
@ruggero,

Let me figure out several things. Will keep you posted. Thanks for your willingness to help.
Title: REPLY BY MINISTRY OF VROM
Post by: AquariuZ on April 29, 2009, 09:44:58 AM
Reply in today.

Na overleg met de beleidsdirectie en bij navraag bij het ministerie van Economische Zaken kunnen wij u het volgende antwoord geven.
 
Alle omgevingsvergunningen worden in eerste instantie altijd afgegeven door de desbetreffende gemeente. Daarnaast kan het bij grootschalige projecten nog wel eens voorkomen dat deze vergunning wordt afgegeven door de Provincie.
Ik wil u dan ook adviseren om met de juiste gemeente contact op te nemen.


TRANSLATION

After discussion with the policy management team and a inquire with the Minitry of Ecomic affairs we can let you know the following:

All environmental licensing is handled primarily by each individual municipality. When it concerns large scale projects licenses can occaisionally be granted by the province as well.

Therefor I would advise you to contact the correct municipality directly.


In other words: they do not know or are unsure.

I will send a request to the municipality of Groningen and let you know.

AZ

EDIT: Done. Requests for information out to both the municipality and the province of Groningen.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: AquariuZ on April 29, 2009, 10:00:04 AM
Something just occured to me:

Why are the weights in the left side of the Abeling "D" overlapping?

What could be the significance, and if accurate depiction how could that be engineered?
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Cherryman on April 29, 2009, 10:06:53 AM
Something just occured to me:

Why are the weights in the left side of the Abeling "D" overlapping?

What could be the significance, and if accurate depiction how could that be engineered?

He talks about putting "wheels" in series, so it could be a kind of schematic view of the side of multiple wheels viewed from the side.

So the weights "lineup"  before they get accelerated in the upper left corner.

Maybe this way he overcomes the "dead" points....

Just my two cents..
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: AquariuZ on April 29, 2009, 10:43:58 AM
He talks about putting "wheels" in series, so it could be a kind of schematic view of the side of multiple wheels viewed from the side.

So the weights "lineup"  before they get accelerated in the upper left corner.

Maybe this way he overcomes the "dead" points....

Just my two cents..

Interesting approach isn't it?

I remember that from my guess it being a vertical Newton cradle but later dropped the concept. (fails)

Maybe need to re-think the mechanics on how the weights can be stacked and then propelled given the current barrier parameters we have... Have not heard from Dusty for a while so assuming the simple design as described in the Patent does not work as is (expected)

There must be something else happening on the left.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: ruggero on April 29, 2009, 11:14:08 AM
Does anyone have an idea what's going on on patent figure no 6...?
Specifically item '208' and '212'...with the 'teath'.


AquariuZ:

The 'stacking' on the left is a natural result, coursed by the weight following the "oval guided track".
It makes them narrow the distance between the weights as they run closer to the axle.
By 10:00 they start accelerating to the rim.

One strange thing though: The weight on the logo at 07:00 seem to be a little more to the left than the rest...a bit out of alignment. Not much, but enough so everyone can spot it...It's not a coincident.

As a professional graphic designer I would have aligned these "dots" to make the logo look smoother.
Also, I would have distributed the left weights equally.

My point is: This is the the actual running path of the weights..!

ruggero  ;-)
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: AquariuZ on April 29, 2009, 01:02:57 PM
Does anyone have an idea what's going on on patent figure no 6...?
Specifically item '208' and '212'...with the 'teath'.

The answer is somewhere in this thread where I translated the patent, good luck.

Just kidding  ;D

The rugged surface is to avoid friction (in this case it is made out of glass elements). The weight seperators have an oval shape with smooth concave endings to promote gliding smoothly over this surface.

It is a friction reduction surface.

AZ
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: AquariuZ on April 29, 2009, 01:06:25 PM
It seems I threw the stick in the hen house with my requests to Groningen.

Just received about six emails from confused officials...

It seems the question now has been relayed to the correct department.

The plot thickens....

AZ
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Jubjub on April 29, 2009, 01:36:30 PM
I have got a crude 3d-model (3ds max) that actually seems to work.
Tonight I'll let it simulate a couple of minuttes and upload the video for you. (Should be in about 10 hours from now)
There's no other force-input but gravity itself.

It's the simple hockey-stick model with 12 weights on each wheel - Oh and the trick was to use TWO wheels instead of just one  ;)
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: ruggero on April 29, 2009, 01:52:29 PM
That sounds interesting Jubjub...

But isn't the "Dumbbell" design using TWO wheels? On the same axle?

ruggero ;-)
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on April 29, 2009, 02:51:27 PM
@Jubjub,

Didn't know one can simulate natural motion in 3DMax. Thought you have to indicate the trajectory ahead of time and thus you force the program to calculate the motion along that particular trajectory which may be a completely unrealistic trajectory physically. Can you please post the 3DMax file here? I'm curious to see how you've done the running along a natural path..
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on April 29, 2009, 03:03:30 PM
It seems I threw the stick in the hen house with my requests to Groningen.

Just received about six emails from confused officials...

It seems the question now has been relayed to the correct department.

The plot thickens....

AZ

This whole governmental side of the story sounds very strange. Abeling writes:

Quote
We have permission to construct and exploit Weight Power Plants in The Netherlands.

How come, if such permission is indeed needed, the county of Groningen is the one to decide for the whole country of Netherlands?

Also, this

Quote
We can use the existing infrastructure.

doesn't make sense either because in countries such as the USA and, as far as I know, all European countries the utilities are obliged by law to buy the electric energy if someone produces such and decides to sell it to them.

It could very well be that the above statements are thrown in just to make the everything sound official and approved which for the gullible would mean that perpetuum mobile is a done deal, that it's real. Hope that's not the intention of these statements and what is really meant just isn't expressed well.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: ruggero on April 29, 2009, 04:29:30 PM
Snapshot.

Things i cannot place marked in red.

This could very well be a construction which is supposed to go between the plates.

Look at the bottom one, rotate left, what do we see? Looks like a stopper barrier to me.

I know...this is an old post from AquariuZ – but I think I have found something new and interesting:

What you call a "barrier", that I believe is actually a "Shooting" mechanism.

The whole guide tuns like a pendulum when a weight fall at 04:00, and push the "Shooter" to the left.
When the weight reach "weightlesness" around 09:00, the pendulum guide falls back....and the "Shooter" fire.

How does that look...?

ruggero ;-)
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on April 29, 2009, 05:59:21 PM
@X00013,

I got it. To get rid of the background sheet just un-check in View the buttons for Background and Working (not intuitive). Then proceed in SolidEdge as if mm are meter and orient everything w/ respect to the zero of the coordinate system. Thus, when you import the created dxf in wm2d the new sketch will be positioned properly w/ respect to the earlier sketch (which is also drawn with respect to the zero of the coordinate system). This whole thing makes a lot easier the drawing and the import of the various details into wm2d. Now will have to figure out what the for of the track should be.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Jubjub on April 30, 2009, 09:19:28 AM
Due to the site being down for maintenance yesterday I was unable to upload anything until today.

Here's the link for the video of my rough version -> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3skVetNsbZY

As for the Max-file you'll have to wait until I get home from work (Yes, I'm at work right now...)
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: AquariuZ on April 30, 2009, 01:02:50 PM
Due to the site being down for maintenance yesterday I was unable to upload anything until today.

Here's the link for the video of my rough version -> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3skVetNsbZY

As for the Max-file you'll have to wait until I get home from work (Yes, I'm at work right now...)

Most impressive!!! :o

AZ
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: AquariuZ on April 30, 2009, 01:07:33 PM
I know...this is an old post from AquariuZ – but I think I have found something new and interesting:

What you call a "barrier", that I believe is actually a "Shooting" mechanism.

The whole guide tuns like a pendulum when a weight fall at 04:00, and push the "Shooter" to the left.
When the weight reach "weightlesness" around 09:00, the pendulum guide falls back....and the "Shooter" fire.

How does that look...?

ruggero ;-)

Ruggero, YES COULD BE

It is so sad I do not have a decent 3D modeling program nor the CPU cycles to correctly model...

Frustrating...

AZ
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: AquariuZ on April 30, 2009, 01:13:44 PM
Due to the site being down for maintenance yesterday I was unable to upload anything until today.

Here's the link for the video of my rough version -> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3skVetNsbZY

As for the Max-file you'll have to wait until I get home from work (Yes, I'm at work right now...)

Jubjub, what software is this? And is there a free or demo version I can abuse? I wish to understand if this has accurate gravity modeling in it.

Also:in the patent or like dustys design the grooves are offset and do NOT point to the center axle... Other than that: full marks.

AZ
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on April 30, 2009, 02:25:01 PM
@Jubjub,

The way I depict motion in 3Dmax is by indicating a trajectory along which the body should travel and then letting the program calculate how the body should look like at each point of that trajectory. It can be any trajectory, even a physically un-realistic one such as, say, water running uphill. It’s like drawing a cartoon. I know of no way in 3DMax to have a, say, stone fall to the ground under its own weight, if the trajectory of this fall isn’t assigned ahead of time. In other words, as far s I know, there’s no way to do what wm2d does – solve the equations of motion for a body at given initial conditions and represent graphically these solutions. If what you’ve done in 3Dmax isn’t doing that then it’s just an illustration of something desired but not necessarily physically consistent such as the models with the attached motor @Cherryman was showing, or in 3D the models @tao was showing of Torbay device. I hope I’m wrong and 3Dmax can do also real life simulations showing the natural path of motion.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Jubjub on April 30, 2009, 06:05:48 PM
I'm using 3ds max - A 30-day trial can be downloaded from http://usa.autodesk.com/adsk/servlet/index?id=5659302&siteID=123112

I have uploaded my max-file to http://rapidshare.com/files/227559769/GravEng08_1.max (It's for Max 2009 and later)

@Omnibus,

You are both right and wrong about the whole trajectory thing.
If you model a a stone with a given weight, an unyielding groundplane, add some gravity and use max's Reactor to simulate the whole thing, the stone will drop to the ground (and bounce around depending of the amount of elasticity, friction and general surface shape).
However if you want to create a scene with a football penetrating a window you would set the animation up as you stated.
Something like animating the ball over 10 frames, and then let the physics system take over.

I've been using Max for more than 10 years, so I believe I've got the hang of it over the years. (My job is creating commercials, and visual effects for video and movies - how cool is that?  :D)
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: erickdt on April 30, 2009, 07:30:41 PM
Hi Jubjub,

I too have been using MAX for several years for design visualization. Despite this, I've never been able to get reactor to work right. It always just "explodes" the objects in the system all over the place. Do you have any idea how to fix this?

E
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on April 30, 2009, 07:56:57 PM
@Jubjub,

So, what you're showing us is a natural behavior of the device, just like the the natural fall of the stone let go from some height w/ respect to ground? It isn't motion along a predetermined trajectory, correct? If that's the case then it's most interesting to discuss this further and see whether or not there might be hidden problems. Recall how many times we had working models in wm2d only to find out there might be something problematic with them.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: erickdt on April 30, 2009, 07:59:38 PM
If you create a reactor object with no trajectory (via. moving it from one position to another after moving the frame time) it will simply fall, endlessly if there's no ground plane...
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on April 30, 2009, 08:04:56 PM
If you create a reactor object with no trajectory (via. moving it from one position to another after moving the frame time) it will simply fall, endlessly if there's no ground plane...

Correct. Question is what has really been done here.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on April 30, 2009, 08:09:00 PM
@Jubjub,

What is the accuracy set to in your sim and can you make it, say, ten or hundred times less grainy (increase the accuracy of calculations) and then run the program again with the new limits?
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Jubjub on April 30, 2009, 08:24:23 PM
@ Ericdt

It's a common "error" in max with the "explosions". I would suggest that you try the new 2010 version.
I believe they have been working to fix that problem. (I'm not sure if they actually FIXED it or just made it better - it has never been too much of a problem for me)
Also you should read the new help-file regarding reactor as they are adressing this issue.

But in general take a look at your values and specifically distance-tollerances and your substeps/key. If the substeps are not high enough and the motion in the scene is too fast, objects could be interpenetrating with the result that everything explodes when the object try to move away from each other.
Also check for the difference between Havok1 and 3 in regards to what type of simulations you are trying to run.

Hopes this helps  :)


@ Omnibus

Quote:"So, what you're showing us is a natural behavior of the device, just like the the natural fall of the stone let go from some height w/ respect to ground?"

That is indeed the case  :)

I believe this whole "D"-idea with the permanent "out-of-balance-wheel" is pretty old. And my guess is that there has been a lot of people trying to build it over the years (centuries). Actually I built one with magnets and what not several years ago but never got it to run.

When I read on this forum about the idea it surfaced again in my memory and I just thought "What the hell, I'll just try and make a 3d-model and see if it works"

First I tried with just one wheel with dumbbells, but it came to a stop after a few revolutions. So I made a copy of that wheel, rotated it 15 degrees and attached it to the second one and voila! It just kept on running.

Sometimes it slows down a bit, but picks up speed again - I believe this is due to both:
1. The way my "sliding holes" are cut and the way the dumbbells are hitting the barrier.
2. The number of substeps I'm simulating. (Default is 10, I used 15 - Higher is better, but more timeconsuming)

But overall I think that the sliding holes position and shape is of minor importance - It will ofcourse help the machine to run better if they are optimized and moved around to "the sweet spot". What this place is I don't actually know though :D
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on April 30, 2009, 08:26:37 PM
@All,

Check this out (see attached) at default values (air resistance off etc.) which I take to represent ideal conditions. The CCW rotation is observed also with much less grainy accuracy conditions, so it isn't an issue.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on April 30, 2009, 08:35:44 PM
@Jubjub,

I don't exclude the possibility that such machines had been in existence centuries ago but have been severely suppressed. That's beside the point here, however. What you're saying and presenting deserves utmost attention. First off, that 2D wheel making several full turns isn't to be ignored at all. Never mind it stops eventually.  What are the conditions for that and can you make a vid (sorry to be so pushy but, as you can imagine, I'm really curious to see that)? Also, my version is Autodesk 3ds Max 2009. Do you think it's the right version for what you're showing. If so, probably I should start with your 2D model.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on April 30, 2009, 08:58:37 PM
@Jubjub,

I was able to open it but haven't used the program for a long time. How do you start the motion? Just clicking on the Start button won't do any good. Probably it has to be rendered first or something.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: AquariuZ on April 30, 2009, 08:59:23 PM
@All,

Check this out (see attached) at default values (air resistance off etc.) which I take to represent ideal conditions. The CCW rotation is observed also with much less grainy accuracy conditions, so it isn't an issue.

VERY interesting.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: AquariuZ on April 30, 2009, 09:00:38 PM
I'm using 3ds max - A 30-day trial can be downloaded from http://usa.autodesk.com/adsk/servlet/index?id=5659302&siteID=123112

I have uploaded my max-file to http://rapidshare.com/files/227559769/GravEng08_1.max (It's for Max 2009 and later)

@Omnibus,

You are both right and wrong about the whole trajectory thing.
If you model a a stone with a given weight, an unyielding groundplane, add some gravity and use max's Reactor to simulate the whole thing, the stone will drop to the ground (and bounce around depending of the amount of elasticity, friction and general surface shape).
However if you want to create a scene with a football penetrating a window you would set the animation up as you stated.
Something like animating the ball over 10 frames, and then let the physics system take over.

I've been using Max for more than 10 years, so I believe I've got the hang of it over the years. (My job is creating commercials, and visual effects for video and movies - how cool is that?  :D)

Downloading....

Thanks a lot!

AZ
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Jubjub on April 30, 2009, 09:01:32 PM
@ Omnibus,

I wanted to make you a file with just one wheel, and decided to take the one that I allready uploaded and just delete the barriers and dumbbells on the far side.
Just for kicks I started the simulation... - And it kept running... ???
I don't rule out that I may have made some kind of mistake somewhere. That sort of thing happens all the time in my line of work (usually we are going by the "As long as it looks good it doesn't have to be realistic"-rule).

In my earlier attempt, where the wheel would come to a stop, I started to work with the size of the dumbbells, their weight, the wheels details and so on - When I decided to put in the extra wheel it actually might have been working with just one wheel - or my settings where too low. I really can't say.

Yes, I'm running the 2009 version - 2010 is lying next to me on the table, but I haven't gotten around to install it yet.
So just open the file, delete the far dumbbells and you should be ok to press the simulate button  :)
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Jubjub on April 30, 2009, 09:04:37 PM
About the "How to start the simulation" question:

I think it will be enough to just watch this short video from Youtube - A reactor tutorial: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TbVIu61fQcA
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on April 30, 2009, 09:18:12 PM
@Jubjub,

I got it -- through Reactor. You the man. Now we have to analyze this very very carefully. It's close to unbelievable. The 30 degree offset may be something very important. Where do you put the initial conditions? Let's play first with them, increasing the accuracy.

Also, can you redo the grooves on the wheel to be as in @Dusty's wheel? Be interesting to see if it'd make any difference.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on April 30, 2009, 09:32:49 PM
@Jubjub,

So, I see, the dumbbells are 200kg each and the wheels with the grooves are each 1kg. Concave Mesh is the simulation geometry but there are other geometries. Why did you choose this? Friction and elasticity are set to zero -- ideally non-rigid both the dumbbells and the wheels. So, while friction is modeling ideal conditions one would expect ideally rigid to be the ideal condition of, at least, the dumbbells. Probably we should change that just to see what happens. This was from first glance.

EDIT: I ran it w/ friction set to 0.3 and elasticity to 0.5 on all parts which are the default values in wm2d. Rendering gets excruciatingly slow on my laptop at that. Maybe you can try it on your computer if it's faster than an average laptop.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: ruggero on May 01, 2009, 12:15:18 AM
Is it too much to ask if you could provide the rest of us with your amazing simulations in some standard movie formats like AVI, QUICKTIME, SWF etc.– please...?

ruggero  ;-)

BTW: Beautiful job on the 3DMax (rough version)
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: erickdt on May 01, 2009, 01:05:00 AM
Due to the site being down for maintenance yesterday I was unable to upload anything until today.

Here's the link for the video of my rough version -> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3skVetNsbZY

As for the Max-file you'll have to wait until I get home from work (Yes, I'm at work right now...)

I finally got the chance to see your video (my work machine is 64 bit which doesn't support flash player). Very nice. If you need help rendering an animation of these I've got 16 processors and a licensed copy of MAX 2009 at my disposal.

E
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Dusty on May 01, 2009, 01:37:57 AM
Okay, I'm back with another report.  I know this is getting positively ridiculous to have this many video's of this gravity wheel, but I just want to show the step by step progress on the ideas as they develop.

As an over view of this project, after the patents were posted I proceeded to build a 3D model of the basics that were given.  After building the machine I had something real for testing which led to making changes for the purpose of seeing what might be better.  If an idea was worse then I went back to what worked better.  So far I made one change to the lower track and just recently I made one change to the upper track.  On the wheels themselves I tried four different slot layouts.

Now I'll explain each video test, and keep in mind I'm looking for the most rise in the dumbell and also the rotation of the wheels. 

In this video I'm showing new hockey slots that are aiming straight towards the axle from both sides. 
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7pH6Wgr9H-k&feature=channel_page     video 0763

In this wheel I flipped the two wheels and cut a new hockey end to test the opposite slot angle as compared to the original slots.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L71bZRCOJBc&feature=channel_page      video 0764

Here I've added the curved slots.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pbc1kStM9Wg&feature=channel_page     video 0765

This was real interesting, I'm showing a test I thought up, showing that the wheel going past the 360 degree point by having the dumbell fall and follow the track.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FZ4i9leznEk&feature=channel_page        video 0766

In this video I removed the dumbell and attached a five lb weight and just had it fall and rotate, not following the track, and it went 16 inches less than the previous video.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-qjStWmfvnI&feature=channel_page       video 0767

In this video I'm showing just one dumbell fall and follow the track.  This hockey slot track was the original slots on the wheel.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=74G_kSf5cS4&feature=channel_page      video 0768

Then this last video is showing the new upper track layout, with super fast acceleration.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_pmdExy6xsQ&feature=channel_page     video 0769

One thing I haven't showed is that I have used 2.5 lb, 5 lb and 10 lb weights for the dumbells.  More weight actually slowed down the rotation and too little weight didn't provide enough torque.  It looks like 5 lbs. is just right.

So now I'm just about finished with this first wheel.  I have one or two more tests with the track layout for optimization of bumbell rise.  Then it's time to build a bigger wheel.  It will be six feet in diameter and will have all eight dumbell weights installed.  A bigger wheel will make more room for all weights and give a longer hockey stick for extra leverage.  On the lift side of the wheel the distance from the slot to axle will remain the same as you see in the current wheel, but the outer torque distance will increase almost twice the distance.  I'm going to use the curve shape on the bigger wheel.

Thanks
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: hartiberlin on May 01, 2009, 03:16:33 AM

I wanted to make you a file with just one wheel, and decided to take the one that I allready uploaded and just delete the barriers and dumbbells on the far side.
Just for kicks I started the simulation... - And it kept running... ???


Hi Jubjub,
great animation.

Please try to export your3D model as a projected 2D model of the slotted wheel
as a DXF file and post it please here.
Maybe we can this way try it with the WM2D Simulation software.

@Dusty,
great work man,
keep on going.
In your last video, please try to remove your bottom barrier,
as it might just have too much friction.
Please read the comment I made at youtube.

Many thanks.

Regards, Stefan.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on May 01, 2009, 03:50:21 AM
Hope @Cherryman saw @Jubjub's sim. It uses exactly the 3D sim software he was looking for.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: spider4re on May 01, 2009, 03:54:20 AM
Okay, I'm back with another report.  I know this is getting positively ridiculous to have this many video's of this gravity wheel, but I just want to show the step by step progress on the ideas as they develop.

As an over view of this project, after the patents were posted I proceeded to build a 3D model of the basics that were given.  After building the machine I had something real for testing which led to making changes for the purpose of seeing what might be better.  If an idea was worse then I went back to what worked better.  So far I made one change to the lower track and just recently I made one change to the upper track.  On the wheels themselves I tried four different slot layouts.

Now I'll explain each video test, and keep in mind I'm looking for the most rise in the dumbell and also the rotation of the wheels. 

In this video I'm showing new hockey slots that are aiming straight towards the axle from both sides. 
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7pH6Wgr9H-k&feature=channel_page     video 0763

In this wheel I flipped the two wheels and cut a new hockey end to test the opposite slot angle as compared to the original slots.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L71bZRCOJBc&feature=channel_page      video 0764

Here I've added the curved slots.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pbc1kStM9Wg&feature=channel_page     video 0765

This was real interesting, I'm showing a test I thought up, showing that the wheel going past the 360 degree point by having the dumbell fall and follow the track.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FZ4i9leznEk&feature=channel_page        video 0766

In this video I removed the dumbell and attached a five lb weight and just had it fall and rotate, not following the track, and it went 16 inches less than the previous video.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-qjStWmfvnI&feature=channel_page       video 0767

In this video I'm showing just one dumbell fall and follow the track.  This hockey slot track was the original slots on the wheel.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=74G_kSf5cS4&feature=channel_page      video 0768

Then this last video is showing the new upper track layout, with super fast acceleration.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_pmdExy6xsQ&feature=channel_page     video 0769

One thing I haven't showed is that I have used 2.5 lb, 5 lb and 10 lb weights for the dumbells.  More weight actually slowed down the rotation and too little weight didn't provide enough torque.  It looks like 5 lbs. is just right.

So now I'm just about finished with this first wheel.  I have one or two more tests with the track layout for optimization of bumbell rise.  Then it's time to build a bigger wheel.  It will be six feet in diameter and will have all eight dumbell weights installed.  A bigger wheel will make more room for all weights and give a longer hockey stick for extra leverage.  On the lift side of the wheel the distance from the slot to axle will remain the same as you see in the current wheel, but the outer torque distance will increase almost twice the distance.  I'm going to use the curve shape on the bigger wheel.

Thanks


Great work Dusty
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: AquariuZ on May 01, 2009, 04:56:46 AM
Then this last video is showing the new upper track layout, with super fast acceleration.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_pmdExy6xsQ&feature=channel_page     video 0769

The last one is a WINNER. It matches the abeling "D"...

Hopefully you can create the same accelerating curves to run a full test but this looks promising...

What a monumental effort you are putting into this, thanks for persisting...

AZ
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on May 01, 2009, 05:20:01 AM
@ruggero and everyone else who doesn’t have wm2d, here’s a vid of a simulation with @Rusty’s type of a motor: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vf37W1C4uzc&feature=channel_page. Conditions are the default ones in wm2d and are supposedly ideal in terms of lack of Air  Resistance being set to None. However, static and kinetic friction is set to 0.300 while elasticity is set to 0.500 for all elements which is far from ideal. No need to mention that these parameters, especially friction, are very important to be set correctly and not overestimated – any common machine will stall if friction is made too high. Also, the weight of the spheres is 0.1kg while the weight of the grooved wheel is 1kg. Here @mondrasek may raise the same objections as the ones he raised concerning an earlier video (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9-dT4MZCtYo) simulating @eisenficker2000's idea, namely that the Animation Step (0.050s) and the Integration Error (0.010m) are too crude. However, try to change the geometry of this same model and you’ll see that the self-sustaining motion ceases although the same elements participate and the same confusion in calculations @mondrasek mentioned in connection with the earlier vid should be in effect.

Probably it should be mentioned that the symmetric grooves in Abeling’s patent unlike what apparently are grooves of various shapes seen in the wooden rotor of the machine in the barn seen in Abeling’s video may indicate that the problem with the trajectory of the dumbbells in a working machine may be more involved that what we’re portraying it in our renditions. @Rusty may be exploring that possibility so the present sim is just one basic variant along the road to what the solution may turn out to be.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on May 01, 2009, 08:47:02 AM
@Jubjub,

Trying to figure out what’s going on in your sim. Animation>Reactor>Utilities>Analyze World gives me too low density for the dumbbells. So, I changed the Mass 200 you’ve given to 2000. Also, the Mass 1000000 which you’ve given to the wheel seemed too high but the program doesn’t seem to feel a Mass less than about 100000 is acceptable so that’s what I changed it to. What the dimension of this quantity Mass is, I couldn’t find. With these changes the simulation works just as fine.

However, as I said before, you’ve given Friction the value of 0.0 to the wheel. When I changed that to Friction 1.0, as is the value assigned to the dumbbells, the wheel sways around equilibrium and doesn make turns any more. One of the dumbbells, at that, behaves strangely seemingly hanging in the air, so the program is doing something funny under these conditions. As I said before, ideally non-elastic conditions are assumed and I left that for now. If you change that to Elasticity 1.0 (ideally elastic) the setup explodes. Again, I’m still not clear as to what thee different Simulation Geometries are all about but, say, Bounding Box leads to the construction collapsing (the analysis window says bodies are interpenetrating). Same with the Bounding Sphere and Mesh Concave Hull. That’s for now. Will see tomorrow what else I can do with this analysis.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: ruggero on May 01, 2009, 09:42:58 AM
@ruggero and everyone else who doesn’t have wm2d, here’s a vid of a simulation with @Rusty’s type of a motor: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vf37W1C4uzc. ......

I really appreciate your concern for the rest of us (mac-users etc.)...;-)

But this link gives an error at YouTube: "The URL contained a malformed video ID."

ruggero  ‚-)
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Jubjub on May 01, 2009, 10:29:40 AM
Tonight I'll see if I have the time to make a new model. The former wheel "GravEng8-1" was not in scale - That is, I have no idea how big or small it is :)
I'm thinking about making a wheel with the same configuration as Dustys last video to see if it will simulate.

As for the different simulation geometries (@ Omibus) don't tamper with those, they are exactly what they are supposed to be. If you change it to bounding box as you said, the simulator will make calculations from the objects as boxes which we don't want. Concave or convex? Under tools you can test if an object is either - I have allready done so. And for the "mesh" it simply means that it will simulate the objects as they are built, with all their little creases and so on.

@Eric,
Thanks for your offer, but the current video took me under half an hour to render - Admitted, I didn't use final gather, real materials, textures or anything heavy.


Oh, there will be no dxf's of the current setup - But I will keep it in mind for the next one  :)
(Any particular version of dxf?)
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: ruggero on May 01, 2009, 11:46:59 AM
Dusty,

I'm amazed by your craftmanship: Your live models and tests are terrific and show us a lot of real-life issues to take into consideration.

Though...I've noticed that your curve design on the guided track differ from Abeling's original.( see my drawing: Abelings = black line, Dustys = red line)
Is there a reason to that?

From what I see you could easily tilt your existing curves to match Abeling's (see green line on drawing).
If you could do a demonstration on that, I think you will see the weight going further to the top-point. (I'd love to see that on video) ;-)

Also, I believe it of great importance that the "entrance" to the track at 05:00 are as smooth as possible, to prevent impact that slow down the wheel.

ruggero  ;-)
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on May 01, 2009, 02:33:44 PM
@ruggero,

Try this http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vf37W1C4uzc&feature=channel_page

Sorry about that. Probably I gave the link too soon before the youtube processing had completed. The link in the initial post is also corrected.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on May 01, 2009, 03:23:22 PM
@Jubjub,

The diameter of your wheels appears to be 2m which is realistic. However, it isn’t clear what the units of mass used are. The masses are some huge numbers and the interesting thing is that the program doesn’t calculate smaller numbers to be proper. Also, some realistic value of elasticity has to be used which is now set to zero for all parts. Wonder if changing to real materials would change that too. Friction is set to 0.1 for the dumbbells but is 0 for the wheels. Not clear what the meaning of that is. Could it be that the program makes calculations separately for each part and when calculations are for the dumbbells friction is considered non-zero but is zero when calculating the wheels. Not clear. I don’t mind simulations for ideal conditions as long as they are meaningful. Of course, one may argue that even if the ideal conditions are properly set the continuous running of the wheel is due to the fact that at these ideal conditions the device is only a very efficient re-distributor of an initially imparted energy. Therefore, seeking some realism won’t hurt, to say the least.

As for the dxf file, it is of the type exported by SolidEdge, for instance. When drawing it in SolidEdge, however, one has to have in mind that millimeters appear as meters in WM2D. Also, in order for the drawing to be usable in wm2d all the grooves have to be part of a closed curve (polygon) – see instructions how to do that in SolidEdge by @X00013 in this video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ad3RZIwxQAM.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on May 01, 2009, 10:50:28 PM
@Jubjub,

Tried to assign materials to the elements and see the result. Assignimg clear glass to the rotor and the dumbbells (following what Abeling appears to be doing) ostensibly renders well. However, when trying to run the animation the whole thing expodes. Tried also Al disk w/ glass dumbbells as well as other materials. These seem to render and run well as long as one keeps friction of the wheel to 0.00. Also, again, the program doesn't like the dumbells to be of a mass less than around 2000 mass units (whatever these mass units are). You've set it to 200 mass units and, although it renders and runs well (at friction 0.00), the Analyze World considers it un-physical. Aslo, the program doesn't like the wheel to be set to anything less than around 100,000 mass units. What the hell is this I can't fathom. Anyway, I put up with it for now. Now, as soon as you set friction to the wheel, even just a little bit, say, 0.01 units, the whole picture changes. Rendering becomes very slow and of what I've seen wheel exhibits somewhat erratic behavior. Hope you'll get a better picture of that influence with your faster computer. That question of friction is bothersome and has to be understood well. It well may be that setting to much of it is an overkill. Also, ideally non-elastic condition may be reasonable in view of the fact that there are practically no collisions (if one ignores the bumping of the dumbbell into the wall after sliding). But even so, we can imagine some plastilin (putty)-like material that acts ideally non-elastic. Anyway, I think that elasticity thing we'll take care of later after the friction is understood. This post was somewhat repetitious in terms of the friction question but the materials issue is new. Seems choosing materials doesn't change the friction value which has to be specifically indicated through setting it by hand.

Forgot to mention, when materials are assigned at friction 0.00 almost in all cases a slight CCW motion is observed after which the wheel picks up CW motion. This differs from the original case, first uploaded here, whereby no materials were assigned and the wheel goes straight into CW run.

EDIT: I'll add here some more observations. So, after assigning Al to the wheel and stainless steel to the dumbbells, setting friction of the wheel to 0.01 I rendered it for somewhat longer period. What I observed was an initial hesitation to and fro of the wheel after which it picked up the CW rotation. At that the dumbbells that are stuck between other two dumbbells (the size of the dumbbells is such that every other one gets stuck between the previous and the follow-up) slide with a delay . Thus, as I said, even this much of friction imposed on the wheel (0.01) may turn out to be an overkill. I wonder if it's worth making vids of these small steps of the analysis or just stating the above just in words is enough.

Now, tried the above w/ even higher wheel friction value (0.1 inits), matching the dumbbell friction. Similar thing, if not better -- after initial hesitation picks up CW rotation quite decisively. That looks pretty promising.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: LarryC on May 02, 2009, 12:08:17 AM
Allright! Dusty,

"Then this last video is showing the new upper track layout, with super fast acceleration."

Great job, you are very close to showing what Sjack states: In the topleft of the system the weight is accelerated (like with shot put). The weight is moving faster than the system, and as the system catches the weight it is propelled forward.

Also, in the patent, FIG 4, it shows the reason for the super fast acceleration in the top left.  As all of the weight ball slots are equidistant but the the weight balls are not. The forms/guide force the action.

Isn't it amazing how one builder following the inventors patent and information can out perform a pack of simulators? Some simulations are still rotating backwards ???

Regards, Larry

Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on May 02, 2009, 12:22:45 AM
Allright! Dusty,

"Then this last video is showing the new upper track layout, with super fast acceleration."

Great job, you are very close to showing what Sjack states: In the topleft of the system the weight is accelerated (like with shot put). The weight is moving faster than the system, and as the system catches the weight it is propelled forward.

Also, in the patent, FIG 4, it shows the reason for the super fast acceleration in the top left.  As all of the weight ball slots are equidistant but the the weight balls are not. The forms/guide force the action.

Isn't it amazing how one builder following the inventors patent and information can out perform a pack of simulators? Some simulations are rotating backwards ???

Regards, Larry

No doubt, @Dusty is doing a great job and, of course, should there be a working model the simulations can only help in clarifying the theory behind it. As for the backward rotation, it may be the natural way of rotation. Don't forget that that rotation is about the center of mass and not only it isn't seen in the sim but also it constantly changes it's position. Sense of rotation is the least of our worries. And, by the way, in @Jubjub's contraption the rotation is in the intuitively expected sense (probably because of the 30 degree offset).
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on May 02, 2009, 12:36:10 AM
As you may expect, I got ambitious and said to myself what if I set friction to 0.3 and elasticity to 0.5as much as the default values are in wm2d. What happened was a very very slow rendering which then showed hesitation but the turning was CW with hick-ups. This is to be expected because I imposed friction on all, including on the axis of rotation. Now I'm doing it again but the friction on the wheel is now 0.01 (retaining the 0.5 elasticity). Will see what happens.

Wish I could show you this (don't know how to make an avi yet). Rotor is hesitating constantly but inching forward. Decelerating and then accelerating.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: LarryC on May 02, 2009, 03:49:22 AM
Sense of rotation is the least of our worries.

Oh, damm, I must have missed the earlier Omnibus ignore the inventor memo, since the patent and the inventor states the rotational direction is extremely important.

Regards, Larry
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on May 02, 2009, 04:29:40 AM
Oh, damm, I must have missed the earlier Omnibus ignore the inventor memo, since the patent and the inventor states the rotational direction is extremely important.

Regards, Larry

No it isn't. It's what it naturally is, nothing more than that.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: LarryC on May 03, 2009, 01:44:35 AM
@All,

Analyzing Sjack statements: ‘Due to the invention of the dual lifting system, the falling/pushing weight will hardly be hindered by the weight that has to be lifted.’
and ‘Extra force is generated in the lower left of the system’

In FIG 4, weight 3-7 is starting to lift. The angle between the oval guide and the horizon is 30 degrees and the curved radial guide is perpendicular to the oval guide.

This would be considered an inclined plane and the weight force would be distributed so that 50% would be against the curved radial guide and 87% on the oval guide.

Weight 3-8 has an angle between the oval guide and the horizon is 45 degrees. The weight force would be distributed so that 71% would be against the curved radial guide and 71% on the oval guide.

Weight 3-9 has an angle between the oval guide and the horizon of 60 degrees. The weight force would be distributed so that 87% would be against the curved radial guide and 50% on the oval guide. 

The dual lifting system may be the combination of using the fixed oval guide and the curved radial guide to share the lift requirement. As this is playing out the lever advantage is increasing with each movement. By 3-10 it is around 2 to 1.


From the patent: ‘A constructive implementation of the simple conversion device is obtained when the guide means at least one placed next to the carrier, is essentially parallel to the plane or rotary motion include extended ring, which the weight of each motion.’ This is hard to understand due to the translation, but it may be emphasizing the need to be parallel to the oval guide and perpendicular to the curved radial guide.

The fact that the oval guide is perpendicular to curved radial guides is very interesting. I had tested a similar inclined plane previous but it did not run because it did not stay perpendicular and the decrease in angle caused a pinching effort which stopped the unit.

Also, Dusty had a problem with the hockey sticks guides due to pinching effort in the lower left. They did not stay perpendicular to the oval guide.  I think that the hockey sticks need a different radial guide design to maintain the perpendicular orientation in the lower left quadrant.

Regards, Larry
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: ruggero on May 03, 2009, 10:57:20 AM
The angle between the oval guide and the horizon is 30 degrees and the curved radial guide is perpendicular to the oval guide.

This would be considered an inclined plane and the weight force would be distributed so that 50% would be against the curved radial guide and 87% on the oval guide....

Larry,

Is this what other prefer to call "grooves"?

ruggero ;)
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: LarryC on May 03, 2009, 03:10:18 PM
Larry,

Is this what other prefer to call "grooves"?

ruggero ;)

Yes, sorry about the confusion, I was using the name from the short patent translation that had the figure drawings.

Regards, Larry

Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: i_ron on May 03, 2009, 05:04:48 PM
Larry,

Is this what other prefer to call "grooves"?

ruggero ;)

ruggero,

The use of the word groove confused me also...

A groove generally has a bottom and does not go all the way
through...

" a long, narrow cut or indentation in a surface, as the cut in a board to receive the tongue of another board (tongue-and-groove joint), a furrow, or a natural indentation on an organism."

Another example would be..." a vee belt runs in a groove"

So Larry's terminology is good english if the "groove" callers
would take note, thanks

Larry, good observation on the inclined plane!

Ron
PS: generally a slot goes all the way through as in a coin slot,
or mail slot. Whereas a grove generally has a bottom and two sides as in the following graphics... of a coin slot and a deep groove ball bearing...but english does have it's peculiarities... as for example, a slot car racer runs in a groove!



Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: ruggero on May 03, 2009, 06:13:25 PM
 ;D Thank you Larry and I-ron,

I fell enlightened...

Now I will call a 'cut-all-the-way-through-guide-track' a slot.
And call a 'cut-half-through-...' a groove.

ruggero  ;)
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: rlortie on May 03, 2009, 06:16:34 PM
Hello Ron,

I too have been confused with the term 'groove'...

Luckily Dusty who appears to be the major if not only hands on builder of this machine calls them 'slots' as he knows that a groove would be impractical.

@Larry

Your ramp to slot angles look good, this I would call the 'angle of attack' and the more oblique you can keep it the less friction you will encounter. That is up to a point of where the higher percentage is resting on the wheel.

I have high respect for Dusty, he is my kind of man. Just build the darn thing and quit using this thread as a simulation tutorial. Dusty will discover more by accident than any of you will achieve with your simulations.

This does not mean that I believe or endorse this Sjack design, my experience with comparable designs tells me that it will never reach any farther than Dusty has already achieved.

As Bessler stated and translated by John Collins; if it will not run with one then adding more is futile. Adding more increases the symmetrical pattern and the points of equilibrium will stay the same. If it will not run with one with a counter weight at 180 from the point of expulsion from the inner ramp then it will never turn.

A suggestion to Dusty; please try what I have explained above. with only one set of weights installed add the equivalent in a fixed counter weight. You may find the results interesting.

Ralph Lortie 
 
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on May 03, 2009, 07:10:24 PM
Don't discard simulations. They have their own very important role in scientific research. @Dusty is doing a great job and ultimately, as is usually the case in science, that will be the experimental confirmation of the conjecture that such devices are physical. However, simulations help in uncovering the underlying phenomena and among other things help to optimize the design by making easy the testing of multiple parameters which otherwise will be very difficult to do, if at all possible. Too bad that people don't have Autodesk 3ds Max easily available to have more activity in this area. The unavailability of the program is the real problem here, not that simulations are under way.

One solution is to have those who make the simulations post vids. Unfortunately, my computer is too slow for such rendering and I'm unable to post videos of what we're doing. I wish @Cherryman liberates himself again from the MiB's (remember how he resisted and won over them the last time) and participates in these simulations. Recall how he was looking for a way to do 3D simulations. We also need @mondrasek's expertise in this. Where has he gone? Hans too. @AquariuZ, Stefan, @einsenficker2000, @ruggero. Well, I can't list everybody obviously. @Jubjub, did something fantastic and we have to jump right in that marvelous possibility he opened before us to have a realistic simulation of such devices. I'm looking very much forward to more simulations.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on May 03, 2009, 07:17:21 PM
Stefan,

Wonder if a dxf from @Jubjub's device will do any good. This 30 degree offset of the second pair of wheels will be lost in the wm2d sim. As a matter of fact, I think we already have wm2d sims with that kind of slotted wheel. Although, @rlortie may have a point in that if one wheel doesn't work more won't help. Hard to tell. Too many factors are involved and we see sometimes we observe counter intuitive things (CCW rotation while intuitively it appears the expected to be CW and so on).
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: i_ron on May 04, 2009, 04:13:42 AM
Hello Ron,


As Bessler stated and translated by John Collins; if it will not run with one then adding more is futile. Adding more increases the symmetrical pattern and the points of equilibrium will stay the same. If it will not run with one with a counter weight at 180 from the point of expulsion from the inner ramp then it will never turn.

Ralph Lortie

Ralph,

Just to keep you on your toes, I wonder if that is true?
To be precise the weights operate in pairs, so the corrected
statement should read not one but one pair of weights.

But if you look at the 'input' to the wheel then it would seem to be, for arguments sake, the right hand weight from 2:00 to
5:00. Then this exact same input is complimented by the left
hand weight from it's position from 6:00 to 9:00 as it drives
the wheel as it's orbit is changed inwards by the ramp.

But when the right hand weight is at the bottom position it is
providing minimal input to the wheel. So what drives the left hand weight through 11:00 to 1:00? Why the next pair of weights!, and so forth...

Because in my mind the weights don't operate in pairs at 180 degrees but rather the the two inputs from the RH weight at
3:30 and the LH weight at 7:30 drive the wheel and lift the
freeloading weight at 11:30.

Ron
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: rlortie on May 04, 2009, 04:59:17 AM
Ron,

OK! I willingly concede from part of my quote, your reply does show the benefit of doubt. It makes room for second thoughts and at present I do not have the objectivity to back up or disprove my statement.

The last thing I would ever do is mislead anyone by error or intentionally.

I am not attempting to duplicate this machine as I have a phobia gained through experience fighting the back torque and/or friction found in most stationary ramp designs.

I am however working on one that you may say is a deviation of this design; The weights travel a similar path without ramps and the acceleration by angular momentum is introduced at an earlier stage stage of rotation.

By the way! how come we are not talking about a wm2d simulation here?  ;D

Ralph
   
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: i_ron on May 04, 2009, 06:24:46 AM
Ron,

OK! I willingly concede from part of my quote, your reply does show the benefit of doubt. It makes room for second thoughts and at present I do not have the objectivity to back up or disprove my statement.

The last thing I would ever do is mislead anyone by error or intentionally.

I am not attempting to duplicate this machine as I have a phobia gained through experience fighting the back torque and/or friction found in most stationary ramp designs.

I am however working on one that you may say is a deviation of this design; The weights travel a similar path without ramps and the acceleration by angular momentum is introduced at an earlier stage stage of rotation.

By the way! how come we are not talking about a wm2d simulation here?  ;D

Ralph
 

Well Ralph, I got away with challenging the master that time!
My sole gravity machine was that floppy spring thingie some
time back... so back to studying the patent and scratching
my head....I am sorely puzzled as to what we may have missed...but not to worry, the sim's will show the way, lol

Ron

Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: hartiberlin on May 04, 2009, 08:45:21 AM
Stefan,

Wonder if a dxf from @Jubjub's device will do any good. This 30 degree offset of the second pair of wheels will be lost in the wm2d sim. As a matter of fact, I think we already have wm2d sims with that kind of slotted wheel. Although, @rlortie may have a point in that if one wheel doesn't work more won't help. Hard to tell. Too many factors are involved and we see sometimes we observe counter intuitive things (CCW rotation while intuitively it appears the expected to be CW and so on).

Well, we could do it in 2D by putting 2 wheel side by side and using a gear to combine them
and have one wheel "weight phase shifted".

So a DXF would be good.
Regards, Stefan.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: ruggero on May 04, 2009, 09:27:32 AM
I am not attempting to duplicate this machine as I have a phobia gained through experience fighting the back torque and/or friction found in most stationary ramp designs. ...Ralph

Wouldn't a smoother curve transition between weight-in-slot trajectory and ramp trajectory eliminate any possible back torque?

ruggero  ;)
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Cloxxki on May 04, 2009, 03:30:29 PM
EDIT : seems I was thinking only 4 pages ahead of you guys, although you have no reason to believe other than my honest Dutch word for it. Page 39, my idea was introduced by @AquariuZ. I'll just flatter myself having come up with it without seeing any animations or 'Tube vids :-)
Being exposed to so much info over a span of days may distort the mind? I'm now reading on to see if you've debunked this idea. Abeling really told more than he should have, I think. Co-operating minds can be stronger than one.


Another Dutch guy here.

I've read up to page 35 so far. have seen no similations or other external media due to limited access.

Before I forget it though:
Pics I've seen so far, present from the side view of the wheel, a point-centered weight.
I tend to think that there is more "slinging" involved. Add a stick to your weights, and at the end another weight. The extra weights on the right side is free (narrower to fall through rim) to take a wide circel, up to 5 o'clock or so, taking advantage of the range offered (obviously). After 5, it interacts differently with the ramps than the weight on the other end of the stick. It turns from "pulling" to "pushing". Near 12 o'clock, it is resticted freedom, forced to take a "low" path with more velocity.
I'm a physics rookie (school dropout) need to learn similations etc, plus read another 90 pages.

Please someone spend one sentence to tell me I'm wrong and it's been patented already without ever proven results.
If you don't understand, aweful sketching attached!

2 weights, connecting by stock (rod?).
One takes a wider swing 12-5 o'clock, and tends turns into pushing 7-12.

Seems the outer weights has some additional centrifuginal energy with no-where to go.

Thanks!

J
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: mondrasek on May 04, 2009, 04:29:46 PM
We also need @mondrasek's expertise in this. Where has he gone? Hans too. @AquariuZ, Stefan, @einsenficker2000, @ruggero.
I'm still here, when work and life (weekends) are not priority.  I just have not seen where I can add or assist with current activities.  The sims, while interesting, showed the non-runner many expected once the patent was revealed (minus sims with modeling/sim errors).  And Dusty's build is also acting as expected.  So I am of the mind that Abeling doesn't "have it", or he has yet to reveal and/or us discover some other feature of the design.  I am following this thread to see if anyone comes up with that or any other new ideas.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: rlortie on May 04, 2009, 04:40:45 PM
Wouldn't a smoother curve transition between weight-in-slot trajectory and ramp trajectory eliminate any possible back torque?ruggero  ;)

A few years ago, I fabricated a flexible telescoping ramp test bed apperatus. I could change the ramp making it larger and smaller in all directions shapes.

Test after test was made and the results recorded using a very light lever assembly running on low friction bearings and roller blade wheels as idlers riding the ramp. The balanced disk that the weights were mounted on acted as a flywheel.

All testing ended in the same results; close but no cigar! Adding more levers and weights was more a hindrance than an augment.

Ralph
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on May 04, 2009, 04:43:14 PM
Well, we could do it in 2D by putting 2 wheel side by side and using a gear to combine them
and have one wheel "weight phase shifted".

So a DXF would be good.
Regards, Stefan.

That's very interesting if it can be done. This will allow us to compare the two types of simulation -- the wm2d with the 3ds max reactor. Do you think you can apply your idea on these two sims (see attached). It's interesting to see what the effect on the sense of rotation your idea will have on these two sims. The slotted rotors aren't of the same type as @Jubjub's but seem to work just as well. Maybe if you can do it with these rotors we can just replace them later with @Jubjub's.

As for 3ds max reactor, I'm still having trouble figuring out the exact physical situation. As expected wm2d is somewhat simple to handle in that respect -- mass is straightforwardly given in kg, dimensions in meters etc. Also, in wm2d one can adjust both static and dynamic (kinetic) friction. In reactor the provision is only friction with no qualification. There are other things, however, which have to be adjusted too which have to be understood better.

One may also think, am I not emphasizing too much on the friction. If one wants to prevent any motor from functioning one may do that by tempering with friction. Where's the limit in our case in this respect? Do we want to prove that such device can function in principle or we want to satisfy the critics by setting up such conditions as to make it non-working which, as I said, can be arranged literally for any motor whatsoever.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: i_ron on May 04, 2009, 04:43:49 PM
I'm now reading on to see if you've debunked this idea. Abeling really told more than he should have, I think. Co-operating minds can be stronger than one.[/b]

Another Dutch guy here.

I've read up to page 35 so far. have seen no similations or other external media due to limited access.


Thanks!

J

cloxxki,

Welcome to our humble list!

Good to see your ideas although I don't think this is a working
concept yet. It is similar to many where weights are allowed
to fly out on one side of the wheel.

But hopefully with some feedback from the list you can
adjust your thoughts to come closer to what Abeling said...

The weights could be connected somehow with a rod, but
any scheme I have thought of has complications. The distance
between the weights changes as the wheel rotates for example.

What was interesting on the first picture of Abeling's wheel
was the (to me) seeming repetition of two kinds of slots?

But keep your posts coming!  It shouldn't take long to read the
posts if you filter out all the simulation posts. Key posts of suggested importance are those of Dusty's replication.

Kind regards,

Ron
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on May 04, 2009, 04:50:11 PM
@i_ron,

I strongly disagree. The simulation posts are the most important in this thread. This is the only tangible stuff we have on this matter yet. Sims help to understand and illustrate the concept and understanding the concept is a shortcut to the blind hitting brick walls and hoping that luck will dawn upon you.

What is needed here is more scientific approach rather than just relying on construction skills and part of the scientific approach is analysis using sims, possibly describing it analytically with equations, solving these equations etc. Discoveries sometimes are made by chance but in our case it's not about a discovery but about a concrete engineering solution which by no means should ignore using modern tools of analysis to be achieved. If the modern tools of analysis are ignored we would still be riding in horse carts and building satellites to explore the cosmos would be out of the question. Even the computer you're using, which is mostly an engineering achievement, wouldn't be around if the modern engineering methods of analysis and construction were ignored.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: rlortie on May 04, 2009, 05:03:01 PM
@i_ron,

I strongly disagree. The simulation posts are the most important in this thread. This is the only tangible stuff we have on this matter yet. Sims help to understand and illustrate the concept and understanding the concept is a shortcut to the blind hitting brick walls and hoping that luck will dawn upon you.

A wee bit in contradiction here aren't we! You disagree with Ron but state that sims help find a shortcut to the blind hitting a brick wall.

In my opinion you got the latter part right!

Just what is your opinion of Dusty and his hands on trial and error approach. I would say that he is way ahead of any simulation with objective results.

Ralph 
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: rlortie on May 04, 2009, 05:13:03 PM
Sorry DP
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Cloxxki on May 04, 2009, 05:13:24 PM
Thanks Ron!

The rod's length being "under stress" might be a feature by itself. One could make the rod from a male and female member, with the maximum and/or minimum length restricted mechanically, or spring-loaded.
The outer weight(s) would only approximate the velocity of the inner ones during the latter half of the upstroke. (dis)allowing either weights to rotate, or letting them interact with offset rails to gain/produce inertia could all be part of the design. No reason think we'd not reach nice balance though. There might be a "trick" to it.
I'm now on page 58, thinking of driving against the wind. I am surprized that is still considered a novelty. I'll be surprised if someone manages to be faster than the headwind. Surfers, especially on ice skates, reach great multiples of the wind speeds, but then slightly over 90 degree into it.

General remark:
I was a forum moderator before elsewhere. I liked to keep the original post updated with new findings, so one could spare reading multiple (122 here) pages to collect data. And for newbies, similations that require special applications to see, are somewhat tiresome. Oh well, I'll just soldier on reading.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on May 04, 2009, 05:15:35 PM
A wee bit in contradiction here aren't we! You disagree with Ron but state that sims help find a shortcut to the blind hitting a brick wall.

In my opinion you got the latter part right!

Just what is your opinion of Dusty and his hands on trial and error approach. I would say that he is way ahead of any simulation with objective results.

Ralph

Where's the contradiction? Ron says sims are to be ignored, I state that sims are important and shouldn't be ignored.

As for @Dusty, like I said, he's doing a great job by trying to put this in flesh and blood and all power to him if he succeeds. If he doesn't succeed, however, it won't prove such machines aren't possible. Sims as part of a scientific analysis, however, can be closer to answering this. The situation with the trial and error is like someone trying to make a Patek Philippe in his garage with a hammer and a pair of pliers and when failing to produce quite the same as the Swiss watchmaker to conclude that Patek Philippe's can't be real.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on May 04, 2009, 05:23:17 PM
@Cloxxki,

Quote
And for newbies, similations that require special applications to see, are somewhat tiresome.

Quite correct. I also mentioned that earlier. This is the biggest drawback of the sims in such forum, especially with 3ds max reactor. Luckily, the wm2d sims can be shown to those who don't have wm2d via youtube. Unfortunately, the 3ds max reactor ones require very fast computers for rendering within reasonable time and that's preventing me, in particular, to show what I'm doing to those who can't use reactor. That, however, doesn't mean we have to ignore the sims.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: rlortie on May 04, 2009, 06:21:26 PM
Where's the contradiction? Ron says sims are to be ignored, I state that sims are important and shouldn't be ignored.

OK! they should not be ignored as; [sims is a shortcut to the blind hitting brick walls.]

Most of those who build have a little more resources than a hammer and a pair of pliers.

The Acronym WM2D for me means; Wood, Metal & 2 Days.

End of discussion, back to reality.

Ralph
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on May 04, 2009, 06:26:46 PM
Where's the contradiction? Ron says sims are to be ignored, I state that sims are important and shouldn't be ignored.

OK! they should not be ignored as; [sims is a shortcut to the blind hitting brick walls.]

Ralph

On the contrary, sims are a shortcut to avoiding blindly hitting brick walls through trial and error while approaching a problem systematically, as science requires. We shouldn't ignore science just because we have at our disposal a little more that a hammer and a pair of pliers in our basement. Also, wm2d is modeling reality, if properly used, because it's based on laws describing that reality. A tool such as wm2d or 3ds max reactor far exceeds any mechanical tools one may have at one's disposal in addition to the hammer and pliers. Otherwise GM or Boeing would've ignored these sims, Maya's and Catia's long ago. The problem in the area we're discussing is that such highly professional, scientifically based infrastructures are ignoring it and it's left primarily in the hands of amateurs. Obvious engineering solutions such as the one at hand rarely benefit from such ignoring. Otherwise the answer would've been known long ago but because it's positive and isn't to the liking of the Boeing's and GM's of the world, they are avoiding any activity in that respect like the plague. Fortunately, the computerized aids such as wm2d and 3ds max reactor are becoming available to more and more folks outside the corporate culture and that may indeed bring the answer sooner.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: ruggero on May 04, 2009, 07:57:24 PM
The situation with the trial and error is like someone trying to make a Patek Philippe in his garage with a hammer and a pair of pliers and when failing to produce quite the same as the Swiss watchmaker to conclude that Patek Philippe's can't be real.

Not to be a pain in the a...but the same is often heard in here in reverse.

ruggero  ;)
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on May 04, 2009, 08:13:00 PM
Not to be a pain in the a...but the same is often heard in here in reverse.

ruggero  ;)

I know, but the likelihood that a working sim, properly done, would promise a real working device is substantially greater than the likelihood of a failed attempt in a garage to prove failure of the entire concept.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: i_ron on May 05, 2009, 12:04:22 AM
@i_ron,

I strongly disagree. The simulation posts are the most important in this thread.

omni,

Not to me. The simulation posts take up most of this list, yet
the conclusions drawn, that are meaningful, could be summed
up in one short post.

Simulations in the aircraft industry are de rigor, a way of life.
But they have repeatedly flown sensor'ed planes and fine tuned the program to reflect the actual event to the point
that now the program can predict actual behavior (under
most conditions). Where is that here? You are taking an off
the shelve 2D program that has never seen a gravity wheel
before and asking it to preform miracles. You are using the wrong type of program on the wrong type of computer also. An analog computer would render this interaction with the most realism.

The bottom line is... Abeling developed this in a cut and try
approach, we should be able to (with a few more hints) do
the same.

Mind you the sim talk has been enlightening... I feel that I
could almost run the program now myself....lol

Take Care,

Ron


Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Cloxxki on May 05, 2009, 12:09:24 AM

Sailing up against gravital wind, using stored graviblablah  :o




Also, to eisenficker2000: WHAT IF THE WEIGHTS ARE CONNECTED VIA A BAR PAIRING THEM IN 2 X 2


Sorry for the rookie speak, I hardly completed highschool despite confirmed 3-digit and then some IQ.
I referred to this earlier today. Didn't read past page 70 or so, and just got home with an idea.
The "outer" weight is connected to the inner weight via the above rod. BUT is it a spring that can lengthen beyond its set optimal minimum. The first part may be without building much tension at all.
The inner weight nicely follows Abeling's patent, 0 to 6 o'clock along inner diameter of the outside of the wheel. The outer weight is slung around.

Sailing against gravity.
At 6 o'clock or slightly after, I suppose the spring rod's length will be maximum, stored energy maximum.
Now, the 2 weights, thanks to the smart ramps, are lined up horizontally, at the bottom of their projected ramps paths which are both "aiming" for 12 o'clock, thus getting closer as they climb up.
Thanks to the shallow angle of the approximating trajectories of the respective weights, make that the kickback from the spring (getting smaller, accelerates both weights up. As the spring hit its "stop", the two "collide" and one is shot-putted out over the 1 o'clock mark, the cycle repeating itself.

See? The two weights are attracting each other with the energy stored in the springs. The angle (like a surfer along the wind)converts this energy in "lift", rather than having it cancel out the two weights "chasing" each other vertically.

I thought in this direction before, "letting the weights be free and restricted when it suits us". Only when I was bugging a friend over this problem, I came up with the part of the two attracting each other upwards. Much like that grease nut shooting from our fingers, but the fingers being the benificiairies of the effect.

Please debunk this before I go to sleep?

Thanks,

J
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Cloxxki on May 05, 2009, 01:37:55 AM
(Edited, I added some explanations)

OK, I suck at this:

Weights connected by pull-spring. Neutral when weights are at minimal distance. May not even engage until some distance has been established, offering the outer weight a wider trajectory.
Aweful sketch, lacking a scanner to do a horrible one.

Over unity or not, does this use stored centrifugal forced for vertical acceleration?

Obviously, in such a setup, you'll want the weights to roll even so smoothly over the inner and other faces of the wheel, and it's neighbouring ramps. Perhaps the outer weight must engage both the outer wheel and outer ramp with a smooth running bearing rather than rolling right over it, and during its sling it will not gather rotation proportion to its "air speed". Landing on the underside of the wheel without a bearing in between, would cause rotational friction. The inner weight could be a rolling wheel, its outer force should keep it rolling along neatly, if not at varying velocity. I think its diameter as interacting with wheel and ramp should not be too small, for both contant speed friction and preventing slippage during the velocity changes.

In my sketch, without the guiding sleeves in the wheel for the weight, you'll see an abrubt bend onto the ramp for the inner weight.
Restricting its leftward should nett it (in a frictionlessworld) to travel vertically to just as high as it started. In a real world, it would not make it.
BUT, the outer weight swinging a wider trajectoy, from a partially loading spring, will be decellating as well, but not without lengthening (charging) the spring. When the transitions are done right, the outweight will also in the perfect world now have enough to make it back all the way up. But, the spring is not contracting again, causing the two weights to be attracted to each other faster than their restricted sloped collision trajectories, resulting in additional upward energy to become available to both.

I have not yet figured out whether, if this at would work, we'd want the weights to swap places now. This would not only make the guidance more complicated, but also might created some counter effective vectors.
If I'm not mistaken, the outer weight is as I sketched now always travelling faster than the inner weight.

Now I didn't read the patent too thoroughly, and as said before I have seen zero youtube vids or simulation, but I think that although Abeling did not specify the relationship between the weights, my sketch seems to be in line with his statements.

Please debunk me now, it's 1:57AM.

Thanks,
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Cloxxki on May 05, 2009, 08:47:55 AM
124 pages in 4 weeks, but not one post overnight from the newer side of the Atlantic? Must be a really reply-unworthy idea then... Anyone in Europe, please?
I'll have to fill this space with something more useful later, sorry for the bump.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on May 05, 2009, 02:23:18 PM
@i_ron,

Quote
Simulations in the aircraft industry are de rigor, a way of life.
But they have repeatedly flown sensor'ed planes and fine tuned the program to reflect the actual event to the point
that now the program can predict actual behavior (under
most conditions). Where is that here?

This is a very limited understanding of what simulations are. Simulations we’re talking about are based on classical mechanics and it isn’t true that classical mechanics only predicts the behavior of bodies first flown with sensors on.  Classical mechanics can predict the trajectory of a stone thrown at given initial conditions before having been thrown repeatedly with sensors attached to it to fine tune the equations to reflect the actual event. Similarly, classical mechanics can predict the behavior of more complex systems such as a gravity wheel before experimenting with an actual wheel. Therefore, the question

Quote
Where is that here?

is irrelevant, as long as the classical mechanics equations are applied correctly. In other words you may question the model, the way the equations of classical mechanics are applied to make the predictions but not question the fact that classical mechanics, correctly applied, can predict the behavior of mechanical systems before an actual laboratory experiment. The latter is a pessimistic view about the predictive strength of classical mechanics which can be demonstrated to be incorrect at once (recall the example with the trajectory of the stone) using the discrete mathematics of the available computers, at that. This will also save us from the wrong impression that realism can only be brought about by analog computers.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: i_ron on May 05, 2009, 05:15:46 PM
@i_ron,

 Therefore, the question is irrelevant, as long as the classical mechanics equations are applied correctly. In other words you may question the model, the way the equations of classical mechanics are applied to make the predictions but not question the fact that classical mechanics, correctly applied, can predict the behavior of mechanical systems before an actual laboratory experiment.

Excellent rebuttal, points well taken.  Perhaps the bottom line
here then is... in the one month and two days that this list has been operational, and simulations have been stressed...
where is the answer as to whether the wheel works or not?

Kind regards,

Ron
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on May 05, 2009, 06:10:36 PM
Excellent rebuttal, points well taken.  Perhaps the bottom line
here then is... in the one month and two days that this list has been operational, and simulations have been stressed...
where is the answer as to whether the wheel works or not?

Kind regards,

Ron

Unfortunately, no answer yet. On my part one of the reasons is that I'm new to these simulations and have no experience with them whatsoever. I learned about wm2d just about a month ago and even sooner the revelation from @Jubjub came about that 3ds max reactor can do a 3D simulations. Unfortunately, this important research is left in the hands of inexperienced people like myself and the infrastructures whose job is to do them won't touch such simulations with a ten foot pole. Why? We all know why. A positive outcome from this will destroy them to the core. What we're doing is as much anti-business as it can get.

On a side note, wonder if you've heard about the Swedish pirate party which is gaining more and more political ground there. It's support has grown in the last months from close to zero to about 4% mainly among the young voters. One of the things they ask for is to have the patents on certain creations abolished. The area we're doing research in should be one of those where there should be no patents and expectations to get rich through exploiting society. Those who think that the outcome of this research can be turned into a profitable business are badly mistaken. These fellows, such as Sterling, may finagle to earn some crumbs now but in the long run, should this be proven to be real, it will revamp society in a way we can't even imagine now, leaving no grounds to continue to have some enrich themselves at the expense of others mainly through lies and manipulations. No wonder why this had been suppressed for so many centuries.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: mondrasek on May 05, 2009, 06:50:13 PM
Excellent rebuttal, points well taken.  Perhaps the bottom line
here then is... in the one month and two days that this list has been operational, and simulations have been stressed...
where is the answer as to whether the wheel works or not?

With all due respect to Omnibus, I would say that the simulations show the Abeling wheel to be a non-runner.  The simulation of the designs as discovered from the video and later from the patent have failed to show a wheel that operates as described that produces useful torque.  In fact, most well constructed simulations behaved exactly like a balanced wheel, as can be predicted by both physics and the sims.  Several sims have shown unusual behavior, most having been shown due to improper modeling techniques, but none yet have shown anything close to a power generating ability.

Now there is still the possibility that something has been missed or purposefully withheld from the patent.  If so, I am confident that when those other elements are properly added to the sims they will again show a respectable representation of a real life device, either working or not.

One point with regards to the comments about simulations used in air/spacecraft design:  The equations that govern fluid dynamics (particle interactions) are much more complex than those of basic mechanics.  Many are unsolvable except by iteration, and as such, approximations must be used.  The actual wind tunnel and flight testing is used to verify real world operation as well as improve those necessary approximations.  That is not the case with basic mechanics where equations like F=ma and T=md are absolute.  Solving them gives exact and true results that do not then need to be verified by real world testing.  But even those equations do not take into account the minor real world effects of friction and air resistance encountered by a working mechanism than again are governed by much more complex equations.  So the real world build will be necessary to exactly understand those effects.  But the major interactions and performance can be correctly predicted by (good) simulations.

Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on May 05, 2009, 07:56:06 PM
@mondrasek,

We really have to sort this out. I said it already but I'll repeat it here -- are we trying to determine whether or not such device is real in principle or we're doing these simulations just to satisfy the critics and prove through simulations that such devices are inherently non-working. If the latter is our goal and we're set to impose any conditions to achieve that, we can easily prove also that no machine whatsoever is working. I think, however, that our goal is the former and regarding the answer to that the jury is still out. Firstly, if we're talking about ideal devices whereby the friction is zero and only the construction and gravity are at play, I think we have definitively proven such devices are working. That you can't deny. Where's the limit to imposing friction on such devices so that they can be realistic is still to be determined. Like I said, our goal isn't to make them non-working at any rate (which we can do for any machine) but to find out the boundaries whereby a working ideal device becomes a real-life working device. There's more work to be done to reach the answer to that. Recall, I was suggesting that the best way to do that is to find out whether or not there can be analytical solutions at all. Simulations are second best choice for that purpose.

As for fluid dynamics, while it's true that it's more complex to model such systems there are certain firmly established laws and approaches which make the outcome physically predictable even prior to actual lab experiments in fluid dynamics too. Engineers use every day Stokes' law or Nusselt and Reynolds numbers, let alone the empirical formulae, to name a few in constructing their reactors on paper, the way civil engineers apply their set in stone mechanical formulae. Indeed, approximations are made but they are all within the framework of known, predictive physical laws. The approximations are to find out what, say, the coefficients in a formula describing a concrete physical situation are but are hardly yielding anything new in terms of new mechanical or physical laws. If something is found out in this way that contradicts the established laws of physics then it is counted as a discovery and not as just an engineering solution of a problem. This happens very rarely and is a noticeable event, not just a routine everyday engineering work.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on May 05, 2009, 08:04:31 PM
@mondrasek,

Speaking of simulations, were you able to take a look at @Jubjub's 3D simulation using 3ds Max reactor? Your input would be very valuable.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: mondrasek on May 05, 2009, 08:31:26 PM
Firstly, if we're talking about ideal devices whereby the friction is zero and only the construction and gravity are at play, I think we have definitively proven such devices are working. That you can't deny.

I most certainly do deny that!  Not one of the devices that you say are "working" is not something that I can understand as an aberration due to the iterative nature of the software and "not best method" modeling.  Having a model wiggle around in a virtual environment with large interferences and time steps being allowed does not prove the device works.  It proves an ignorant approach to the use of the simulation tool.  Dismissing and failing to follow the proper methodology as I have described repeatedly does not mean there is any hope left for simulated designs that show absolutely no forceful tendency to accelerate or produce usable torque.  My interpretation of such evidence is that the design does not work, not that we need to play around with the software further.

As for fluid dynamics, while it's true that it's more complex to model such systems there are certain firmly established laws and approaches which make the outcome physically predictable even prior to actual lab experiments in fluid dynamics too. Engineers use every day Stokes' law or Nusselt and Reynolds numbers, let alone the empirical formulae, to name a few in constructing their reactors on paper, the way civil engineers apply their set in stone mechanical formulae. Indeed, approximations are made but they are all within the framework of known, predictive physical laws. The approximations are to find out what, say, the coefficients in a formula describing a concrete physical situation are but are hardly yielding anything new in terms of new mechanical or physical laws. If something is found out in this way that contradicts the established laws of physics then it is counted as a discovery and not as just an engineering solution of a problem. This happens very rarely and is a noticeable event, not just a routine everyday engineering work.

I stand behind my earlier statements.  Many of the equations that govern fluid dynamics are not solveable to an exact value.  This is due to the fact that fluids are made of many tiny particles and we cannot calculate the exact reactions to known forces of each particle simultaneously.  Several methods are commonly used to approximate the solutions with varying degrees of accuracy.  Real world testing is sometimes used to update the best approximations to use under specific conditions.  So a comparison between the simulations used to model fluid dynamics and the simulations used to model basic mechanics differ in this respect.  The proper methodology for achieving coorelations between those sims and the real world therefore also differ.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: mondrasek on May 05, 2009, 08:35:15 PM
@mondrasek,

Speaking of simulations, were you able to take a look at @Jubjub's 3D simulation using 3ds Max reactor? Your input would be very valuable.

No.  I have not used 3ds Max reactor.  And so far I am not interested in exploring further anything that has been presented where that tool would be necessary.  I am learning the answers to any questions that I have about those sims through the posts of others including yourself.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: rlortie on May 05, 2009, 09:03:10 PM
I will not debate with omni on this simulation issue.

I will say that it is my opinion; accidental discoveries through hands on research is more likely than any conclusion using simulations which still can not be deemed 'objective' until utilized...They are limited  on programs running mechanics and physics  as accepted fact and leave little chance of an accident recognized by the empirical builder.

For an example; I and a working partner were working on a ramp design when a temporary wire strap holding the ramp broke. The end result was discovery of a leverage system capable of producing over 260 degrees of + torque out of one levered weight. A simulation to my knowledge could never achieve this.

I too am beginning to have stronger  doubts about Sjack's claims. We have heard nothing from him or anyone he is allegedly associated with. Even Dusty seems to have gone quiet.

In the meantime as time permits I will continue with my design that achieves the same performance without the use of stationary ramps and slotted disks.

@Dusty

I am very impressed with your hands on trials and tribulation. You are a very empirical builder (my type of guy) showing the  aptitude that it will take to vindicate Bessler. If you ever wish to have private communication with some one to bounce ideas off of I offer my services, I am not a believer in 'free sourcing' until after a certified patent pending is issued.

Ralph Lortie
   
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on May 05, 2009, 09:09:41 PM
@mondrasek,

Quote
Dismissing and failing to follow the proper methodology as I have described repeatedly does not mean there is any hope left for simulated designs that show absolutely no forceful tendency to accelerate or produce usable torque.

This is what I’m questioning. I would in no way dismiss a proper methodology. However, I need more to be convinced that decreasing the time step, let alone setting up air resistance to non-zero is indeed the proper methodology and not just seeking ways to prove the device is non-working. What if setting up lower thresholds for the iterations leads to desynchronizing the calculations that are supposed to be simultaneous and worsens the outcome? I don’t know. There may be reason, as I said before, for these threshold to be set up at what their defaults values are, and not lower. This I don’t know either. Further, why would one device work and another, similar device with slightly changed track won’t work, despite the same small threshold set up for both? So far these questions have not been addressed and all that has been given as a counter argument are devices containing known flaws (such as, for instance, rigid joints set on Optimized). No, the answer to whether or not ideal devices are non-working still isn’t clear cut, to say the least, let alone that an ideal device with an initially imparted energy should go on indefinitely which doesn’t seem to be the case with the correctly constructed (without rigid joints on Optimized, for instance) non-working devices set at low thresholds.  More is needed.

One sure way would be to prove analytically that equations describing such devices cannot have solutions leading to their indefinite functioning. This is a very involved, non-trivial task, however, up to only highly trained mathematicians and/or theoretical physicists versed in solving such problems. With these simulations we're trying to find a shortcut but, as I said, I'm still not sure we've found it.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on May 05, 2009, 09:12:04 PM
@rlortie,

What we're doing here has nothing to do with a discovery but with finding a proper engineering solution of something proved to be possible in a discontinuous way. Engineering solutions are not scientific discoveries.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: mondrasek on May 05, 2009, 09:59:55 PM
I need more to be convinced that decreasing the time step, let alone setting up air resistance to non-zero is indeed the proper methodology and not just seeking ways to prove the device is non-working.
This need of yours I understand and respect.  And because of it you answered that the sims so far were inconclusive.  I, on the other hand, feel that the testing and my understanding of the sims has conclusively shown that they fail to show a device that works as Abeling describes.  And so I stated, "With all due respect to Omnibus", my differing opinion.

Just as enormous power can be generated in a resonant electrical (or mechanical) system, yet not be extracted as more energy than was initially input, so can the iterative nature of the sim software set up motion where it would not exist in the real world.  The acid test is to apply a load and see if the sim can overcome that.  The quickest small global load (that also mimics real world conditions) is air resistance.  If turning that on dampens your movement to zero, that movement was not a force that could do any work and can be ignored (and likely just a software aberration).  If you can design something that overcomes that simple test, then you may have something worth pursuing.  The Abeling design has not shown any simulated tendency towards producing usable output.  I conclude from this that the design as simulated does not work.

The time step and integration error are debatable.  But you agree that the smaller the time step, the more accurate the sim is supposed to become, right?  And the (relatively large) default setting allows for more real time performance on slower machines?  So that is what I would put in my software for default as well.  It does not mean it is any way optimal.  We both know that smaller is more accurate.

Integration error needs to be set smaller with smaller sized model elements.  This is obvious with how this value also decreases the allowable interference between colliding elements.  So decreasing this value also increases accuracy.

There is always the possibility that a specific and small value of time step and integration error will set up a resonant condition, forcing a competing interference, especially when pinching one moving object (rollers) between two others (wheel slots and guides).  When this happens it is usually obvious and you can change one or both values a small amount to get away from this "resonant" condition.  But I stand by the fact that decreasing both is the proper way to increase accuracy and usually rules out aberrant behaviors caused by gross values.  I also respect your desire to have less subjective information and to draw your own conclusions.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Cloxxki on May 05, 2009, 10:09:03 PM
@Dusty
Your replication is going to work, I'm pretty sure. It all makes sence to me now.

I'd recommend : larger diameter weights as they roll the wood.
Heavier weights as you planned.

Maybe if you use rollers (steel or alu as you work with) spacer OVER the bearing to increase the diameter to reduce resistance, you'l also get some spinning of said bearing to work, so they won't be stuttering as much, and it will become one smooth operation.

As I warned on Youtube, I'd consider building a brake first (wedge some under there with a lever) before you do a test of more than 1 revolution. Bolt the frame to the floor.

I feel the excitement, when you take the next step, we'll see a working perpetuum mobile, which will turn into a hightly woodshredder unless it's rpm's are controlled :-)
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on May 05, 2009, 10:18:36 PM
@mondrasek,

I'm trying to understand this. Air resistance aside (we'll consider it zero), I'm getting the same integration message error at the same position of the wheel no matter whether Integration Error is set to 0.01m or to 0.0001m when using the Runge-Kutta method (for this purpose I'm checking the Warning for the Integration Error). Euler's method just explodes and we'll exclude it for now. I don't think the animation step matters either. If you ignore that error, in the case of lower threshold the wheel finds equilibrium while at higher threshold keeps going (all that is under non-ideal conditions -- both frictions on 0.3, elasticity at 0.5, no air resistance). The smaller threshold should be better but it obviously isn't in this case -- error stays the same but at larger thresholds the performance differs from the performance at the lower thresholds.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: mondrasek on May 05, 2009, 10:24:08 PM
Omni, please post the sim you are currently playing with and I'll take a look.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on May 05, 2009, 10:27:52 PM
@mondrasek,

Please, see attached.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on May 05, 2009, 10:40:47 PM
@mondrasek,

Now, this is with track shifted to the right. Everything else the same. This time won't work either way -- both at 0.01m and 0.0001m integration error. The integration error message again popping up at the same place for both thresholds.

EDIT: Just tried it w/ track shifted in the opposite direction -- to the left. Doesn't work at both thresholds here too. So, why is it that at one particular position of the track it works at 0.01m integration accuracy while at any other position of the track it won't work? Could it be that a position for 0.0001m integration accuracy can be found where it will work as well? Is this a matter only of optimization?

Will be interesting to see what Stefan will come up with when he has the chance to apply his idea for two wheels offset by 30 degrees, connected with a shaft.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: mondrasek on May 05, 2009, 11:04:07 PM
Omni,

Well, that sim is a bit of a beast and will take some time on my humble work computer.  But right off the bat it definitely looks like a problem with too large a time step and integration error.  You should notice two things:  1)  Some of the balls are spinnning when they should not, and 2) the balls are interfering with the walls of the slots and ramps very much visually (the program even complains of that with and error for me).  These are due to an interference error that the sim is likely trying to resolve by turning the wheel (the wrong way even).  Both are symptoms of an iterative "resonance" in the calculations.

I'll check it out more tomorrow, but for starters I would say simplify the model first!  This is a symetric design and can be tested with only two slots and two balls 180 degrees apart.  Adding the other slots is wasting CPU cycles and adds nothing to the sim.  It would only add additional torque to the output (2 x slot pairs = 2 x output, 4 x slot pairs = 4 x output) if it exists.  No reason to have the extra slots in the sim.  Not for a symetric system.  Once the sim is slimmed down to it's base elements we can probably crank up the accuracy with less errors and still maintain some more realistic playback speeds.  Just erasing all but two balls may be enough.

I'm off for now.  Should be back in the morning, EST.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on May 05, 2009, 11:24:08 PM
See, the question is why this iterative "resonance" is favorable at only one particular disposition of the same elements and all the rest the same? As for the turning of the balls when they shouldn't, it's also observed with 0.0001m integration error.

I'm reluctant to decrease the set of elements because that particular set may be the one that brings about the essence of the effect. Also, introducing external torque to substitute for the missing elements doesn't seem to me as an acceptable approach. I'd rather play with the parameters and compare different placements of the same elements. We have to see if the program can handle that, otherwise we should just drop it because the conclusions we draw by using it, either way, will be unreliable.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Cloxxki on May 05, 2009, 11:43:37 PM
@Dusty:
Did you on your current wheel ever try to give the wheel a really good starting jerk, to see if the system would overcome its lack of first turn efficiency? Seems that the slow moving weight generate relatively his friction. Until you confirm, who know, perhaps with a bit more weight and a good jerk, you have a motor!

@All: skip the rest of this post if you're not into looking ahead.

Dusty's machine will work next time, I'm pretty sure. Abeling has cracked the code, be it the same as Bessler's or not. After this there will be new versions of similar concept as well I'm sure.

The math works out, right?
The weight in the hockey stick hook provided work of, say, 100cm.
As the weight exits the wheel at 0cm height, is has even on the first rotation suffient velocity to roll up to 60cm or so until the wheel picks it up again.
The other weight then does that work, and there's energy to spare for friction and acceleration (of the wheel I mean).

I envision within a year, we'll have build contests to make the fastest spinning/most efficient/silent Abeling's Wheel, working with a resticted weight or height. Desktop toy size, perhaps? And we'll see slow-motion vids of the most spectacular self-destructions.
There's the patent infringement, but perhaps if you only build it for yourself, and only one unique machine, it might be OK.

What about permanent magnets for weights, to do away with surface and bearing friction on the machine? :-) That might actually be an idea for the large scale versions too. The weights could become more and more banana-shaped. Or skateboards as mentioned, if you will.

Abeling can now come forth with his working machine, as I'm pretty sure Dusty will be very close to it when get gets his next version up.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Dusty on May 06, 2009, 12:43:45 AM
Hi,

I see it's time for a little update.  I've been working on building the six foot wheels.  I've added a couple attachments just to see the size of the new wheels.  I have a bunch of work to do in cutting the slots and cutting up the frame and making it larger.  I'm working on it every day as time allows. 

I do read every post and would like to thank everyone who offered ideas and support, you know who you are!  Thank you very much. 

Dusty
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Justalabrat on May 06, 2009, 12:45:41 AM
@Dusty
I feel the excitement, when you take the next step, we'll see a working perpetuum mobile, which will turn into a hightly woodshredder unless it's rpm's are controlled :-)

LOL! I think we would all like to have that as a problem!
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Cloxxki on May 06, 2009, 01:04:41 AM
LOL! I think we would all like to have that as a problem!
Indeed. But look how simple it is. The weight rolling up the first ramp is only pressing down the Earth. That part of the equasion (a good chuck) is gone.

That new wheel is HUGE!

@Dusty:
Sure you've already addressed it in your design, but you may want to make the transition of the weight from the wheel onto the first ramp as fluent as possible.
For this you'll want to decide on the out diameter of your weights as will be rolling up that ramp.
For the ramp curvature to make it a smooth transition, I thing a circel part is too abrubt. Maybe consider turning down the radius to it's main one only when the weight is like a foot or more on the thing already. Build up the weight transfer and direction change, rather than it hitting the radius abrubtly.

The upper ramps and wheel slots, I'm sure you'll design it for high-rpm, the weight taking a clean path around it. The will be different from still demonstrations, obviously.

Think safety and stiffness, if you're looking for this thing to make even just a few rotations. With 8 (heavier?) weights, it's going to accelerate.

Please let this be a real free energy device, that makes the complicate magnet motors and other complicated contraptions obsolete for the purpose of powering our houses or charging our e-cars.
Hope this is not one of those monthly disappointments I find on this forum, that start out on a high and then just die. Even if the MIB seize this patent, we (the people) will be able to make this thing, and develope upon it.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: LarryC on May 06, 2009, 01:19:47 AM
I see it's time for a little update.  I've been working on building the six foot wheels.  I've added a couple attachments just to see the size of the new wheels.  I have a bunch of work to do in cutting the slots and cutting up the frame and making it larger.  I'm working on it every day as time allows. 
Dusty

Hi Dusty,

Where did you get the six foot wheels? I can only find the usual 4X8 plywood.

Thanks, Larry
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: X00013 on May 06, 2009, 02:05:57 AM
@ dusty, your insane on the membrane, I like it ;D
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: overtaker on May 06, 2009, 02:17:25 AM
You can buy 3 sheets of 4 by 8 plywood,  cut them all to 4 by 6 ft.,  cut one of them into two pcs. of 2 by 6 ft., glue and screw them together ( overlap seems of course ), cut out your circle.  This will give you one disc.  If you buy plywood that is sanded on one side, glue the rough sides together.   Lots of glue applied with a paint roller works well. Work fast.
If you buy 3/8 plywood your finished work will be 3/4. I like to change directions of the top layer. Hope this helps.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Cloxxki on May 06, 2009, 08:31:53 AM
@Dusty:
While I think that acceleration at the top is very cool as do you, I am wondering whether there could be too much of a good thing.
Accelerating the weight more than it needs to, might drain too much energy from the other weight doing the work for it?
I was thinking maybe slots with a larger radius, or a shifting radius. The slingshot action will be there anyways, but "too" much might stress the system overly in that "hot" spot, and cause more clunking than necessary.

Good luck with that huge build!
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: ruggero on May 06, 2009, 08:55:06 AM
124 pages in 4 weeks, but not one post overnight from the newer side of the Atlantic? Must be a really reply-unworthy idea then... Anyone in Europe, please?

Well....I'm from Denmark, Scandinavia,... that's Europe, that's Vikings, that's Lego, B&O and Maersk.

ruggero  ;)
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Cloxxki on May 06, 2009, 09:01:37 AM
Well....I'm from Denmark, Scandinavia,... that's Europe, that's Vikings, that's Lego, B&O and Maersk.

ruggero  ;)
I was on the wrong track, at least for the invention at hand, but someone could have told me :-)
For the heck of it, I may simulate or build my idea one day anyways, perhaps that as long as the weights leave the wheel 6-9 o'clock, it will work just as nicely. Leaving the wheels seems to be what makes this equasion work, after all.

@Dusty:
May be obsolete to state here, but better sure that sorry. Have you investigated whether a weight rolling up the ramp will be clean of touching the wheel, pushing or being pushed (wide cut-out) to allow it to reach a good heght before the wheel catches up with it? Using the weight to push the wheel up early in the "up" phase seems a waste of inertia. I suppose there will be an ideal slot shape which will have the wheel gently building up the push after 9 o'clock. Starting-stopping the weight may cancel out from an inertia standpoint, but it does add to stress, friction and noise.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: mondrasek on May 06, 2009, 03:40:26 PM
See, the question is why this iterative "resonance" is favorable at only one particular disposition of the same elements and all the rest the same? As for the turning of the balls when they shouldn't, it's also observed with 0.0001m integration error.
The turning balls are a clear sign that the wheel is experiencing some unresolvable computational error.  In this case, I don't think you can get away from it by reducing the time step, only minimize it somewhat.  It is due to the nature of the design.  Likely the sim is calculating the change in position of the wheel due to the influence of one ball.  That change in position of the wheel causes collisions with all the other balls.  As the sim continues with the calculations for the second ball, these same issues arise with the other seven again.  This is repeated 8 times in this model.  And as balls in certain specific portions of rotation rotate violently compared to others, it appears that the particular angles of the slots and guides, as well as possibly the distance of the ball from the main wheel axis, create worse conditions than other locations.  But the movement is still obviously an iterative "resonance" and not some new force.  Moving the guides a bit to one side does not stop the balls from spinning.  It may stop the wheel from rotating, but this only means the errors are canceling this time and not creating a net torque on the wheel.  Nothing more.  And it definitely does not mean this sim is showing any tendency toward providing power.

If left to itself, the wheel in this sim is a balanced wheel with a keeling effect.  It will find the position where the weights settle the best and stop moving.  If the guides allowed for no slop, it should become a balance wheel without a keeling effect and would balance in any orientation.  And the closer you get to a balanced condition, the more problems you will have with an iterative simulation.  This is true in the real world as well where we find that balanced systems may oscillate or fret around the balance point due to the tiniest of outside influences and actually wear faster than a system that is loaded to one side and thus held in place by a force. 

You can try making a pendulum that faces straight up in WM2D.  It will almost always fall to one side eventually.  Change the time step and integration error and it will fall again, sometimes to the other direction.

A couple of other simple tests for this sim:

1)  Increase the weight of one ball slightly.  You will find that the wheel runs in the expect direction and then rock back and forth with that ball seeking the lowest point.  This takes the wheel out of balance but shows the motion when at balance to be just a software abberation.

2)  Spin the wheel by placing another weight on top of only one ball and turning on collision.  This will give the wheel a spin just like you would by hand.  The wheel will slow to the same abberant rotational speed.

All of these things show that the weird movement of the sim is an error due to the iterative nature of the software, and not an indication of the design wanting to run.

I'm reluctant to decrease the set of elements because that particular set may be the one that brings about the essence of the effect. Also, introducing external torque to substitute for the missing elements doesn't seem to me as an acceptable approach. I'd rather play with the parameters and compare different placements of the same elements. We have to see if the program can handle that, otherwise we should just drop it because the conclusions we draw by using it, either way, will be unreliable.
I did not say to introduce external torques.  I was trying to explain that in a symmetric gravity wheel that it must be able to run with only two weights (or movements) at 180 degrees apart.  The only purpose in adding more weight pairs is to increase the output.  Likewise if two weights do not create a net torque, adding more pairs only further decreases performance as witnessed by decreasing rundown times from a given start RPM.  So testing with only two weights is valid.  It also allows the sim to avoid the 8 x iteration error and 4 x calculation problems in this particular sim.  Try it.  It is very quick, easy, and allows the sim to run much faster and without the abberant movement.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: ruggero on May 06, 2009, 03:47:03 PM
Using the weight to push the wheel up early in the "up" phase seems a waste of inertia. I suppose there will be an ideal slot shape which will have the wheel gently building up the push after 9 o'clock. Starting-stopping the weight may cancel out from an inertia standpoint, but it does add to stress, friction and noise.
You're so very wellcome, Gloxxki.. ;)

Anyway...I agree with you, that we have to build up the push. BUT perhaps the buildup period can be very very short...like a katapult!
I made some changes to Dusty's design (se drawing):

The major point here is, that gravity will do a maximum push on the ramp at 06:00....why don't we harvest that energy?

I suggest that the Dusty's ramp could slide to the left, pushed by gravity by the weight at 06:00.
The ramp push another catapult (spring) mechanism to the left.
When there is no more push force, the catapult will shoot the weight at 11:00 over the top.
And the ramp slide back to start position.

(the catapult mechanism could also turn around the axel as a CW counterlever...)

Request!
Could anyone of you WM2D experts make a sim of this?

I would just love to se Dusty try this on his 'little' wheel set-up...;)

ruggero
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Obelix on May 06, 2009, 03:50:57 PM
Hello,

Just an idea of how resolve the right trace of weight:
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: mondrasek on May 06, 2009, 03:51:00 PM
I was on the wrong track, at least for the invention at hand, but someone could have told me :-)

Cloxxki, that is one of the problems with these forums.  If you gain the reputation of the debunker, you risk gaining the reputation as the skeptic, a negative contributor, a MIB, etc.  And that can lead to attacks and other negative action.  So it is sometimes easier for us to ignore some stuff.  Especially if it is in a thread on a different idea or tact or possibly covered earlier in the thread.  But don't be discouraged.  If you have a good idea you can't find fault with, be persistant.  Starting a new thread and inviting critique appears to always break the silence.  Also, PM it to the members who's opinion you really seek.  I sometimes PM offers for assistance or explanations for why ideas won't work as expected to members to avoid derailing a thread or help them avoid any embarrassment or any violent counter attack from fanatics.

Welcome to this discussion!

M.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on May 07, 2009, 04:51:42 AM
@mondrasek,

The categorical spirit of your conclusion doesn't follow from the gist of what you're saying. The more likely outcome of this analysis is that wm2d is just not fit for such kind of exploration and one`can only conclude subjectively either pessimistically or optimistically, depending on his inclinations. That's even worse than not having any modeling tool.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on May 07, 2009, 05:30:59 AM
@mondrasek,

Quote
I did not say to introduce external torques.  I was trying to explain that in a symmetric gravity wheel that it must be able to run with only two weights (or movements) at 180 degrees apart.  The only purpose in adding more weight pairs is to increase the output.  Likewise if two weights do not create a net torque, adding more pairs only further decreases performance as witnessed by decreasing rundown times from a given start RPM.  So testing with only two weights is valid.  It also allows the sim to avoid the 8 x iteration error and 4 x calculation problems in this particular sim.  Try it.  It is very quick, easy, and allows the sim to run much faster and without the abberant movement.

I should reiterate, I don't agree with that. Any suggestion for a construction different from the particular one under consideration is not modeling it and cannot be substituting it for any conclusions regarding it. If the construction under consideration indeed works it would be something unusual and it is by no means to be expected that other trivial mechanical constructions would mimic its action. If this were the case the phenomenon we're seeking would be an everyday occurrence demonstrable by the available pendulums, weights and the like which isn't the case, as is well known.  Thus, either there should be a reliable tool to correctly model the particular setup of interest or we should just not waste time playing with sims that only model their own instabilities. Seemingly similar examples won't do the job other than demonstrate problems with the modeling software which isn't the goal in our case.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Cloxxki on May 07, 2009, 08:48:08 AM
OK, I woke up from a 48 hour euphoria.
All at once, I don't see anymore why a device like Dusty's Abeling replication would work, or any, when weights are to return just as high as they started. Let alone from just a gentle initial push.

Do any of you a special energy exchange that would be giving over unity?

Someone's simple explanation of, if at all, WHY such a device would self-accelerate and continue to run, would be most appreciated.

Thanks!
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Tink on May 07, 2009, 10:28:52 AM
OK, I woke up from a 48 hour euphoria.
All at once, I don't see anymore why a device like Dusty's Abeling replication would work, or any, when weights are to return just as high as they started. Let alone from just a gentle initial push.

Do any of you a special energy exchange that would be giving over unity?

Someone's simple explanation of, if at all, WHY such a device would self-accelerate and continue to run, would be most appreciated.

Thanks!

It is very simple, the weights are closer to the center of the wheel on one side than on the other side.
It is this imbalance what makes it run.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Cloxxki on May 07, 2009, 10:44:01 AM
Thanks Tink, makes all kinds of sence.
But surely this has been tried for centuries? with all the brainpower put into PPM's, odd that it would take until 2009 for one to be confirmed, if it is?
How hard is it to make a tower lift standing inside (the sideview of) a wheel, two running fully sync'd? Weight goes down one side of the wheel, at bottom transfers onto the tower lift, which delivers it back on top. Of extra height is required to overcome friction, the sync system might have a bit of a "hop" in it for that final push, or even neater : a light overdrive on the tower. Might that work? Or does Abeling do rely on the unweighting of the wheel early on in the weight's lift, using momentum?
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: exnihiloest on May 07, 2009, 01:48:28 PM
@mondrasek,

The categorical spirit of your conclusion doesn't follow from the gist of what you're saying. The more likely outcome of this analysis is that wm2d is just not fit for such kind of exploration and one`can only conclude subjectively either pessimistically or optimistically, depending on his inclinations. That's even worse than not having any modeling tool.

wm2d would "not fit for such kind of exploration" if such kind of exploration were not based on classical physics, but searchers for gravity wheel don't say it needs new physics. They apply known physics laws for explaining their inventions. Thus wm2d applies too.



Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on May 07, 2009, 02:28:55 PM
wm2d would "not fit for such kind of exploration" if such kind of exploration were not based on classical physics, but searchers for gravity wheel don't say it needs new physics. They apply known physics laws for explaining their inventions. Thus wm2d applies too.

The problem with wm2d isn't the classical physics it applies (the effect whose reality we're trying to establish is well within the confines of the less understood aspects of classical physics) but how it is applied. Instabilities in the numerical solving of differential equations (difference equations, rather) are a well known problem among others and it appears wm2d suffer from such problems to an unacceptable extent.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: mondrasek on May 07, 2009, 03:59:18 PM
The problem with wm2d isn't the classical physics it applies (the effect whose reality we're trying to establish is well within the confines of the less understood aspects of classical physics) but how it is applied. Instabilities in the numerical solving of differential equations (difference equations, rather) are a well known problem among others and it appears wm2d suffer from such problems to an unacceptable extent.

I agree that WM2D suffers from the "well known problems".  I disagree with your assertion that they are to an "unacceptable extent."  Though I would prefer a better tool, I am comfortable with the limited abilities in this one to show that the Abeling wheel as it has been modeled is simply a balanced wheel.  If you find the results of the sim unacceptable, that is your prerogative.  It is not my intent to argue your conclusions.  I was only trying to show you how my understanding of the software and the simple tests able to be performed with it are in fact valid and are predicting exactly what Dusty has found in the real world so far.  I strongly believe it will continue to do so with his current build as well.  So do I think Dusty should stop?  Nope.  He should do exactly what he wants to with his build for his own purposes.  Likewise, I should state that I believe the sims are conclusive evidence of a non-runner.  And Omnibus should state that Omnibus believes whatever you do.  But please don't try and make your beliefs the absolute from which there cannot be other valid opinions.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Tink on May 07, 2009, 05:10:30 PM
"I am comfortable with the limited abilities in this one to show that the Abeling wheel as it has been modeled is simply a balanced wheel."

No it is not a balanced wheel!
Is it so hard to see?
When all weights were on the outside of the wheel it would have been balanced, but they are not.
It is sooo simple, is it maybe too simple?
Take a wheel with 8 weights and calculate all the forces of the weights and you will see what is going on.
A shame WM2D has such a hard time calculating it.
I think Dusty will beat WM2D by just making the darn thing in real life.
Go Dusty go!
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: mondrasek on May 07, 2009, 05:38:02 PM
No it is not a balanced wheel!
Is it so hard to see?

Actually I think it is just hard to see that it IS balanced.  This wheel is a bit tricky to just eyeball.  You have to consider several things about each weight:

1)  Is it naturally trying to spin the wheel CW or CCW?
2)  How far from the axle in the X direction since Torque = Force x this distance?
3)  How much of the force due to each weight is acting to produce Torque?  This last one depends on the angles of the weights against the slots and guides.

Add them up and you get zero torque.  But it is definitely not easy to see if you are not considering all three of the factors above.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Cloxxki on May 07, 2009, 06:23:37 PM
But a flexible chain wrapped around a "D" shape doen't spin out of control. Just sits there.
Or would you contribute that to a shifted centre of rotation?

Abeling's wheel is also less simple than balanced or imbalanced wheel.
Weights are inserted on top, with exactly the rim's speed.
Keeping overall wheel acceleration out of the picture, the weight exist the wheel at 6 o'clock and roll up, losing momentum, before being caught back up by the wheel, which both re-accelerates the weight up to rim speed, and lifts it for the last part.

I can't get my mind to grasp, to which extent, a weight rolling up a ramp without loading the wheel, shortly taking a slight radial advantage (as I think it is), creates a positive imbalance.
Whichever way you look at it, the weight ends up on the outer top of the D's belly, in the exact same place as the previous rotation.

Dusty's first wheel, in all it's crudeness, does see the weight reaching a very good high already on the first self-started rotation. It SEEMS like a matter of perfecting the weight's path and the system's friction, and it'll push that weight right over the top, and all the way into that slot.
When on weight has reached 12 o'clock, the other is already some way up, albeit close to the hub.

Should Dusty's bigger next generation wheel work, we should together use the knowledge gained to create a machine owrking off the same principle, but working around the patent, respecting Abeling's great invention. His invention and the patent system should not hold up free energy to reach he masses when the first workable machine is confirmed.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on May 07, 2009, 06:32:00 PM
@mondrasek,

See, what the whole thing amounts to is just conflict of beliefs, not objective scientific proof. Despite your tendency to carry on your belief a little further, which is only natural because mechanical devices don’t exhibit the claimed unusual behavior, conservatively wm2d doesn’t prove conclusively anything either way.

If one ignores wm2d and considers your three points as a criterion for whether or not that’s an unbalanced wheel, they are also not a clear-cut proof that it isn’t. Due to the constraints (as you correctly point out – slots and guides) it isn’t at all evident that the generalized force times generalized distance on the right hand side isn’t different from that product on the left-hand side. It isn’t as if you just have a bunch of weights on the left and on the right freely acted upon by the force of gravity. If it were that then the answer is straightforward. Here, however, it seems to be evident that the vertical component on the left is greater than that on the right, despite the seemingly shorter distance to the pivot. So, intuitively, based on your points, one may conclude differently from what you’ve concluded.

It was for a program to calculate precisely at every possible disposition of the elements that balance. Unfortunately, instead of that wm2d only gives us opportunity to reinforce earlier held beliefs, rather than conclusively prove one way or another.

Would be great if you could show at what mutual disposition you think the elements reach equilibrium and show analytically that the torques on the left and right at that disposition become equal in magnitude. Not a bad idea is to also show an earlier disposition whereby that torque inequality reverses sense compared to a disposition of the elements after the equilibrium one.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: spider4re on May 07, 2009, 06:50:59 PM
Just a thought outside the box, instead of a guide that the weights follow, how about a flexible guide that is driven by the wheel itself? as the weight approaches the "guide" which could be a belt similar to a belt on used on a car engine (maybe grooved so the weight has something to catch onto) the weight hits it and is assisted up to the point where dusty has shown that the weight shoots itself to the end of the curved groove. Might this help reduce friction (although take a toll on torque as the wheel will (through a flywheel setup) run this conveyor belt.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Cloxxki on May 07, 2009, 06:57:17 PM
Post removed by poster on account of nonsense.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: mondrasek on May 07, 2009, 07:02:54 PM
But a flexible chain wrapped around a "D" shape doen't spin out of control. Just sits there.
Exactly!  Let's think about that.  The parts of the chain on the wheel (curved part of the D) are creating a torque.  How much torque?  Well the piece at 3 o'clock is heading straight down, so all of its mass is causing a torque on the wheel.  And the torque due to that one piece is enough to lift exactly one link in the vertical part of the D equally.  They balance.

But what about the pieces of the chain on the wheel at around 1 o'clock?  Most of it's weight is just resting on the wheel.  Only a small portion is creating torque.  And so it is not creating enough torque to lift one piece vertically.  So there needs to be more pieces on the curved section in order to lift the ones in the straight section.  And in every case and configuration, those pieces falling balance those you are trying to raise.  With just the weights, slots, and ramps, that is exactly the same as Abeling's wheel sim.

Dusty's first wheel, in all it's crudeness, does see the weight reaching a very good high already on the first self-started rotation. It SEEMS like a matter of perfecting the weight's path and the system's friction, and it'll push that weight right over the top, and all the way into that slot.
When on weight has reached 12 o'clock, the other is already some way up, albeit close to the hub.

It seems so all right.  How high the weights are raised shows how good the build is so far.  But what is actually keeping Dusty's wheel from spinning is the exact amount of energy he is loosing due to friction and other losses.  If he gets rid of all those losses, the wheel will spin forever!  It will spin exactly at the speed that you initially spin it.  But it will not accelerate.  And it will decelerate if a load is applied.  It will be a flywheel, not a gravity energy conversion wheel.  (No disrespect Dusty.  You are doing a beautiful job.  I envy your talent and resources.  I'd love to do that more than sims myself!)  Every improvement that Dusty makes will move the weight closer to going over the top.  Every mistake in his adjustments will bring it the other way.  But he will never get it to the top, let alone have it go over.  Not without something else.  And maybe he'll figure out what that something else is along the way and tell us all!  And so I wish him luck.

M.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on May 07, 2009, 07:13:04 PM
@mondrasek,

What is needed is something simpler than what wm2d tries to do. We don't need calculations for hundreds of frames to show something spinning. Calculations at two dispositions of the parts, one before and one after the equilibrium one is all we need. Is there a program that can do that or probably wm2d may do it somehow and it will spare confusing it with too many calculations per unit time?
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: mondrasek on May 07, 2009, 07:25:40 PM
See, what the whole thing amounts to is just conflict of beliefs, not objective scientific proof. Despite your tendency to carry on your belief a little further, which is only natural because mechanical devices don’t exhibit the claimed unusual behavior, conservatively wm2d doesn’t prove conclusively anything either way.

You are correct.  I believe that when every test shows a balanced wheel with the exceptions of understood computational errors, this proves the sim to be a non-runner.  You believe it does not.

Would be great if you could show at what mutual disposition you think the elements reach equilibrium and show analytically that the torques on the left and right at that disposition become equal in magnitude. Not a bad idea is to also show an earlier disposition whereby that torque inequality reverses sense compared to a disposition of the elements after the equilibrium one.

I could easily do the calculations.  Only problem I have are the ellipses in the model.  When I export them out as DXF, they become diamonds.  So the DXF definition used by WM2D is not recognized by AutoCAD.  If I draw ellipses in AutoCAD, they are slightly different in shape.  So I need a way to export that particular sim geometry.  Or would you accept if I replace those ellipses with the ones from AutoCAD for purposes of the analysis?  I can't put them into the sim, since WM2D does not recognize the DXF ellipses of AutoCAD either.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on May 07, 2009, 07:53:42 PM
@mondrasek,

Quote
You are correct.  I believe that when every test shows a balanced wheel with the exceptions of understood computational errors, this proves the sim to be a non-runner.  You believe it does not.

See, that shouldn't be if the analysis is rigorous. Laws of classical mechanics applied here are understood well individually, it's only their acting in concert for all the parts that may bring about a surprise and so far wm2d doesn't allow us to count it out.

As for the calculations, I think it'd be interesting to see your methodology first so I'd be curious to see calculations done the way you can do them for the moment.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Cloxxki on May 07, 2009, 08:15:30 PM
A weight going fast in enough to in theory and zero resistance just reach 12 0'clock on it's rolling up a ramp, will cover the first half of the height much quicker than the wheel.

Example :
5m tall wheel
10m/s rim speed.
The weight could gain 5m vertically in 1.0 second and then stall.
The first half to axle height however, it would cover in less than half the time then on the wheel.
The wheel takes 0.39s, the ramp 0.29s plus losses.
The difference comes from the exponential nature of acceleration. This leads me to think that the wheel will be more efficient as speed increases.

Abeling seems to use this <0.1s gained (at axle heaight) as stored energy to sling the weight back onto the rim with speed to spare, bumping the rim.

I am SO hoping that this is IT...
Abeling in the video did say his finding it quite simple and logical, it could have been invented 200 years before. And perhaps it even was...

Brain fart, let me know if its worth its own thread.
-Weights on rods, a central axle.
-1/4 rod length from outside, a joint that folds the rod old full revolution between 6 and 12. The weight takes the inside path. 2 ways about this: with and against the rotation of the wheel. The fluent line seems logical Between 6 and 9, rods could even be disengaged freewheeling up on their own power if need be. The rod's folding action would be complete at 12 o'clock. This could be either with great or with low velocity, depending in the joint's chosen rotation direction.

At 9, the weight would have saved the machine torque but also already match the 9 o'clock rim by speed and direction despite sitting at half the rod length from the axle. Has such a system been simulated before that you know of? I've never done one.

I've seen some Bessler related pictures of some sort of joints, were those explained or proven to not work?
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: 3decimal14 on May 07, 2009, 08:16:38 PM
Very interesting things on this matter at this site:

From: http://magnetism.otc.co.nz/Flywheel.htm (http://magnetism.otc.co.nz/Flywheel.htm) (Flywheel)
"We must first recognize that in a "sling shot" or a rock twirling system, if we put a small amount of accelerating energy into the final turn, the rock gains over unity energy."

/Tommy
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on May 07, 2009, 09:12:58 PM
Very interesting things on this matter at this site:

From: http://magnetism.otc.co.nz/Flywheel.htm (http://magnetism.otc.co.nz/Flywheel.htm) (Flywheel)
"We must first recognize that in a "sling shot" or a rock twirling system, if we put a small amount of accelerating energy into the final turn, the rock gains over unity energy."

/Tommy

No, so far there's no evidence to that. Why should we recognize such a thing? There's no end to the confusion on this matter.

This is an interesting observation, though, that needs attention:

Quote
... when opposing forces meet they do not cancel. Even though a net zero energy may be present, both forces are still very much present.  You cannot just add them together get zero and then forget about them for the offset force interaction. Thus a 90 degree force redirecting both will be shifting this higher energy off centered on two sides of the balance, and now each side must be observed before summing the result.

and the text under the diagram:

Quote
Vector addition
Diagram of vetor addition

Resulting force is the sum of all the vectors of acceleration present. The red lines are after the first step of this process where we add each opposing force one at a time to the offset force at 90 degrees to find the resultant equivalent vector of energy. This means that the resulting offset force will be the sum of both resulting forces. If the two are equal then there is a doubling of the deflected energy. The vector tangent to the wheel must have its length doubled. As long as this vector model is true, the circle will be in an over unity state, drawing energy from the time domain [higher density compression area] and placing it into the motional vector of the wheel.

Here C and c are the two forces equal in magnitude but opposite in direction, while a is the 90 degree offset force. How this translates into a practical overunity device is still unclear, however.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: i_ron on May 08, 2009, 03:46:54 AM
It is a balanced wheel. 

When one looks at the patent drawing and sees the right hand
weight twice the distance out from the axle, one immediately
assumes the logic that this will power the wheel.

What is not immediately obvious though is the simple fact that
the outside weight will travel 100% while the inner weight will
only travel 50% of that same distance. Thus at all points in
the Abeling wheel as the ratio changes from 2.375:1 to 1:1
the wheel is fairly well balanced in the dynamic mode.

Thus the patent as drawn will not work.

Ron

Do I need to clarify that? Take a teeter totter with the two
weights as at 3:00 and 9:00 and 2:1, while the right hand weight drops 1 meter the left hand weight will only rise .5 meter.

Yet in the time period that the Abeling right hand weight
goes from 12:00 to 6:00 so does the left hand weight have
to travel from 6:00 to 12:00 so it's motion has to be geared
up 2:1 to achieve this, as compared to the TT.

Still not well written... but I hope you catch my drift... it is
no surprise then that wm2d didn't know which way to rotate
the wheel...





 
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Obelix on May 08, 2009, 10:15:44 AM
Hello,

What did you think of this one ?
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Cloxxki on May 08, 2009, 11:44:54 AM
Hello,

What did you think of this one ?
Hi Obelix,
I for one, like it as an idea
However, which speed ratio would you suggested for the tower vs. the outer wheel?

For instance, Vwheel = 1, then Vtower=1 for smooth transitions might be troublesome, as vertical lift is 57% faster than the weights average downward speed. Only exactly at 3 o'clock can the wheel match that.

I would rather amend this setup to let the weight on top roll to the side first (losing zero height), and doing work on a wheel with much larger radius, its axle positioned well to the left of the tower.
Still, I doubt that torgue would be able to over come the slight height loss each revolution. Could the tower be geared up to have fewer weights to lift? I doubt it.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: exnihiloest on May 08, 2009, 01:10:08 PM
...Instabilities in the numerical solving of differential equations (difference equations, rather) are a well known problem among others and it appears wm2d suffer from such problems to an unacceptable extent.

I agree it is quite easy to modelize a perpetual motion with WM2D due to inaccuracies in numerical solving.
But in this thread we have a reverse problem.
We try to modelize a said perpetual motion in WM2D and it doesn't work.




Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on May 08, 2009, 02:47:20 PM
@exnihiloest,

Quote
We try to modelize a said perpetual motion in WM2D and it doesn't work.

That isn't as clear as you put it.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: spinner on May 08, 2009, 04:29:36 PM
OMG...
This thread is still alive?
And... there are still people who believe this Abeling stuff could really work?

Ahhh... :'(
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: mondrasek on May 08, 2009, 04:35:53 PM
As for the calculations, I think it'd be interesting to see your methodology first so I'd be curious to see calculations done the way you can do them for the moment.

Well here is an analysis of the sim with the hockey stick design.  I let it run in WM2D with extremely low time steps and integration errors with object frictions turned off but air resistance on low until it settled.  Once it found it's balance point I saved the file out as a DXF and imported into AutoCAD.  As I stated before, the DXF output of WM2D does not allow for the ellipses of the guides to come in to AutoCAD properly.  Instead it imports diamonds that have their corners on the major and minor axis end points for the ellipses.  I drew new ellipses using these corner points, but keep in mind that the ellipse shape in AutoCAD is slightly different than in WM2D.  I then moved the weights into the proper positions in these new guides and used AutoCAD to perform some vector calculations.

I first drew a line in each weight from the center to the bottom of the spheres.  This line is exactly 10 units long and represents the weight vector.  I then drew lines from the center to where the sphere contacts the wheel slot and the guides.  These are used to find the length of the force vector being applied to the wheel slot.  A line of this exact length was then transferred to where the ball is in contact with the wheel slot.  A line is drawn from the center of the wheel to this same point and is dimensioned to show the exact distance that this vector is acting on the wheel from the axle (torque distance).  Drawing a line from the end of the ball force vector perpendicular to this line gives a line (vector) that is the amount of force acting to create torque on the wheel due to this ball.  So now we just need to multiply the distance times the length of this vector and add them up.  This length was also dimensioned by AutoCAD so both the force and the distance are to the precision of a modern CAD system.  If you start with the weight at approx. 1 o'clock and go clockwise calling each torque that results in CW motion + and each that results in CCW motion - you will get:

+1334.4
+3658.8
+3934.5
+540.7
-2335.1
-1779.4
-2165.7
-3117.8
Total = 70.4

This is as balanced as I can get with this analysis.  I believe the reason the total is not exactly zero is easily explained by the fact that I had to substitute guides of slightly different shape (ellipses) and the obviously poor resolution of the DXF exports from WM2D.

The DXF file with the vectors and dimensions is attached.  Also, here is a screen shot of balls 5 and 6 for those who cannot view the DXF and are interested.

Thanks,

M.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on May 08, 2009, 06:56:52 PM
@modrasek,

Thanks for the analysis. Will have too look at it in a bit because it found me just in the process of writing a post which is sort of a continuation of the old “squeezed-cherry-stone” idea expressed here by @Cloxxki here http://www.overunity.com/index.php?topic=7150.1230
Quote
See? The two weights are attracting each other with the energy stored in the springs. The angle (like a surfer along the wind) converts this energy in "lift", rather than having it cancel out the two weights "chasing" each other vertically.
and in the link  @3decimal14 gave here http://www.overunity.com/index.php?topic=7150.1280.

The idea that it isn’t enough to consider that a body is at rest at a given spatial position in order to conclude what its behavior will be after being acted upon by a given force is interesting: The same applied force that would induce different displacement to that body (thus doing different work on the body) depending on whether or not the initial state of immobility of the body is due to static equilibrium or is due to two canceling equal but opposing forces acting on it.

Now, while the above is true we have to see how it can serve us in the aspect we’re discussing here. It will serve the goal we’re pursing in this thread if the forces in question exist naturally. If these forces are naturally existing then the energy which we expect to derive from the above (force over distance) would not come out of a pre-existing energy reservoir, which is exactly the goal this thread is all about.

It seems that the magic word for the achievement of the above goal is ‘constraints’.

Thus, if we let a weight go unobstructed from a given height h it will fall to the ground and when there all of its gravitational potential energy would’ve converted in equivalent amount into other energies (ultimately heat). If, however, that weight is attached to a string fixed to a pivot placed sideways at the same height h as the weight, two equal but opposing forces (centripetal-centrifugal) will be created which didn’t exist in the first instance.

Now, at this point we’re not asking how the weight has found itself at height h because there’s no evidence that it was only due to the energy of a pre-existing energy reservoir. We’ll see later where the energy to get the weight at height h came from and shouldn’t be assumed at this point that it came necessarily from a pre-existing energy reservoir. At this point we observe that the downward motion of the weight and the creation of the centripetal-centrifugal forces is due to the naturally existing force of gravity which isn’t derived from any pre-existing energy reservoir whatsoever.

Thus, so far we have the naturally existing opposing forces (centripetal-centrifugal) which the link @3decimal14 gave requires. We can now consider at once a device similar to that of Veljko Milkovic by which through spending of a very small amount of work, which if the weight is in static equilibrium would shift it at a very small distance, would in this case of “squeezed-cherry-pit” cause the creation of a force enough to restore the position of the weight at height h. We can keep doing this and in this way we will be creating excess energy discontinuously. The excess energy will be the difference between the gravitational potential energy of the object at height h and the energy necessary to move that same object when at static equilibrium. That’s all well and good. Discontinuous creation of excess energy in this way is another method of discontinuous excess energy creation in addition to the definitively proven way for its creation with the magnetic propulsor.

The question which arises now is can we find, constructively, constraints, which would substitute for the periodic external imparting of the small amount of energy, to cause the appearance of greater amount of energy and ensuring in this way continuous obtainment of excess energy? Is this what Abeling’s device is doing.


P.S. Stefan, while all that was said about the centrifugal force earlier is true I think @3decimal14 gave a link which adds a new interesting aspect to that discussion and may turn out to be useful in solving the problem of continuous obtainment of excess energy.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on May 08, 2009, 08:22:23 PM
@mondrasek,

I agree with the general methodology of you analysis. I would point out, however, that the torque should be calculated with respect to the center of mass which doesn't coincide w/ the center of the wheel. It will affect both the arm and the perpendicular to it weight component. Also, it should take into account eventually that the center of mass changes its position at different positions of the spheres for the same slots and track.

So, now, what is needed is to have this implemented into a program which would make all these calculations automatically and would in this way promptly come up with the comparison of the left-hand and right hand torques for the different configurations. Further, it would be good to have an 'planning of experiment' optimization program to explore as to whether or not there can be a favorable configuration with a non-zero difference between these left and right-hand torques. That would really bring about an answer which may be considered rigorous enough for a conclusion in this matter. Wonder if there wouldn't be a way to write a script in AutoCAD to do at least the first set of calculations (save the optimization part). I'd prefer the script to be in SolidWorks rather than in AutoCAD because the former seems more user-friendly. Anyway, I think you've done a good job.

EDIT: Too bad wm2d isn't open source to try to do these calculations right there. Wonder if there wouldn't be other programs available that could do the job. How about that Slovenian Frame2D? Has anyone had any experience with it?
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: mondrasek on May 08, 2009, 08:38:05 PM
I would point out, however, that the torque should be calculated with respect to the center of mass which doesn't coincide w/ the center of the wheel.

What?  The wheel is balanced except for the wieghts which are not attached to it.  The weights push against the balanced wheel exactly as calculated.  Also, rotation of the wheel can only occur around the axle.  Why would you calculate a torque around any other place?
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on May 08, 2009, 09:12:18 PM
What?  The wheel is balanced except for the weights which are not attached to it.  The weights push against the balanced wheel exactly as calculated.  Also, rotation of the wheel can only occur around the axle.  Why would you calculate a torque around any other place?

Then, you have to take into account the mass inhomogeneity of the wheel itself. As for whether or not any construction will end up with a balanced wheel, that hasn't been resolved yet. I agree with the gist of your methodology, not with the generality of your conclusion. Like I said, it has to be explored further and I guess to write a program to efficiently do so won't be a problem for someone who does real programming (Fortran, C++, Assembler etc.) on a regular basis.

EDIT: Ignore the center of mass thing -- we're exploring an ideal wheel here which is perfectly symmetric and homogeneous. Friction is also ignored. And, you're right, rotation is about the pivot, not about anything else.

One thing needs explanation, though, and I worded it incorrectly implying that rotation should occur around something else, not the axis -- center of mass appears off center (of rotation) at all times, why should then there be an equilibrium position? Your calculations show equilibrium for your particular disposition of the parts.  How can that be reconciled with an off the axis (of rotation) center of mass, as is the case with the actual models?
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on May 08, 2009, 09:52:42 PM
One would expect that equilibrium behavior would be when axis of rotation coincides with the center of mass. If center of mass (even if the track is removed to exclude it from the calculation), however, is at all times off of the axis of rotation, as in the wm2d models at hand, then no equilibrium should be reached at any time. What is puzzling, though, is that center of mass is always to the right of the axis of rotation and yet the wheel spins CCW.

Of course, the correct calculation (as a methodology, not as a final conclusion at this point) is the way @mondrasek has done it and it very well may be that wm2d is simply not calculating correctly the center of mass. This may be one warning sign as to the applicability of wm2d. Because, if the position of center of mass were correctly calculated that (its persistently being off-center) in itself would be a proof for the workability of the studied machines.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: hansvonlieven on May 08, 2009, 10:05:47 PM
One would expect that equilibrium behavior would be when axis of rotation coincides with the center of mass.

That is only one way to have equilibrium. However, an equilibrium state is achieved if the centre of mass is anywhere along a vertical line through the pivot. Unstable equilibrium above the pivot, stable equilibrium below.

Hans von Lieven
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on May 08, 2009, 10:07:58 PM
That is only one way to have equilibrium. However, an equilibrium state is achieved if the centre of mass is anywhere along a vertical line through the pivot. Unstable equilibrium above the pivot, stable equilibrium below.

Hans von Lieven

That's true but in this case it isn't -- center of mass is persistantly to the right of the axis of rotation.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on May 08, 2009, 10:20:42 PM
The center of mass vs. axis of rotation calculation may be even a simpler way than @mondrasek's method to determine the workability of the studies devices. Like I said, if that center of mass is indeed always to the left of the pivot then the device is a perpetuum mobile beyond any doubt.

As a matter of fact that discrepancy (non-coincidence of center of mass and axis of rotation) is what attracted my attention to this, not so much seeing the wheel turn. We have to determine is that really the case or is some flaw in the way wm2d calculates center of mass.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: hansvonlieven on May 08, 2009, 10:24:08 PM
That's true but in this case it isn't -- center of mass is persistantly to the right of the axis of rotation.

That cannot be right because if it were you would have perpetual motion.

Hans von Lieven
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on May 08, 2009, 10:25:36 PM
That cannot be right because if it were you would have perpetual motion.

Hans von Lieven

Correct. That's why I still think we do have a perpetuum mobile.

We already have discontinuous production of excess energy definitively confirmed by the magnetic propulsor. Also, that "squeezed-cherry-pit" concept which Veljko Milkovic seems to utilize as well is likely producing discontinuously excess energy. What remains to be seen is how to make that production of excess energy occur continuously and Abeling's may be one solution. 
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: hansvonlieven on May 08, 2009, 10:28:04 PM
Which simulation are you talking about Omnibus, I would like to have a look at this.

Hans von Lieven
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on May 08, 2009, 10:32:18 PM
That one similar to what we already spoke about (see attached).
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: hansvonlieven on May 08, 2009, 10:41:02 PM
I thought so, I was just making sure we are talking about the same thing.

In WM2D you do not get a centre of gravity as such. In some simulations you can, but not in this one. WM2D gives you the "System centre of mass" which is not the same thing, since it includes the mass of your ramps, hence the discrepancy.

Hans von Lieven
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: hansvonlieven on May 08, 2009, 10:46:03 PM
I just did a quick sim to show you what I mean. Have a look at where the system centre of mass is on this one.

Hans von Lieven
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: mondrasek on May 08, 2009, 11:04:00 PM
The center of mass of the wheel and weights (guide ramps not included) in the sim I analyzed is directly below the axle.  That is why the wheel stops there.  That is the keeling effect.  This off center CoG is allowed by the slop in the guide tracks.

If the guide tracks were made so that they were only the width of the weight spheres (no slop) the center of gravity of the system would be coincident with the axle.  And it would not settle at any position.

How did I find this equilibrium position?  I turned off the material frictions, cranked up (lowered) the time step and integration error, added minimal overall dynamic friction in the form of "air resistance" and let it run!  It worked perfectly.  It gave the correct result.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on May 08, 2009, 11:12:30 PM
I thought so, I was just making sure we are talking about the same thing.

In WM2D you do not get a centre of gravity as such. In some simulations you can, but not in this one. WM2D gives you the "System centre of mass" which is not the same thing, since it includes the mass of your ramps, hence the discrepancy.

Hans von Lieven

Remove the ramps and try it. Center of mass is still to the right. In that respect your wm2d example doesn't apply.

Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: mondrasek on May 08, 2009, 11:41:03 PM
Let the sim run and settle to it's equilibrium point first using the prescribed methodology and THEN check the center of mass.

Notice that I did not analyze the sim you gave me in it's current starting condition because that was not the equilibrium position.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: mondrasek on May 08, 2009, 11:52:27 PM
Omnibus, do you see that when these sims do not act as expected I look for errors in the analysis?  And everytime the sim does not behave as expected I have found them?  And when I show you how the sim can still be corrected to show the proper (and expected) nature of this wheel you say that should not need to happen?

I believe you are expecting too much out of this software.  The saying goes, "Garbage in, garbage out."  And with respect to sims, this is true.  Those who use sims successfully have learned the best methods over time.  It has a learning curve.  But, again, please do not make absolute statements ruling out the results.  If you do not understand how they were derived, we are happy to answer your questions.  I am growing tired of having to say you are wrong since you say absolutes rather than ask why or state that something is your opinion, observation, or belief. 
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: hansvonlieven on May 08, 2009, 11:52:31 PM
Remove the ramps and try it. Center of mass is still to the right. In that respect your wm2d example doesn't apply.

I don't know what you have done, maybe left something somewhere. I removed the ramps and it behaves as expected, it finds equilibrium.

Hans von Lieven
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on May 09, 2009, 12:11:20 AM
I don't know what you have done, maybe left something somewhere. I removed the ramps and it behaves as expected, it finds equilibrium.

Hans von Lieven

Remove the two elliptic pieces forming the ramp and have only the wheel and the spheres remain. Go View>System Center of Mass. Center of mass is to the right of the axis of rotation

Open again the file, let it run for a while. Then go Stop>World>Start Here. Then remove the rwo ellipsoid pieces forming the ramp and have only the wheel and the sphere on the screen. Again go View>System Center of Mass. Center of mass is again to the right of the axis of rotation.

Center of mass is persistently to the right of the axis of rotation according to the wm2d, therefore, this must be a perpetuum mobile if we are to believe the program. It is quite possible that @mondrasek's analysis applied to the right construction (recall that his analysis was only applied to a mock up just to show the methodology) may also prove perpetuum mobile. More work is needed.

EDIT: Notice, if you get rid of everything else but the wheel the center of mass falls right where it's expected to be. That's a check that wm2d determines system of mass correctly.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on May 09, 2009, 12:14:23 AM
Let the sim run and settle to it's equilibrium point first using the prescribed methodology and THEN check the center of mass.

Notice that I did not analyze the sim you gave me in it's current starting condition because that was not the equilibrium position.

That's the point -- the sim never settles to it's equilibrium position, the center of mass is always to the right of the rotation axis. If the center of mass is indeed to the right of the axis of rotation and you've made it somehow to get the wheel to an equilibrium position then your conditions are inducing an error and should be abandoned.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on May 09, 2009, 12:23:17 AM
@mondrasek,

Quote
Omnibus, do you see that when these sims do not act as expected I look for errors in the analysis?  And everytime the sim does not behave as expected I have found them?

I don’t agree that you have found them. I’ve always said that your analysis of wm2d isn’t rigorous. Rigorous would be an analysis applying your last approach (summing up the torques) on models that have appeared to work and trying to optimize it. I already said that. This hasn’t been done yet. 


Quote
And when I show you how the sim can still be corrected to show the proper (and expected) nature of this wheel you say that should not need to happen?

If the analysis is rigorous there shouldn’t be the disagreement we’re having now. Unfortunately, no rigorous analysis and optimization of Abeling’s device has been shown yet.

Quote
I believe you are expecting too much out of this software.  The saying goes, "Garbage in, garbage out."  And with respect to sims, this is true.  Those who use sims successfully have learned the best methods over time.  It has a learning curve.  But, again, please do not make absolute statements ruling out the results.  If you do not understand how they were derived, we are happy to answer your questions.  I am growing tired of having to say you are wrong since you say absolutes rather than ask why or state that something is your opinion, observation, or belief.

Again, there hasn’t been a rigorous analysis shown yet and if you’re getting tired of not being able to supply one that’s another story. The problem with the rigorous analysis cannot go away just like that and instead accept the wishful thinking as the solution.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on May 09, 2009, 12:38:43 AM
Like I said, the only puzzling thing is why while having the center of mass to the right of the pivot the wheel should turn CCW. That's beside the point, however, because if the wm2d correctly determines the center of mass (which appears to be the case) any possible flaw in the rest of wm2d's performance is a moot point. The decisive factor proving perpetuum mobile is the observed persistent discrepancy in the position of the axis of rotation and the center of mass.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: mondrasek on May 09, 2009, 01:46:09 AM
not rigorous
Rigorous?

RIGOROUS?

Yet everytime I follow the same methodology.  The same methodology.  The same methodology.

And each time I see the sim resolve to the expected results.  The expected results.  The expected results.

And so I say again:  WM2D works fine, within it's known limitations, and always (ALWAYS) has predicted the correct real world results.

And now when I do a simple static analysis of the torque balance you question that?  And say I do not consider things that are absolutely NOT relevant?

Is this a case of, "He cannot see the forest for the trees?"

I do not know.  But I grow weary of the debate:  I try all of your tests.  You ignore all of mine.

It is like your first instinct is to argue, or contradict, rather than understand.  Or maybe its just me...
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on May 09, 2009, 01:56:18 AM
No, I don't ignore your tests but they haven't been rigorous so far and therefore are not definitive. Not to say that they are at odds with the most important test, namely, the position of the center of mass with respect to the axle. The program seems to be correct on that and it's proving unequivocally this device is a perpetuum mobile, at least in the ideal case. I've repeated this multiple times and I'm saying it again because, unfortunately, you don't want to hear it.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on May 09, 2009, 02:23:49 AM
Let me be more specific, although I've already said it. Your analyses of the wm2d results are more or less a guessing game, indirect deductions. The only rigorous methodology you've proposed is outside of wm2d and that still remains to be applied onto a proper model. Besides, when applied onto a proper model the results from its application have to be in harmony with the already so much mentioned discrepancy in the position of the pivot and the mass center. If the torque analysis deviates from what follows as a result of said discrepancy, the latter takes precedence and the torque analysis should be deemed flawed.

We should really try to agree on simple yet rigorous criteria and not beat around the bush using semantics or indirect signatures. One such very simple but reliable criterion is whether or not the two centers (axis and mass) coincide. Never mind anything else that the program calculates. If these centers are correctly placed by the program (as they seem to be) at the different moments of turning of the wheel and if they always stay sideways to one another at any position of the wheel, that's a definitive proof that the device is a perpetuum mobile. Interestingly, that's exactly what's observed with the model of Abeling's device.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: hansvonlieven on May 09, 2009, 02:51:54 AM
You don't get it Omnibus,

The mere fact that your so called centre of mass is on the right hand side and your rotation to the left, as you have already noticed, must indicate that there is something wrong with the simulation. This simply cannot happen in the real world. If the centre of mass was accurate the wheel should turn in the opposite direction.

QED

Hans von Lieven
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on May 09, 2009, 02:58:47 AM
You don't get it Omnibus,

The mere fact that your so called centre of mass is on the right hand side and your rotation to the left, as you have already noticed, must indicate that there is something wrong with the simulation. This simply cannot happen in the real world. If the centre of mass was accurate the wheel should turn in the opposite direction.

QED

Hans von Lieven

It's exactly the opposite. The center of mass is calculated correctly by the program (which is proven in several ways, as I already explained) but the rest of the calculations are messed up by the program. The fact that the program messes up the rest of the calculations is a moot point, as I already said, because the most important calculation -- the position of the center of mass -- the program does well. I already explained that. The conclusion is that the model of Abeling's rig is a perpetuum mobile at least in the ideal case.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on May 09, 2009, 03:09:44 AM
One may not even bother with clicking on Run in wm2d. The only thing necessary is to have system center of mass turned on by going to View>System Center of Mass. One also doesn't need the ramp. Just the slotted wheel and the spheres, positioned where they would be if the ramp were present, is enough for the conclusion (the ramp, by the way is very light and practically doesn't contribute to the calculation of the center of mass). This can be repeated for different positions of the wheel within its full turn only to observe that the center of mass is positioned always sideways to the pivot. That clearly is a proof that the device is a perpetuum mobile. Simple but categorical criterion.

This is a simple tool which can also help us in making the device more efficient by reshaping the track (ramp) so that it will keep the spheres at positions such as to ensure maximum deviation between the pivot and the mass center.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: hansvonlieven on May 09, 2009, 03:13:00 AM
This idea is nothing new. A while back there was the Andy motor. What this guy did was actually rather clever. Rather than having the weights run in a slot he made an iron hoop in which magnetic rollers ran instead of weights.

Below is an animation of the principle and a photo of an actual replication. They never did get it to work.

Hans von Lieven
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on May 09, 2009, 03:20:35 AM
That isn't the case here. Recall that a device with forced trajectory doesn't work (see attached). Spheres really have to have more degrees of freedom for the pivot-mass center shift to be in effect. Not even all ramps yield working models. This has to be studied more now that we know that perpetuum mobile is possible in principle.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: hansvonlieven on May 09, 2009, 03:24:15 AM
It's exactly the opposite. The center of mass is calculated correctly by the program (which is proven in several ways, as I already explained) but the rest of the calculations are messed up by the program. The fact that the program messes up the rest of the calculations is a moot point, as I already said, because the most important calculation -- the position of the center of mass -- the program does well. I already explained that. The conclusion is that the model of Abeling's rig is a perpetuum mobile at least in the ideal case.

I know what you are doing wrong, You take into account only the position of the weights relative to the fulcrum. Of course you get a permanent imbalance, What you are ignoring is the energy required to force the weights into an elliptic orbit around the fulcrum. Once you add that in you will, in an ideal system, find balance. Add in friction etc and you have loss.

Hans von Lieven
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on May 09, 2009, 03:34:16 AM
I know what you are doing wrong, You take into account only the position of the weights relative to the fulcrum. Of course you get a permanent imbalance, What you are ignoring is the energy required to force the weights into an elliptic orbit around the fulcrum. Once you add that in you will, in an ideal system, find balance. Add in friction etc and you have loss.

Hans von Lieven

No, no, we're discussing an ideal situation. No resistance, only masses and gravity. It's a perpetuum mobile, no doubt about that.

I should've probably worded the previous post differently: Any device (Abeling's, Andy's whatever) which has non-coincident mass center and pivot and the former is at all times positioned sideways, is a perpetuum mobile and should work in principle. The way any patent for an internal combustion engine should represent a working machine. However, in reality very few are reallyworking due to numerous purely engineering problems. Same here. If a device having the said permanent discrepancy cannot be made to work, the problem is a purely engineering one and depends on the skills of the person who manufactures it. Simple as that.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: hansvonlieven on May 09, 2009, 03:37:32 AM
In an ideal system a pendulum is a perpetuum mobile.

Hans von Lieven
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Dusty on May 09, 2009, 03:49:27 AM
Now I have the frame finished and the wheels mounted.  Next I need to build all the new dumbells and build the tracks.  I'm going to try and design a track system using steel instead of the plywood.  All this work will take me about a week to finish.

I took all the best of the best of the smaller wheel and am putting all that into this newer bigger design.  If it eventually works, well great, but if it doesn't I'll rebuild and try again.

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

Dusty
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Tink on May 09, 2009, 03:54:15 AM
WOW!!!

Looks great Dusty!
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: LarryC on May 09, 2009, 04:00:57 AM
Rigorous?

RIGOROUS?

Yet everytime I follow the same methodology.  The same methodology.  The same methodology.

And each time I see the sim resolve to the expected results.  The expected results.  The expected results.

And so I say again:  WM2D works fine, within it's known limitations, and always (ALWAYS) has predicted the correct real world results.

And now when I do a simple static analysis of the torque balance you question that?  And say I do not consider things that are absolutely NOT relevant?

Is this a case of, "He cannot see the forest for the trees?"

I do not know.  But I grow weary of the debate:  I try all of your tests.  You ignore all of mine.

It is like your first instinct is to argue, or contradict, rather than understand.  Or maybe its just me...


Mondrasek,

No, it is not just you, but congratulation, I was wondering how long it would take you to understand. You are a good knowledgeable man and you tried your best to past on your knowledge, but it is truly like spitting into a headwind with the constant inane rambling in this case.

Regards, Larry
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: hartiberlin on May 09, 2009, 04:03:32 AM
Looks really great Dusty !

Hopefully you will get it to run !

Good luck !

Regards, Stefan.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: overtaker on May 09, 2009, 04:11:53 AM
OUTSTANDING Dusty.  Great craftsmanship.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on May 09, 2009, 05:22:53 AM
In an ideal system a pendulum is a perpetuum mobile.

Hans von Lieven

No, it isn't. If that were the case then even a balanced wheel would be a perpetuum mobile but it isn't.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on May 09, 2009, 05:28:15 AM


Mondrasek,

No, it is not just you, but congratulation, I was wondering how long it would take you to understand. You are a good knowledgeable man and you tried your best to past on your knowledge, but it is truly like spitting into a headwind with the constant inane rambling in this case.

Regards, Larry

Congratulations for what?

Reality of perpetuum mobile has already been proven beyond doubt theoretically. What remains now is to see it as a working model. I don't doubt that it has been done in the past but many fall for the propaganda and repeat its mantra that it hasn't been done before. That's just propaganda. It has and that can be confirmed at once theoretically.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on May 09, 2009, 05:29:17 AM
Go @Dusty. You're a winner.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on May 09, 2009, 07:04:11 AM
Notice, a pendulum under ideal conditions isn't a self-starter at every position of its bob. It isn't a perpetuum mobile. For a device such as the one we're discussing to be a perpetuum mobile the mass must be off center at all positions of the wheel making it always a self-starter. Such self-starter won't work only due to poor engineering.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Cloxxki on May 09, 2009, 11:31:56 AM
Wonderful work Dusty!
Do secure that frame though, just in case it works as advertised :-)

About Andy's motor. Interesting to learn about that, and how it didn't work.
Was it ever established WHY it didn't work? I'm sure friction wasn't the hold-up? Or could magnets pose hidden difficulties?

My variation to this design would be with a pivot on the rod, just inside the most outer diameter. It would allow the weight to advance and lag in the (yet to be determined) appropriate places. Copying Abeling's weight path and its vectors, if so desired, or even improve upon it (flatter through 12-2:00, straighter down?).
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: AquariuZ on May 09, 2009, 11:50:23 AM
Now I have the frame finished and the wheels mounted.  Next I need to build all the new dumbells and build the tracks.  I'm going to try and design a track system using steel instead of the plywood.  All this work will take me about a week to finish.

I took all the best of the best of the smaller wheel and am putting all that into this newer bigger design.  If it eventually works, well great, but if it doesn't I'll rebuild and try again.

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

Dusty

Dusty, you are a sparkling diamond my friend, a sparkling diamond.

Wow.

AZ

man-o-man what a happy camper I would be if I had your workshop, skills & materials. Now I dream on... May I live in your shed?  ;D
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: LarryC on May 09, 2009, 03:58:22 PM
@All,

In case anyone would like to create a template from points off of Fig 4 of the patent, please see the attachments. A spreadsheet is displayed first with the points scaled off of Fig 4. The two drawing were made using the points. The excel data set is last. Just change the 610 (MM) in blue to whatever radius you wish.

I know Fig 4 is not perfect, but it is as close as you can get to what the inventor proposed. I had to adjust it slightly to get the outer circle within a fortieth of an inch. The guiding stand is a non-symmetrical oval according to Fig 4. Print Fig 4 and trace the oval if you wish to confirm.

Notice the smooth inward change to center in the lower to middle left and the explosive outward change in the upper left on the last column of the spreadsheet.

If only one set of weights were used with this setup then only momentum could get you thru the upper left to receive the needed CW rotational impact at the end of the acceleration phase. It seems that more than one set would be required to add additional leverage and momentum.

Regards, Larry 
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: ruggero on May 09, 2009, 05:10:09 PM
Very Nice - Thanks LarryC

Maybe you could expand the template by looking at the "Angle of Attack"...especially from 14.0 to 15.5 it have a dramatic change in angle.

ruggero
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: AquariuZ on May 09, 2009, 07:16:55 PM
@All,

In case anyone would like to create a template from points off of Fig 4 of the patent, please see the attachments. A spreadsheet is displayed first with the points scaled off of Fig 4. The two drawing were made using the points. The excel data set is last. Just change the 610 (MM) in blue to whatever radius you wish.

I know Fig 4 is not perfect, but it is as close as you can get to what the inventor proposed. I had to adjust it slightly to get the outer circle within a fortieth of an inch. The guiding stand is a non-symmetrical oval according to Fig 4. Print Fig 4 and trace the oval if you wish to confirm.

Notice the smooth inward change to center in the lower to middle left and the explosive outward change in the upper left on the last column of the spreadsheet.

If only one set of weights were used with this setup then only momentum could get you thru the upper left to receive the needed CW rotational impact at the end of the acceleration phase. It seems that more than one set would be required to add additional leverage and momentum.

Regards, Larry

Outstanding!
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: eisenficker2000 on May 09, 2009, 08:17:42 PM
I love to see the results off Dusty's new model..

I have become a bit sceptic, after fiddling around with my own model.

The picture is from the "equilibrium" position..I doubt if more weights do make a change...

I have an tilted avi, but it practically only shows the wheel returning to its "steady state"
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on May 09, 2009, 08:26:23 PM
@eisenficker2000,

Good job. Never mind skepticism, if that's engineered correctly it should work (friction is the culprit). Let's get some data to see how the center of mass is positioned vs. the axle -- what are the weights of your parts, diameter of wheel etc.? Emotions are not friends of objective research.

EDIT: Also, place all 8 weights. It isn't to be assumed they play no role.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Cloxxki on May 09, 2009, 08:51:31 PM
Wonderful work Eisenficker!

Now that I see it, I wonder if the top ramp's final  "hump back" needs to be that tall at all. After the initial acceleraration, would the weight not find the end of the slot from there?
I of course don't know how your replication works, but might that hump be in the way of full rotation? Never hurts to ask or try...

[EDIT] Added:
Also, if nothing else works, consider widening the slots to allow the weight to truly freely roll up the bottom ramp. And if that's not is, perhaps have the bottom start even higher up.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: hansvonlieven on May 09, 2009, 10:27:38 PM
No, it isn't. If that were the case then even a balanced wheel would be a perpetuum mobile but it isn't.

A balanced wheel once put in motion will spin forever if there is no force acting against it. ie. in an ideal or perfect system.

Hans von Lieven
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: eisenficker2000 on May 09, 2009, 10:56:00 PM
@ Omnibus: the brass weights are 20mm diameter with 3mm silver steel axles and weigh each 27 grams. The wheel itself weighs 108 grams and has a diameter of 160mm.

@Cloxxki the slots are wider then the 3 mm axle of the "Diabolo" weights. The weights rotate and are pushed/rolled outside by that. Yes there is friction, but as there is no load on the wheel, it is free running, it should be overcome.

I enclose the drawings off my replication as (zipped) dxf. The wheel is small and easy to replicate. I used 5 mm PVC sheet, but plywood could also be used.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Alexioco on May 09, 2009, 11:22:42 PM
whens dis guy gonna show dis thing?


ALex
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Alexioco on May 09, 2009, 11:24:43 PM
I love to see the results off Dusty's new model..

I have become a bit sceptic, after fiddling around with my own model.

The picture is from the "equilibrium" position..I doubt if more weights do make a change...

I have an tilted avi, but it practically only shows the wheel returning to its "steady state"

nice wrk mate, lookin gd

Alex
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Cloxxki on May 09, 2009, 11:36:03 PM
@Cloxxki the slots are wider then the 3 mm axle of the "Diabolo" weights. The weights rotate and are pushed/rolled outside by that. Yes there is friction, but as there is no load on the wheel, it is free running, it should be overcome.
Thanks for the drawing, it's closer to what I meant to recommend that I expected from the picture.
I meant the wider slot suggestion allow the weight to perhaps roll up the ramp further before this momentum is use to accelerate the wheel. To use speed as long as it's there.

Perhaps my idea of a folding rod has some merit after all, to get away from the two weights always being in one line with the axle. At least, if your setup cannot be made to work as hoped.

The top ramp might be converting (I can't calculate or simulate that unfortunately) the last bit of momentum all in height. If the hump was just lowered and flattened some, perhaps more speed would be carried. With any speed almost, I'm pretty sure the end of the slow would be found well before dropping below the axle again.
If anyone can simulate this or easily substitute the slotted wheel plates, I'd wonder about a mimimalist hockey stick hook, with the remainder of the stick wider especially past the hook, and curved, outside pointing in the wheel's rotation direction.
In you setup, the weight *seems* to start pushing the wheel again pretty much right after being unhooked, or am I getting that wrong?
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: spinner on May 10, 2009, 12:01:20 AM
A balanced wheel once put in motion will spin forever if there is no force acting against it. ie. in an ideal or perfect system.

Hans von Lieven

Of course! And the pendulum under ideal conditions would work perpetually, too. And they would both be a 3rd td law breakers, just like the superconducting ring with induced current.
Once started, it would "go forever", perpetually... (never mind the energy needed for start, or maintaining the conditions for performing (high vacuum, ZeroF bearings, cryo-cooling, ..))
Hell, even (some) "overbalanced" concepts would work if there was no friction, air/bearing/.. resistance, etc...

Sadly, such devices (or perpetuum mobiles of the third kind) would not be very useful....
As soon as you tap into such a source, it would stop (sooner or later, depending how much energy one put in initially...)

I'm a bit old-fashioned, so I prefer the 1st law Perpetuum mobiles... The ones which should produce eternal/surplus/useful work (or, create energy).... ;D


Thanks to guys like Mondrasek and Hans.. I admire your patience and persistence explaining things, especially when you try to answer the posts like this...

Quote
...
Center of mass is persistently to the right of the axis of rotation according to the wm2d, therefore, this must be a perpetuum mobile if we are to believe the program....
...
The decisive factor proving perpetuum mobile is the observed persistent discrepancy in the position of the axis of rotation and the center of mass....
...
The program seems to be correct on that and it's proving unequivocally this device is a perpetuum mobile, at least in the ideal case. I've repeated this multiple times and I'm saying it again because, unfortunately, you don't want to hear it....
...
If these centers are correctly placed by the program (as they seem to be) at the different moments of turning of the wheel and if they always stay sideways to one another at any position of the wheel, that's a definitive proof that the device is a perpetuum mobile. Interestingly, that's exactly what's observed with the model of Abeling's device.
...
The conclusion is that the model of Abeling's rig is a perpetuum mobile at least in the ideal case....
...
One also doesn't need the ramp. Just the slotted wheel and the spheres, positioned where they would be if the ramp were present, is enough for the conclusion (the ramp, by the way is very light and practically doesn't contribute to the calculation of the center of mass). This can be repeated for different positions of the wheel within its full turn only to observe that the center of mass is positioned always sideways to the pivot. That clearly is a proof that the device is a perpetuum mobile. Simple but categorical criterion....
...
This has to be studied more now that we know that perpetuum mobile is possible in principle....
...
No, no, we're discussing an ideal situation. No resistance, only masses and gravity. It's a perpetuum mobile, no doubt about that....
...
Reality of perpetuum mobile has already been proven beyond doubt theoretically. What remains now is to see it as a working model. I don't doubt that it has been done in the past but many fall for the propaganda and repeat its mantra that it hasn't been done before. That's just propaganda. It has and that can be confirmed at once theoretically....
...
For a device such as the one we're discussing to be a perpetuum mobile the mass must be off center at all positions of the wheel making it always a self-starter. Such self-starter won't work only due to poor engineering....
...

Ah, Omnibus.... Fascinating...

Cheers!
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on May 10, 2009, 12:38:52 AM
A balanced wheel once put in motion will spin forever if there is no force acting against it. ie. in an ideal or perfect system.

Hans von Lieven

No, I said what the condition is. A balanced wheel when not put in motion not only will not spin forever but will not spin at all. Unbalanced wheel, on the other hand, even if not set in motion will spin forever when let go from a standstill if correctly engineered, let alone if the conditions are ideal.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: 0c on May 10, 2009, 12:47:46 AM
Unbalanced wheel, on the other hand, even if not set in motion will spin forever when let go from a standstill if correctly engineered, let alone if the conditions are ideal.

Seems to me an "unbalanced wheel" will seek the position of maximum entropy, which just happens to be "balanced". Once that is achieved, there is no more motion.

... according to conventional thought, anyway
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on May 10, 2009, 12:53:52 AM
Seems to me an "unbalanced wheel" will seek the position of maximum entropy, which just happens to be "balanced". Once that is achieved, there is no more motion.

... according to conventional thought, anyway

Learn first what entropy means before attempting to use such big words.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: spinner on May 10, 2009, 01:10:43 AM
Seems to me an "unbalanced wheel" will seek the position of maximum entropy, which just happens to be "balanced". Once that is achieved, there is no more motion.

Yep.. Can we also say the "keeling" effect? The natural relaxation, spontaneous seeking of the minimum potential energy, the point of rest, reaching the "punctum quietus", etc...
Or, Natural tendency for relaxation? Sofa, TV, anyone?  ;D

Of course, there might be mechanisms which drives the Universe continuously... Perpetually.
Who said that the existence is just a one way path from max energy to max entropy? Why couldn't be a cyclical process? Perpetual?
Eh... Nevermind.
Cheers...
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: 0c on May 10, 2009, 01:33:14 AM
Learn first what entropy means before attempting to use such big words.

Here's one definition:
"a non-conserved thermodynamic state function, measured in terms of the number of microstates a system can assume, which corresponds to a degradation in usable energy."

Here's another:
"a measure of the partial loss of the ability of a system to perform work due to the effects of irreversibility."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Entropy

The heavy side of the unbalanced wheel will settle to the bottom and no further work will be done.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on May 10, 2009, 01:49:22 AM
Here's one definition:
"a non-conserved thermodynamic state function, measured in terms of the number of microstates a system can assume, which corresponds to a degradation in usable energy."

Here's another:
"a measure of the partial loss of the ability of a system to perform work due to the effects of irreversibility."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Entropy

The heavy side of the unbalanced wheel will settle to the bottom and no further work will be done.

Instead of posting definitions whose meaning escapes you try to put some effort in systematic learning. This you won't be able to accomplish in a forum such as this no matter how much you push to attract attention so that  someone finally attempts to explain it to you.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: hansvonlieven on May 10, 2009, 02:15:38 AM
No, I said what the condition is. A balanced wheel when not put in motion not only will not spin forever but will not spin at all. Unbalanced wheel, on the other hand, even if not set in motion will spin forever when let go from a standstill if correctly engineered, let alone if the conditions are ideal.

Incorrect.

An unbalanced wheel will not spin, even in an ideal system, unless there is an outside force acting upon it. If there is no outside force it will behave like a pendulum.

Hans von Lieven
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on May 10, 2009, 02:37:14 AM
Incorrect.

An unbalanced wheel will not spin, even in an ideal system, unless there is an outside force acting upon it. If there is no outside force it will behave like a pendulum.

Hans von Lieven

That's exactly what an unbalanced wheel is not. Outside force is substituted by the persistent violation of the lever rule. That's the very essence of unbalance wheel.

Before getting into this more complicated case, the case of unbalances wheel, you should understand first that a balanced wheel when not put in motion not only will not spin forever but will not spin at all. This you don't seem to get.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on May 10, 2009, 02:56:46 AM
@All,

Those who are reading this exchange shouldn't be misled by the semantics which Hans likes to play with. This isn't a literary conversation and it is well known in what sense the term unbalanced wheel is used here -- unbalanced wheel in this conversation is a wheel whose center of mass is always to the right (in the discussed case) of the axis of rotation for any thinkable position of that wheel. One such wheel is the one in Abeling's patent. Such wheel, even without an external impetus, always seeks equilibrium and never finds it.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: hansvonlieven on May 10, 2009, 03:11:26 AM
@All,

Those who are reading this exchange shouldn't be misled by the semantics which Hans likes to play with. This isn't a literary conversation and it is well known in what sense the term unbalanced wheel is used here -- unbalanced wheel in this conversation is a wheel whose center of mass is always to the right (in the discussed case) of the axis of rotation for any thinkable position of that wheel. One such wheel is the one in Abeling's patent. Such wheel, even without an external impetus, always seeks equilibrium and never finds it.

There is no such unbalanced wheel in Abeling's patent howevermuch you want to see it that way. Abelings patent is Patent Nonsense!

Hans von Lieven
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Tink on May 10, 2009, 03:16:45 AM
Hans, do you mean to say the Dutch government and all the companies working with Sjack Abeling are just plain stupid?
Can so many people be so stupid?
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on May 10, 2009, 03:23:06 AM
There is no such unbalanced wheel in Abeling's patent howevermuch you want to see it that way. Abelings patent is Patent Nonsense!

Hans von Lieven

That's some opinion of yours which contradicts the evidence.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on May 10, 2009, 03:44:40 AM
@eisenficker2000,

In these five wm2d files (attached below) you may see five different positions of a wheel similar to yours with the same mass as yours and eight spheres also having same mass as your weights. These files are only intended to observe the position of the center of mass with respect to the axis of rotation and in no way are they intended to be seen spinning, using wm2d. While wm2d can correctly calculate and place the center of mass (which is the crucial parameter we're interested in) it is unfit for other simulations in our case.

As seen, unlike a pendulum-like wheel which seeks equilibrium after being deflected from it, having the center  of mass sway to an fro from right to left side vs. the pivot and back, in this wheel (the model of your wheel) the center of mass is persistently to the right of the axis of rotation no matter what the position of the wheel. That's the good part. That's a proof that your wheel is indeed a perpetuum mobile.

The bad part is that the discrepancy in the mass center and axle positions is quite small and that, being the driving phenomenon, will probably be insufficient to overcome prominent friction forces which even a brief look at your rig suggests.

Therefore, in addition to efforts to reduce these prominent friction forces efforts seem to be necessary to optimize the desired persistently-unbalanced performance of your wheel. One way is to decrease the mass of the wheel itself and increase the mass of the weights. Another, more involved way is to seek optimal track-guide relationships and that is the very essence of this project, isn't it?

Good luck and don't give up. Even a watchmaker can't produce a quality watch just like that and this pursuit is even more involved.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on May 10, 2009, 03:49:10 AM
Just curious, what does 'eisenficker' stand for?
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: i_ron on May 10, 2009, 05:16:52 AM
Hans, do you mean to say the Dutch government and all the companies working with Sjack Abeling are just plain stupid?
Can so many people be so stupid?

If you do a search on,"Groningen" they list all the projects in the district, both completed and pending... there is no mention of any "weight power plant"

Here are two examples..."Highly Efficient Natural Gas-Fired Plant
Advanced Power plans to build a power plant fuelled only by natural gas with a capacity of 1,200 MW. The CCGT (combined cycle gas turbine) project will reach an efficiency of up to 60%, which will make it one of the most efficient power stations in the world.

This morning (Tuesday, the 6th of May) the longest high-voltage cable in the world was successfully put into operation: the NorNed cable between the Netherlands (Eemshaven) and Norway (Feda), with a length of 580 kilometres. The cable has a capacity of 700 megawatt"

So I would appreciate any news item on Abeling's plant.


Ron

Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: i_ron on May 10, 2009, 05:25:20 AM
There is no such unbalanced wheel in Abeling's patent howevermuch you want to see it that way. Abelings patent is Patent Nonsense!

Hans von Lieven

Not often that I agree with you, but this is one of those times.

Perhaps what people are seeing is similar to the three ball
design where it is obvious the center of mass is on the left
and the 'wheel' will rotate CCW until the left two balls are on the bottom, NOT, it is a balanced wheel, as is the patent.

Ron
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on May 10, 2009, 05:27:48 AM
Not often that I agree with you, but this is one of those times.

Perhaps what people are seeing is similar to the three ball
design where it is obvious the center of mass is on the left
and the 'wheel' will rotate CCW until the left two balls are on the bottom, NOT, it is a balanced wheel, as is the patent.

Ron

That's not the case here, as I already explained.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on May 10, 2009, 05:38:23 AM
If you do a search on,"Groningen" they list all the projects in the district, both completed and pending... there is no mention of any "weight power plant"

Ron

Don't get it. Do search for what? You suggest there might be a governmental project under the name "weight power plant", is that it? Someone must be out of his mind to have suggested that the government would fund such a thing. Where has this been suggested?
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: i_ron on May 10, 2009, 05:49:37 AM
Don't get it. Do search for what? You suggest there might be a governmental project under the name "weight power plant", is that it? Someone must be out of his mind to have suggested that the government would fund such a thing. Where has this been suggested?

"Abeling Beheer has been given permission by the Dutch government to construct Weight Power Plants in The Netherlands, and it has been given permission to connect these plants to the current infrastructure."

(water management is a second place priority...RP)

"The construction of the first Weight Power Plant is expected in May 2009.
The location for the construction of the first Weight Power Plant is probably going to be the province of Groningen, the Netherlands."

http://mooieenergie.nl/
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on May 10, 2009, 05:53:17 AM
"Abeling Beheer has been given permission by the Dutch government to construct Weight Power Plants in The Netherlands, and it has been given permission to connect these plants to the current infrastructure."

(water management is a second place priority...RP)

"The construction of the first Weight Power Plant is expected in May 2009.
The location for the construction of the first Weight Power Plant is probably going to be the province of Groningen, the Netherlands."

http://mooieenergie.nl/

And, why do you construe this to mean that this is a governmental project and that the government has to report on the net about its progress which we can find using a search engine?
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: i_ron on May 10, 2009, 06:51:49 AM
And, why do you construe this to mean that this is a governmental project and that the government has to report on the net about its progress which we can find using a search engine?

Did I at any point say, or even insinuate, that this was a government project?

My response was to tink who said,"Hans, do you mean to say the Dutch government and all the companies working with Sjack Abeling are just plain stupid? Can so many people be so stupid?"

See? he says "government working with S Abeling" This is not
grounds to label this a government project, but rather as my
quotes show... if the government has given permission, then
this is co-operating. I was assuming that everyone would be
able to comprehend that just a search on 'groningen'
would lead only to hotels and tourist destinations, but in the
interests of brevity, I failed to say "groningen power plant"
or "groningen weight power plant" which brings up what
seems to be their 'chamber of commerce' which is very proud
to toot the horn for all the wonderful happenings... in our
particular field of interest, the weight power plant.

But alas, either it is not happening now, or it is so well
hidden that no one has heard of it, or.... it has failed a test.

Incidentally the only mention when you type in "groningen
weight power plant" is this list!

My good friend in southern NL tells me he has never seen
this on the news or met anyone who has heard anything
about it, hence it would be a delight to have someone
report on this as an actual event.

Just because I fully support Hans is no reason to be belligerent
with me. Please note that we both say "the patent" won't
work... not the wheel won't work.

Just eyeball it...the power stroke can only be from 2:00 to
5:00, which is three (spaces on the clock face) where as the
returning weight has to travel through nine spaces. Where is
this free lunch coming from? I already pointed out that at 3:00
with a two to one ratio the outside weight (the driving power)
will lift nearly two left hand weights... but ONLY HALF the distance of the outside weight. So the left hand weight must
be made to travel two times its law of the lever distance!
where are you getting this input from?

Ron P





Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Cloxxki on May 10, 2009, 11:36:27 AM
True, between 2 and 5 is the only time on the right where a weight does work.
However, between 6 and 12, not all this time is work required from the 12-6 side. This obviously because of the bottom ramp. So, the work done 2-5 is not restricted. We see that in @Dusty's setup, when a weight reaches 5:00, the wheel has energy sored to give the weight at 9 a nice sling. It almost makes it over the top ramp. As the last 10% of a weight's straight vertical launch take up a huge part in weight, I feel that getting the top ramp right will be most essential at approximating a full revolution, and subsequently infinite next ones. In Abeling's/Dusty's sling, the basic principe attempted seems to be converting wheel inertia an a little bit of vertical momentum in the weight, into mainly horizontal momentum. The CF that come to play here should aid the weight in finding the end of the wheel's slot. The conversion seems to only have to manage just that. The intense sling in Dusty's machine may be "over the top" (pun intended), more than is necessary, and at the same time more than is possible. Well, that last part is a fact, but its cause may well have been in his wheel/weight/friction ratio, as long as we cannot determine whether the concept is faulty or not.

To calculate the "balance" in Abeling's wheel may be more than just taking a few sample positions and looking at weight balance. We really need to listen to Einstein, and take velocity into account.
If someone runs the calcs, perhaps suppose a really heavy wheel (to reach a fairly constant wheel speed), or an really powerful motor turning it. Track a weight all around the wheel, and tally up energy taken/given. This will be quite complicated, as at the top, the weight will be pushing the wheel, at an angle through the slot. Pushing an being pushed is alternated through a revolution, and for 6-8 or so, neither actually occurs. Harder to tell, but the same may be valid to some extent 11-12.
Last remark on position vs velocity and acceleration : there may be "bad" spots for the weight to find itself in, but at first glance, in Dusty's wheel the weights are spending awefully little TIME in these positions. If anything makes this wheel turn, it's being at the wrong place at the wrong time, for a very short time. And being in the right place, for as long as possible.

About that powerplant licence.
You should know that due to the increasing power costs over the past decades, farmers all over The Netherlands have bought/built windmills. The modern white ones, towering their garages. It came down to a cost saving for most, in the relatively short term. There were subsidies involved even, I think, as the government promotes renewable energy.
You know our country is quite flat, and the winds are always there. At times, the farmers saw overcapacity, which they were then able to sell to the power company. Some farmers actually net a power INCOME rather than having a power BILL. They naturaly take their windmills quite seriously, farming in The Netherlands is all but a sure thing for prosperity.
I can only assume that you'll need a licence to be allowed to sell power to the grid. I would not be surprised if Abeling's second or later proto managed to produce electricity conforming to the regulations. Part of his world presentation may be the negative use bills received from the power company, as a means of dramatic evidence.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: ruggero on May 10, 2009, 12:02:08 PM
Hi all,

I do think that we overlook something here: The G-max at 06:00.

I'm not in to math and formula, so I have to ask somebody who know about this, to find the answer:

– At 06:00 the G-max force will have a push-down on the outside ramp (oval guide).
– We also experience at 06:00, that there is an enormous drag downwards on the wheel and its axle (slowing the wheel?)
– How does that influence on the friction and velocity (of the weight and on the wheel)?
– If we take away this additional G-max force, then how high could the weight roll?
– Is it possible to harness this additional force?

Perhaps this illustration of an experimental setup better explain what I'm talking about.

The 'Egg' curve is standing freely on the ground (able to tip).
Egg working like both as a lever and beam itself.

At the top left, the Egg curve rising will be catched, so the weight can continue rolling forward and up-hill on an incline plane.

How far will the weight roll up-hill?

Will we have an impact at the top left?
And how big?

ruggero
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on May 10, 2009, 01:47:08 PM
@i_ron,

Quote
Just eyeball it...the power stroke can only be from 2:00 to
5:00, which is three (spaces on the clock face) where as the
returning weight has to travel through nine spaces. Where is
this free lunch coming from? I already pointed out that at 3:00
with a two to one ratio the outside weight (the driving power)
will lift nearly two left hand weights... but ONLY HALF the distance of the outside weight. So the left hand weight must
be made to travel two times its law of the lever distance!
where are you getting this input from?

This analysis is incorrect. I have shown how to analyze this properly: in this kind of wheel as Abeling's the center of mass is persistently to the right of the axle which makes it permanently unbalanced, always tending toward equilibrium but never reaching it. It's difficult to take advantage of this in practice because forces of friction counteract efficiently that tendency. The goal is to overcome this difficulty through skillful engineering and have the desired effect demonstrate itself.

And, again, don't expect the government to meet this with fanfares splashing it all over the internet. The opposite is expected to happen as has happened throughout the whole history -- hide it and suppress it, never to be heard again.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Cloxxki on May 10, 2009, 02:41:47 PM
And, again, don't expect the government to meet this with fanfares splashing it all over the internet. The opposite is expected to happen as has happened throughout the whole history -- hide it and suppress it, never to be heard again.
Sure? We have some serious wind mill parks. recently opened on on an articial island 10km out of the coast. Politics in The Netherlands are not too hot on coal and nuclear.
The mentioned gas energy plant sits on a pretty huge gas field BTW. I think if you're going to take it from the earth, you might as well make sure it's turned into energy the most efficient and clean way currently available. But that's for another topic to comment on.
If Abeling's idea works, then Dusty and Eisenficker are going to confirm it. I rate them just as high as Abeling technically, and the idea came to them for free, plus they have the luxury of this forum to feed them with advice. If it works, we'll need little time to establish WHY it works, and create some good open source alternatives, to avoid patent infringement. Abelings seems to have patented his construction, not the reason why it works. It may be a relatively simple formula he devised first (having been sought for centuries), and then built a machine around.
A moving lower ramp has been suggested before, to harness CF from the weight at 6:00. I suppose a directional shift would be needed to release that force later during the more vertical path of the weight. Then, it may not be necessary at all.
The tighter curve upwards is generating greater vertical speed than had the weight remained on the wheel, while at the same time saving on torque by taking the inside path. That's something.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: eisenficker2000 on May 10, 2009, 03:32:25 PM
I have done some old fashioned calculating, for a static situation, so no WM2D or sims just some AutoCAD geometry and vectors.

I have found a resulting torque, okay about the same as produced by the #3 weight (counting counterclockwise with the top weight as #1), but still it is there
So the wheel should start by itself if the friction is less then the calculated forces...

Torque calculated as in the  drawn state of the wheel.

Vectors calculated, constructed axial and radial to their tracks (white).
Radial Vectors translated to center of wheel (green).
Taken G=10 with weights of 27 grams.

L= length of arm(meters), F= Force (Newton), Clockwise = negative.
T= Torque (Newton meters)

1 L = 0.0687 m   F = 0.072 N  T = 0.0049464 NM
2 L = 0.0424 m  F = 0.231 N  T = 0.0097944 NM
3 L = 0.0319 m  F = 0.262 N  T = 0.0083558 NM
4 L = 0.0361 m  F = 0.216 N  T = 0.0077976 NM
5 L = 0.0556 m  F = 0.106 N  T = 0.0058936 NM
6 L = 0.0700 m  F = 0.191 N  T =-0.0133700 NM
7 L = 0.0700 m  F = 0.270 N  T =-0.0189000 NM   
8 L = 0.0700 m  F = 0.191 N  T =-0.0133700 NM
            ----------+
             Total Torque =-0.0088522 NM   ---> Wheel starts Clockwise

Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on May 10, 2009, 03:33:01 PM
@Cloxxki,

You’re assuming there’s a formula that has been sought for centuries but that’s exactly what powers that be are making you to believe (this idea is obvious and it very well may be that it has been accomplished many times in the past only to be suppressed) in order for them to push their inefficient nuclear power stations and wind mills, not to say the oil industry and patents enslaving everybody. What we’re talking about is the most anti-business, therefore, anti-patent and anti corporate as anything can get. Therefore the government will never in a million years encourage its development. What’s expected to happen if this turns out to be practically applicable is for the government to ban production of energy in this particular way – through perpetuum mobile – because it will destroy everything else, including the society as we know it. Drugs are banned this way, aren’t they? Anything has to be their way and nothing freeing you from their iron grip would ever be allowed. So, don’t give me these examples of what the good government is doing for the energy policy and don’t worry about patents. No patent can ever be endorsed by any agency of the powers that be unless you think they are stupid and love self-destruction. They are not.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on May 10, 2009, 04:34:09 PM
@eisenficker2000,

Your calculation of the overall torque differs slightly from that of @mondrasek and I think yours is the correct one. When finding the component of the force perpendicular to the arm to calculate the torque @mondrasek uses in all cases the total weight if the sphere. You are first decomposing that weight into two components one of which is the vector tangential to the track. It is this component from which you then find out the component perpendicular to the arm. This is the right way to do it because, indeed, if the sphere is left on its own it will slide along the track under the action of the tangential component of the weight.

It would be really useful if you can write a script to carry out these calculations automatically so that you can observe the result at the different positions of the wheel. That would be a really valuable proof for the viability of the device and can be compared quantitatively with the other, even simpler test, revealing the persistent sideways shift of the mass center with respect to the axis of rotation. At this point wm2d can give very easily results from that latter test for the different positions of the wheel and it makes it a really valuable tool in this respect.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Cloxxki on May 10, 2009, 04:39:30 PM
@Omnibus
I'm afraid you're over-rating Dutch government's foresight in this matter. Any conspiracies understood to exist in the US, they most likely are not apart of, considered as unreliable and insignificant. We have always been hard to predict in our actions. A small nation, one time a mightly force, now humbly minding its own business.

And perhaps we should not forget the vital role this country has had after WW2 in offering a platform for the European Patent system.

The gains found in such a gravity device may not even end up being lower cost than from a 300 year old Dutch windmill. Abeling seems to have calculated 50% These things seriously GO, you know. Ever been in one? Made from wood and fabric.
I'm sure it's a novel thing to have, a gravity engine, but would it beat the windmills or the solar panel? All it does as far as I can oversee, is offer reason to amend to some basic physical laws which have been correctly devised in the past centuries. A ball rolling down a circular ramp will net zero velocity gained when reaching its starting height at the other side? If the ramp is shaped the same, and it's CF potential is allowed to smoothly flow away, sure.

Abeling's search for high-performance materials indicates that to harness the full potential of his invention (or, unknowing application of the missed formula), he is looking at an advanced machine. Advanced machines are economy as well. Our country has a name to uphold in inventing and producing them. We're a small insignificant coutry, and we love our underdog position. But we strive to be prood, and who know, Abeling may make us proud.
Footnote: if he's a 100% Fries, he's historically not Dutch though, but rather part of a surpressed people himself. They have their own rich culture and language, the latter of which still taught in higher education.

I don't understand any vector speak, but would be wondering if alternative weight paths could show more significant "excess" torque.
Is your position that a formular to trick gravity doesn't exist? Then I'm going to fetch a pen and paper and get started. That's Dutch culture, at least.

If a math programming specialist would be able to help me out, I'm up for the challenge. I've broken other other virgin codes before, and likely defeat doesn't scare me off. It would be logical to first wait until Dusty large-scale replication sees the light though. If it works, we'll want to know why, and why it isn't working even better.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on May 10, 2009, 04:43:40 PM
@All,

Notice also that the result which wm2d yields when comparing the position of the mass center vs. the axle is only conservative. In reality, the effective weight on the left-hand side is even less than that on the right-hand side which makes the discrepancy in question, the cause of the perpetuum mobile effect, even greater.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on May 10, 2009, 04:51:48 PM
@Cloxxki,

Since you're into programming, if I understood you correctly, and are willing to help, could you write a script in AutoCAD to calculate automatically the torques @eisenficker2000 is talking about for various positions of the wheel?
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: i_ron on May 10, 2009, 05:06:03 PM
@All,

Notice also that the result which wm2d yields when comparing the position of the mass center vs. the axle is only conservative. In reality, the effective weight on the left-hand side is even less than that on the right-hand side which makes the discrepancy in question, the cause of the perpetuum mobile effect, even greater.

Tis only an illusion. Note that unlike this version below, that doesn't work, the patent shows more weights on the left than on the right...

Ron
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: eisenficker2000 on May 10, 2009, 05:15:50 PM
Enclosed the Autocad drawing (as zipped dxf) and its constructed vectors to calculate the torques.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: ruggero on May 10, 2009, 06:22:41 PM
HELLO - Anyone out there?????

I just hate to be neglegted in here ... it's not polite...it's like government do, remember ?...

Soooo – I'll try to post my suggestion again.

Hopefully someone do something about it. Please answer my call.

Quote from: Cloxxki
A moving lower ramp has been suggested before, to harness CF from the weight at 6:00.
You mean me...?

ruggero
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: petersone on May 10, 2009, 06:46:59 PM
Hi Ruggcero
I'll talk to you!!
I can't see from pics.what you are doing,but I can't see that the ball is going to be gaining height.
peter
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: AEVector on May 10, 2009, 07:07:59 PM
Hello,

I created a Working Model simulation of Dusty's version of this gravity wheel (see attached). In the simulation, I added a yellow ball that falls on a platform attached to the circumference of the wheel, making it spin.

This could be helpful for Dusty to try any combination of ramp/track shape to see which works.

To change the shape of the ramps in Working Model 2d, just click on the shape. Then press CTRL-Y. Grab the edge tabs and reshape.

There are two wm2d files. One has the working weights on the wheel. The other doesn't to see the free-wheeling without the weights.

Good luck.

AEVector
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: ruggero on May 10, 2009, 07:35:12 PM
Hi Ruggcero
I'll talk to you!!
I can't see from pics.what you are doing,but I can't see that the ball is going to be gaining height.
peter

Thank you, Petersone...I was beginning to feel kind of out of space...

You drop a (ball) weight on the 'egg' curve (ramp) and see what happens.
Figure stepping on a RAVE, and it will tip into your face..;)

It's a part of a mechanisme that could sling-shoot the weight (ball) at 11:00 over the top.
To do the experiment one does not need to build a wheel – just the 'egg' curve and a (ball) weight.

And perhaps the weight would exit the 'egg' curve right after 06:00 and enter the fixed oval guide.

ruggero 
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on May 10, 2009, 07:39:52 PM
Tis only an illusion. Note that unlike this version below, that doesn't work, the patent shows more weights on the left than on the right...

Ron

What i'm saying isn't an illusion but a result of calculated positions of the mass center using wm2d. They are calculated and placed correctly by wm2d unlike other things that program does. As seen, Abeling's wheel, as any such wheel, has the unique property of persistently maintaining the mass center sideways to the right of the axle. This is the right criterion proving it's a perpetuum mobile, not counting the balls on the left and on the right, neither observing the paths they travel. Perpetuum mobile is proven by the analysis applied by @eisenficker2000 but is much more cumbersome in view of lack of suitable software to do the calculations conveniently (as wm2d does regarding the position of center of mass).
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on May 10, 2009, 07:41:32 PM
Enclosed the Autocad drawing (as zipped dxf) and its constructed vectors to calculate the torques.

Thanks for the file. Have you any idea how these calculations can be automated?
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: rlortie on May 10, 2009, 08:12:27 PM
Omni,

You have been debating the issues of WM2D for quite some time now. By arguing with Ron your up against a brick wall and wasting a productive builders valued time.

You could have built four of them by now and objectively proved that it will not work!

AEVector's depiction makes it so simple to see that it is fruitless is so obvious I do not understand why this cannot be seen.  You are attempting to lift five weight with the leverage of three, calculate the combined leverage ratio and you will find that you are always attempting to lift more than falling and the leverage will never be  there.

The longer the leverage the less mass you have to lift with and more to lift.

Take away the ramps which in this case are nothing more than a drag and you have Bessler's first MT drawings which has been proven time and time again will not work.

Ralph
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on May 10, 2009, 08:30:29 PM
Omni,

You have been debating the issues of WM2D for quite some time now. By arguing with Ron your up against a brick wall and wasting a productive builders valued time.

You could have built four of them by now and objectively proved that it will not work!

AEVector's depiction makes it so simple to see that it is fruitless is so obvious I do not understand why this cannot be seen.  You are attempting to lift five weight with the leverage of three, calculate the combined leverage ratio and you will find that you are always attempting to lift more than falling and the leverage will never be  there.

The longer the leverage the less mass you have to lift with and more to lift.

Take away the ramps which in this case are nothing more than a drag and you have Bessler's first MT drawings which has been proven time and time again will not work.

Ralph

Like I said, this is not the correct way to prove whether or not the discussed wheel is a perpetuum mobile. The correct scientifically rigorous way is to observe how the center of mass and the axis of rotation relate to each other. It is proved beyond doubt that the wheel in question maintains persistently the sideways position of the mass center with respect to the axis of rotation. This is a categorical proof that the wheel  in question is a perpetuum mobile (that is, that it does work). As I mentioned, this is the easy and convenient and yet rigorous way to prove it's a perpetuum mobile. Another, lengthier way, is to apply the method @eisenficker2000 has applied. The latter, if correctly done, will prove the same thing as the method based on mass center-axle coincidence, namely, that we're dealing with a perpetuum mobile. The important thing here is that even if we are unable to manufacture such a wheel (due to the lack of engineering and mechanical skills) the reality of perpetuum mobile has been proven beyond doubt and that's the important conclusion from the discussion in this thread.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: rlortie on May 10, 2009, 08:44:07 PM
Omni,

you wrote;
Quote
(due to the lack of engineering and mechanical skills)

That has got to be the most lame duck excuse I have ever heard.  I presume you are referring to yourself as I am sure Dusty, Ron and I consider it an insult.

Just what is it that we lack in skills to build this thing? Speaking for myself, Although I have the skills and resources I will not attempt to build it as I know it will not work. I believe that Dusty will objectively prove this. Of course you can always come back and  say 'He did not try this or that"...

I am out of here!

Ralph
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on May 10, 2009, 08:56:17 PM
Omni,

you wrote;
That has got to be the most lame duck excuse I have ever heard.  I presume you are referring to yourself as I am sure Dusty, Ron and I consider it an insult.

Just what is it that we lack in skills to build this thing? Speaking for myself, Although I have the skills and resources I will not attempt to build it as I know it will not work. I believe that Dusty will objectively prove this. Of course you can always come back and  say 'He did not try this or that"...

I am out of here!

Ralph

Don't try to tell me that if you can't make a working device then it proves there can never be a working device because you're so skilled that if it were possible to make such then you would've certainly made it. The opposite is true. It is proved beyond doubt that such device is real and if the device you've made doesn't work blame it on yourself, your skills and infrastructure you use, never mind how great you personally think they are.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: mondrasek on May 10, 2009, 09:51:24 PM
How does one "prove" a Unicorn does not exist?
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on May 10, 2009, 10:06:10 PM
How does one "prove" a Unicorn does not exist?

By proving it defies the laws of biology let alone physics and chemistry unless someone shows you a real Unicorn in flesh and blood. Then you have to rewrite these laws.

However, when the laws of mechanics are obeyed and yet something once thought impossible is proven otherwise by strictly keeping with these laws, then invoking Unicorns is irrelevant.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: X00013 on May 10, 2009, 10:18:54 PM
Sorry, I cant help myself, I just have to post somthing with a unicorn in it  ;D http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9YIAUUNBzeE
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on May 10, 2009, 10:22:59 PM
@All,

What needs to be done now is to develop a tool for finding an optimal construction that would maximize the effect.

One way is to first write in the form of script for AutoCAD what @eisenficker2000 has drawn (I don't see otherwise how the needed lengths of the sections and other data can be determined to be used for calculations). This script will serve further to add more script which would calculate  the eight torques and sum them up. This has to be done for an entire 180o turn of the wheel, possibly at 1o increment. Is there anybody around here who has experience in writing scripts for AutoCAD? 

One can do these things by hand but not only it's incomparably more labor intensive but also seems kind of ridiculous to do it that way while surrounded by so much computing power.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: mondrasek on May 10, 2009, 10:24:53 PM
Sorry, I cant help myself, I just have to post somthing with a unicorn in it  ;D http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9YIAUUNBzeE

Excellent!  Thanks for that!
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: spinner on May 10, 2009, 10:54:27 PM
@All,

What needs to be done now is to develop a tool for finding an optimal construction that would maximize the effect.
...
Jeeez... What needs to be done now is that you stop your delusional posts avalanche, particularly because it seems that you are The One of a few who don't get it no matter what....

What effect??? What Perpetual motion??? What has been proven "beyond a doubt" (this is one of your eternal claims)...
Yes, I'm now beyond any doubt that you are "very fresh" in the area of "unbalanced wheels"...

Never mind the force parallelograms,.. or static analysis, or dynamics of unbalanced wheels...

Abeling's wheel (as described in his patent) is a NON-WORKING device. As simple as that...
If built, It would stuck soon after being released... Under ideal conditions, it would behave like a pendulum. (I think people were trying to tell you that many times...)

So, where's the usefull work this device can provide?...
 Now, will you try to build something, like a proof of a concept (just for yourself)? At least this time? So you could (maybe?) understand at least a bit of what you are preaching here tiresly??
 >:(
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on May 10, 2009, 11:27:36 PM
@spinner,

You're expressing unsubstantiated opinions ("force parallelograms,.. or static analysis, or dynamics of unbalanced wheels..." is just blabber to sound scientific) while I'm providing rigorous scientific proof. As can be seen, I wasn't initially convinced but lately came to realize the proof is simpler than I realized. This was a process on my side. Abeling's is a working device in principle. How it can be turned into a practically working model still remains to be seen. That's why we need tools to guide us through this and your posting hardly contributes anything towards that goal.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on May 10, 2009, 11:30:37 PM
To prove theoretically that this is a perpetuum mobile is much more important that trying to build it. Because most building efforts most certainly will turn out negative which may lead many to conclude it's just not possible which isn't the case.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on May 10, 2009, 11:48:54 PM
@All,

Writing your own program is the best way to go in this analysis because in this way you have the control over what's being calculated. We're quite lucky, I should say, because in what needs to be programmed there's no need for numerical solving of differential equations, getting into instabilities and such. What we need is something plain and simple -- determining the lengths of lines and their product, summing up such products and the most involved, finding the tangent to a curve. All this is a trivial matter for someone who's doing programming on a regular basis. I'll do it eventually but it will take me some time to find out the details about script programming in AutoCAD (programming is not what I do), so I thought someone who knows how to do that might wanna jump right in and shorten the process.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: spinner on May 10, 2009, 11:57:42 PM
@spinner,
You're expressing unsubstantiated opinions ("force parallelograms,.. or static analysis, or dynamics of unbalanced wheels..." is just blabber to sound scientific)...
Yeah, sure. I only dream about me sounding "scientific" (on a forum like this?).... ;D
 :-*

Quote
...while I'm providing rigorous scientific proof.
Rigorous scientific proof? Where???

Quote
As can be seen, I wasn't initially convinced but lately came to realize the proof is simpler than I realized. This was a process on my side. Abeling's is a working device in principle.
Abeling's wheel is a working device in principle? Could be, depends what kind of principle do you have in mind.
For me, the theoretical(dreamed) maximum for the SJ's "device" is a "perpetual motion of the third kind" - which I am most certainly not interested in. Hey, you can have it just for yourself!
A single unit will (allegedly) provide power to 17000 homes... Made of glass, of course.

Quote
How it can be turned into a practically working model still remains to be seen. That's why we need tools to guide us through this and your posting hardly contributes anything towards that goal.
Tools are fine. If one knows how to use them. You can, for instance, use (or abuse) your physics simulation programs and methods as much as you wish. Good luck! 


Yes, I know my posts are not very welcomed here, so I am trying to keep them at minimum...
But, from time to time, I just cannot resist... Sorry.

Surely you don't really think that skeptics are the main obstacle towards reaching the "OverUnity"?

Cheers!
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: X00013 on May 11, 2009, 12:02:52 AM
@spinner, chaos theory software cannot be found, do you care to write such a program?
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on May 11, 2009, 12:13:11 AM
@spinner,

There are already numerous posts with the mentioned rigorous proof. No need to repeat it once again.

As for resisting from time to time, you'll need to restrain from posting when you don't contribute anything. Unless you just enjoy posting because you like to see your own text posted in a forum. That may be slightly annoying for some, you know. That hooks up with the abuse problem. Not only can you abuse your simulation program but you can abuse a discussion by constantly nagging about something you can't quite figure out yourself.

Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: hansvonlieven on May 11, 2009, 12:15:54 AM
@spinner,

You're expressing unsubstantiated opinions ("force parallelograms,.. or static analysis, or dynamics of unbalanced wheels..." is just blabber to sound scientific) while I'm providing rigorous scientific proof. As can be seen, I wasn't initially convinced but lately came to realize the proof is simpler than I realized. This was a process on my side. Abeling's is a working device in principle. How it can be turned into a practically working model still remains to be seen. That's why we need tools to guide us through this and your posting hardly contributes anything towards that goal.

This is vintage Omnibus!

He did the same thing with the SMOT where he provided incontrovertible proof (beyond a shadow of a doubt, so he said) that the SMOT is an overunity device. Anyone who disagreed with him got flamed - and how! It got so bad in the end that Stefan had to step in to calm the waves.

To give him credit, he is much more restrained in his choice of words these days.

Nevertheless the approach is still the same. All he has done is to turn his attention from the SMOT to this Abeling bullshit.

Anyone with a grasp of simple mechanics can see that Abeling is talking crap. No mathematical manipulation is going to change this.

Hans von Lieven
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: X00013 on May 11, 2009, 12:29:18 AM
@Hans, ur killing dusty's build, the thing looks kick ass, no?
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: X00013 on May 11, 2009, 12:32:15 AM
The abeling bullshit is no b shit as far as i am concerned, but it all happens past midnite.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: spinner on May 11, 2009, 12:32:34 AM
@spinner,

There are already numerous posts with the mentioned rigorous proof. No need to repeat it once again.
What if I ask you nicely? Will you repeat that already mentioned rigorous proof once again,
please?

Quote
As for resisting from time to time, you'll need to restrain from posting when you don't contribute anything. Unless you just enjoy posting because you like to see your own text posted in a forum. That may be slightly annoying for some, you know. That hooks up with the abuse problem. Not only can you abuse your simulation program but you can abuse a discussion by constantly nagging about something you can't quite figure out yourself.
Lol, I made +350 posts in 4 years, while you've made allmost the same amount just in this thread. I'm sure your contribution will be remembered, OmniBot.
If this contribution of yours doesn't pan out, you can always return to your previous fixed ideas.

Talking about abuse, eh?
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: hansvonlieven on May 11, 2009, 12:39:40 AM
@Hans, ur killing dusty's build, the thing looks kick ass, no?

Beautiful build, no doubt, Pity it has no chance of working.

Hans von Lieven
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: hansvonlieven on May 11, 2009, 12:48:32 AM
This is a replication of the Andy motor, which is the same kind of idea. If ever there was a beautifully built motor it is this one built by Ken Hegemann.

Of course, it does not work either.

Hans von Lieven
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on May 11, 2009, 01:02:06 AM
SMOT is overunity beyond a shadow of a doubt -- proven as rigorously as science requires. SMOT produces excess energy discontinuously. No need to discuss it here. It's a done deal. Until recently I didn't have a proof for continuous production of excess energy. This last week, however, things changed and now I have the rigorous proof for that too. The discussion with @mondrasek helped me a great deal in that and also the latest analysis by @eisenficker2000 which showed me that I've even been conservative in my conclusion. What I'm aiming at now is, like I said, to create a tool for optimization of the construction with the aim to maximize the effect. Proving that Abeling's wheel is a perpetuum mobile may live without such tool but it would be nice to have it to reach a certain closure on this project, the way SMOT project is now closed with a definitive conclusion.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on May 11, 2009, 01:06:02 AM
Quote
Talking about abuse, eh?

Abusing the forum is when you don't have anything to contribute, even if you post occasionally, as you do. I'm contributing and therefore the number of posts I'm submitting can't be a measure for abuse.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on May 11, 2009, 01:10:59 AM
This is a replication of the Andy motor, which is the same kind of idea. If ever there was a beautifully built motor it is this one built by Ken Hegemann.

Of course, it does not work either.

Hans von Lieven

The fact that it doesn't work only proves that he hasn't been able to produce a working model. Nothing more than that. If I ask you to play Paganini like Kulenkampf and you disappoint everybody it won't mean Paganini is unplayable.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: spinner on May 11, 2009, 01:17:00 AM
SMOT is overunity beyond a shadow of a doubt -- proven as rigorously as science requires. SMOT produces excess energy discontinuously. No need to discuss it here. It's a done deal. Until recently I didn't have a proof for continuous production of excess energy. This last week, however, things changed and now I have the rigorous proof for that too. The discussion with @mondrasek helped me a great deal in that and also the latest analysis by @eisenficker2000 which showed me that I've even been conservative in my conclusion. What I'm aiming at now is, like I said, to create a tool for optimization of the construction with the aim to maximize the effect. Proving that Abeling's wheel is a perpetuum mobile may live without such tool but it would be nice to have it to reach a certain closure on this project, the way SMOT project is now closed with a definitive conclusion.
Oh, dear...

You're a Perpetual motion addict. "PMA"?
Are there any "PMA" groups which could help here?

"SMOT is overunity beyond a shadow of a doubt"
Ouch.
After tens of thousands of posts from people who tried to explain it to you...

Fascinating. Phenomenal.
We're saved.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: hansvonlieven on May 11, 2009, 01:21:32 AM
See what I mean Spinner?

Hans
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on May 11, 2009, 01:22:32 AM
Oh, dear...

You're a Perpetual motion addict. "PMA"?
Are there any "PMA" groups which could help here?

"SMOT is overunity beyond a shadow of a doubt"
Ouch.
After tens of thousands of posts from people who tried to explain it to you...

Fascinating. Phenomenal.
We're saved.

You may restrain from posting such gibberish.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on May 11, 2009, 01:23:56 AM
See what I mean Spinner?

Hans

Oh, good that there's @spinner to have a shoulder to cry on, having nothing else to say.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on May 11, 2009, 01:26:20 AM
Some folks are just fans of useless banter. That’s OK as long as it doesn’t clutter the thread too much. We have work to do here.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: spinner on May 11, 2009, 01:28:01 AM
@Hans
You bet... ;)
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Tink on May 11, 2009, 02:29:13 AM
Hans and Spinner, for God's sake, don't be so negative.
Give this Abeling patent at least the advantage of the doubt.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: hansvonlieven on May 11, 2009, 02:37:39 AM
Hans and Spinner, for God's sake, don't be so negative.
Give this Abeling patent at least the advantage of the doubt.

Why?  ???

Hans von Lieven
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on May 11, 2009, 02:52:47 AM
Why?  ???

Hans von Lieven

Because it's proven theoretically that it really is a perpetuum mobile. That's why.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on May 11, 2009, 02:56:51 AM
Hans and Spinner, for God's sake, don't be so negative.
Give this Abeling patent at least the advantage of the doubt.

No, that's not enough. The principle of Abeling's wheel has been proven to be a perpetuum mobile so there's even more substantial reason to not to be negative.

Besides, who cares what people whose arguments consist of just expressing opinions and hearsay. I haven't heard one scientifically worthy argument form any of them.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Tink on May 11, 2009, 03:00:40 AM
Why?  ???

Hans von Lieven

Well, why not?
You don't know for sure if it will work or not.
You think you know it won't work at all but it is just your opinion, no hard science.
Have you build this machine?
No you did not, and so you can't be so sure as you want to let us believe.
That is okay, was it not that you put people off to building this machine (talking about Dusty here).
I beg you both to be less negative, and if you can't to please don't post as often as you have done.

Edit couldn't post because of session expired, bit late then.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: hansvonlieven on May 11, 2009, 03:41:16 AM
It's a bit more than that Tink,
 
 I have studied the patent and it is my opinion that the design is nonsense based on having worked as a fully qualified mechanical engineer (Physics major) for over 40 years on a large variety of projects. I do not need to build this machine to know that it does not work.
 
 Hans von Lieven
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on May 11, 2009, 03:52:14 AM
It's a bit more than that Tink,
 
 I have studied the patent and it is my opinion that the design is nonsense based on having worked as a fully qualified mechanical engineer (Physics major) for over 40 years on a large variety of projects. I do not need to build this machine to know that it does not work.
 
 Hans von Lieven

This is a ridiculous argumentation.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Tink on May 11, 2009, 03:57:58 AM
This is a ridiculous argumentation.

Amen.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on May 11, 2009, 04:51:56 AM
@eisenficker2000,

Would it be possible to draw the wheel in other positions, possibly all positions at small angle increments which would then serve to represent one full rotation?
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: eisenficker2000 on May 11, 2009, 10:34:53 AM
@Omnibus That is no problem, the moment I have the spare time. I am no AutoCAD drawing artist by profession. Making a program in C, or for the older AutoCAD users (like me)  in AutoLISP, is not hard. It just takes up a lot of debugging and time.

I have put eight (half) weights in my tiny scrappy wheel. I had no time to make another 8.
The tendencies of the wheel are then a bit amazing:It is very eager to go counter clockwise because of the tilted ellipsoid ramp. The moment one weight falls out. The wheel moves itself accelerating counterclockwise till all weights have come in the lower quadrant..the equilibrium state of an overbalanced wheel.

As expected the resulting cw forces are too little to overcome all the friction. Helping the wheel and feeling the resistance, shows more tendency to turn counterclockwise then clockwise. The ramp just leaves 3 weights to counteract 5 weights that still have considerable arms.
I have drawn an alternative wheel with alternative geometry, more like Ableings first presentations, but after calculating that design gained, despite its big changes, just 5% of torque.

After my findings I do agree with Hans von Lieven, the patent is one of the many bedtime stories without any reality involved.

Having my roots in the North of the Netherlands, working as an commissioning engineer in the power industry, I do believe Mr. Abeling, here sometimes mistaken for a Frisian but being a Groninger, like German Ostfriesland,  is living his environmental dream.

Even if his consortium could build (a) big enough wheel(s) to give some mentionable power. The cost of  the site would be more then any windmill or solar electric site.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: hansvonlieven on May 11, 2009, 11:34:31 AM
The Abeling device is, when all is said and done, a very simple machine by engineering standards. To suggest that people with the proper training in engineering cannot accurately predict how a device of that nature behaves is ludicrous.

Many of us have designed and built far more complex structures that are still running after 20 years or more. Have a look at the technology out there and then tell me engineers don't know what they are talking about and that all physicists are wrong when it comes to simple mechanics.

Simply an idiotic idea.

Hans von Lieven
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Alexioco on May 11, 2009, 11:44:31 AM
Yes but I thought Abeling hasnt revealed the full mechanism yet? He talks about weights acting in pairs or something, I'm beginning to become skeptical of him...

Alex
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: hansvonlieven on May 11, 2009, 11:53:05 AM
Yes I know, there is always that black box factor that makes it all work. The hallmark of every scam merchant! Perhaps he has found a way to manufacture Cavorite.  ;D

Hans von Lieven
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Cloxxki on May 11, 2009, 11:59:23 AM
@Cloxxki,

Since you're into programming, if I understood you correctly, and are willing to help, could you write a script in AutoCAD to calculate automatically the torques @eisenficker2000 is talking about for various positions of the wheel?
I'm sorry, I'm utterly uneducated. when I brag about cracking codes, it's regarding mechanical solutions to equasions that have not been made to work, or getting those that work much better.
I lack any kind of technical vocabulary, but working with those who know established formulae behind what I'm visualizing/hunching, I would gladly spend my time at exploring possibilities.
If Abeling's idea works, there will be an optimal geometry, and we can calculate it. If it works, I expect the optimum expect the optimum to be quite different from the ideal torgue egg. Note Abeling's most vertical climbing path. I think it's there for other reasons than we can quantify at this stage.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Cloxxki on May 11, 2009, 12:50:15 PM
I'll say it more firmly this time:

Looking at torque alone is a waste of energy (pun intended), when weights don't follow a constant speed, neither radially nor excentrically. On top of this, weights are not even PART of the (un)balanced wheel for a moment around 6-8:00!

I'll offer an extreme case. I like extreme cases to visualize/emphasize effects at work.

The 12-6 wheel has weight to the rim. Boucy balls. Rim speed equal to the speed a ball would reach when free falling from 12:00 to 6:00.
At 6:00, the balls hit a firm barrier. Forward speed is 98% converted in vertical speed, while the ball is off the wheel. The ball enters the wheel at 11:55 height, in total standstill. Now the wheel need to transfer again 95% back into the ball, starting out fully horizontally.
Other option: ball bounces, but is grabbed in a low-friction baseball glove at 9:00 height, near the axle. Ball has HEAPS of vertical inertia left, more than half. Most (due to lower spoke speed near the rim) is transferred to the wheel. Second time in one revolution that the ball is driving the wheel.
Now the wheel needs to:
1-Lift the ball near the axle from 9:00 to 12:00
2-Initiate horizontal speed (CF may do a part of that "for free"), up till the point where after 12:00 the ball matches the rim's speed.
Would 1) and 2) equal the work done 12:00-6:00 and AT 9:00?
Dusty's machine doesn't send balls flying, it has weight going from push to pull more than one per rotation.

I'll again emphasize my understanding that wider wheel slots are required to prevent the ball at 5-8:00 be hindered in its verticall acceleration out side the wheel. It needs to gain height first, and then smoothly be picked up by the slots (spokes) when their respective vertical speeds at a given height match.
Dusty's wheel is not self-starting: it requires one weight to be at 1:00 to from there build up momentum for the the work on the counter-acting ball. I don't rule out that an additional push is required to get the wheel to get out of balance : getting the lower weight to build up sufficient momentum to unload the wheel long and far enough to store energy for the jolt over 11:00-1:00.

The drawings offered by Abeling and this forum's knowledgeable members are showing many weights on the left. They do not show their respective effect on the wheel. The very bottom ones are not part of the wheel, and the next up is likely PUSHING the wheel. Torque that!
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Alexioco on May 11, 2009, 03:08:32 PM
Yes I know, there is always that black box factor that makes it all work. The hallmark of every scam merchant! Perhaps he has found a way to manufacture Cavorite.  ;D

Hans von Lieven

lol sounds funny, time will tell i suppose, wish he would hurry up and publish this new theory though, if he is a fraud, then i dnt see the point in it cause after awhile somone will find out its fake...

Alex
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: AquariuZ on May 11, 2009, 03:09:58 PM
Springs guys... There must be a spring mechanism in there somewhere for it to work...

Bessler wheel had at least one spring (reading Collins´ book)

Spring -> Store -> Eject -> Launch
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on May 11, 2009, 03:14:39 PM
@All,

Criteria such as persistent mass-axle discrepancy and persistent negative torque calculated for all positions of the wheel comprising a full circle are definitive scientific criteria for the reality of perpetuum mobile. These criteria categorically point to Abeling's device being such. To substitute them with blabber about skillful engineers is ludicrous. Anybody who talks like that and provides no precise argumentation in scientific terms should be ignored outright.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on May 11, 2009, 03:26:36 PM
@eisenficker,

Indeed, the program to calculate the net torque at every position of the wheel can be written in Lisp or one of its dialects. I have found one element of such program which returns the exact lengths of selected segments so, if you send me several of the dxf's similar to the first one you posted such that can be used to represent a full rotation, I can do the calculations. I'd do the dxf's myself but unfortunately, I'm so inexperienced with AutoCAD that I may mess up the drawings which have to be done with great accuracy in order to consider the results based on them reliable.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Cloxxki on May 11, 2009, 03:42:25 PM
I am not convinced a spring is required. Should it turn out to be, then apparently the trick is not in torque, but rather in harnessing CF?
The afore suggested spring in the ramp could have a delayed release, triggered twice a revolution, just when the weight which compressed the spring at 6-8:00 has reached 11:00.
But really, if such a spring would work, why not use it instantly, and do away with the wheel slots completely? All you'd need is small pockets on the rims, and a ramp system ensuring hooking and unhooking. The slightest CF gotten from a spring, if overunity by itself, would launch the weight significantly higher up (due to behaviour of a vertically launched object), where it would only be lacking rim speed. Once hitting the spoke or wheel there, it's almost at the top already.

Or would you suggest using the spring load (immediately or delayed) towards the wheel itself? It could give the working weight an extra impuls and/or push the lifted weight a bit higher up, depending on whether the lifting weight is in contact with a wheel slot at the time of impulse.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: mondrasek on May 11, 2009, 04:12:24 PM
The center of mass of the wheel and weights (guide ramps not included) in the sim I analyzed is directly below the axle.

I was wrong about this.  A few quick measurements of the locations of the weights at the equilibrium position found from the sim does show the CoG to the right of the axle, and not directly below it.  Another verification of WM2D!  But that is also as expected due to the guide ramps.  If one was to take a simple pendulum, and then push it to one side with a static ramp (similar to the guide ramps), it too would have a system CoG to the side of the pivot (axle) point.  It too would be in a state of equilibrium and would not move.  I believe that is the case with the equilibrium position of the Abeling wheel sim, no?  It is like Hans said that you must account for the energy to push the weights into those positions (not exact quote).

Thanks Hans!

@spinner, I sent you a PM a few weeks back when the site was changing.  Did you get it?  If not, no big deal.  If you do see it, please change "Turkey" to "Egypt".  I had my facts crossed.

M.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on May 11, 2009, 04:37:03 PM
@mondrasek,

Quoting Hans is of no use. This is like quoting someone blabbering irresponsible gibberish. You are different from Hans because the argumentation you give is quantitative. You’re not right regarding your final conclusions which are swayed by the existing state of affairs (which is understandable) but other than that discussion with you is sensible. So, be rational and don't thank someone who clutters the forum with rubbish just because that rubbish seems to coincide with what your tendency for conclusions is and helps you rub the nose of an opponent. These are only emotions. Stick to the impassionate scientific methodology.

Regarding this:

Quote
If one was to take a simple pendulum, and then push it to one side with a static ramp (similar to the guide ramps), it too would have a system CoG to the side of the pivot (axle) point.  It too would be in a state of equilibrium and would not move.  I believe that is the case with the equilibrium position of the Abeling wheel sim, no?

No, it isn’t. With a pendulum the center of mass will swing from right to left and back until it settles right at the bottom (see attached). In Abeling’s case the center of mass persistently stays to the right of the axle at all positions of the wheel. That is a definitive proof that the wheel is a perpetuum mobile. How this effect can be made to predominate over the friction is a very difficult engineering problem which has to be tackled either by maximizing the perpetuum mobile effect by finding ways to minimize friction (minimizing what is meant when you said “must account for the energy to push the weights into those positions”). So, the situation is as follows – perpetuum mobile is conclusively proven to be real and what remains is work out the engineering side of it.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on May 11, 2009, 05:11:58 PM
@mondrasek,

Wonder if you saw @eisenficker2000's analysis similar to yours. His is the correct one, however, and it makes my initial perpetuum mobile conclusion, based on the persistent mass-axle shift, conservative -- the perpetuum mobile effect is even greater than I initially thought.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: mondrasek on May 11, 2009, 05:14:36 PM
Quoting Hans is of no use. This is like quoting someone blabbering irresponsible gibberish. You are different from Hans because the argumentation you give is quantitative. You’re not right regarding your final conclusions which are swayed by the existing state of affairs (which is understandable) but other than that discussion with you is sensible. So, be rational and don't thank someone who clutters the forum with rubbish just because that rubbish seems to coincide with what your tendency for conclusions is and helps you rub the nose of an opponent. These are only emotions. Stick to the impassionate scientific methodology.

Ominbus, please get over yourself.  The post I made was a retraction of an erroneous statement.  In finding my error I was also presented with the situation of the CoG not being where I expected.  I found the answer as to why in the explanation by Hans.  And I thanked him for having posted that information.  Nothing more.

No, it isn’t. With a pendulum the center of mass will swing from right to left and back until it settles right at the bottom (see attached). In Abeling’s case the center of mass persistently stays to the right of the axle at all positions of the wheel. That is a definitive proof that the wheel is a perpetuum mobile. How this effect can be made to predominate over the friction is a very difficult engineering problem which has to be tackled either by maximizing the perpetuum mobile effect by finding ways to minimize friction (minimizing what is meant when you said “must account for the energy to push the weights into those positions”). So, the situation is as follows – perpetuum mobile is conclusively proven to be real and what remains is work out the engineering side of it.

I can't follow how your model is relevant.  By attaching the weights to the wheel and removing the guides, the wheel acts like a pendulum, yes.  But the only way to persistently achieve a CoG to the right of the axle at all degrees of rotation of the wheel is to have both the guides in place and the weights free in the slots.  And when this is done the wheel finds equilibrium in the form of zero torque and therefore zero rotation while maintaining the condition of CoG to the right of the axle.  That is exactly what I achieve with my pendulum analogy when I push it to one side with a guide.

If one were to take any system of symmetrically arrayed weights on a wheel, allow them some freedom for displacement (mount them on the ends of springs for example) and then lean it against something on one side so that the balls on that side are pushed towards the axle, you get the same thing.  A wheel with a CoG persistently to one side of the wheel.  At all angles of rotation.  This is not definitive proof that a wheel is a perpetuum mobile.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Cloxxki on May 11, 2009, 05:20:00 PM
Should in such centre of gravity/mass analysis the amount of average weight resting on the ramp be excluded? That portion is not affecting the wheel's balance in that position.
But when they are again interacting with the wheel, they may either be taking extra energy from it, or adding more to it, dependant on slot/weight interface timing.

If Dusty's small radius slots and lower ramp geometry work out well, I have good faith that the thing will keep spinning. However, going to 8 weights, I wonder whether this will mean that it will start up easier, or rather harder.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: mondrasek on May 11, 2009, 05:24:32 PM
Wonder if you saw @eisenficker2000's analysis similar to yours. His is the correct one, however, and it makes my initial perpetuum mobile conclusion, based on the persistent mass-axle shift, conservative -- the perpetuum mobile effect is even greater than I initially thought.

Okay Omnibus.  I took a look.  Eisenficker2000 appears to have calculated correctly.  Unfortunately he drew his weights with one at 3 o'clock.  This is not the equilibrium position of the wheel like I analyzed.  So his wheel is out of balance, just like a pendulum pushed to one side.  So of course he found a torque.  If he rotates his weights in the direction of his calculated torque and does his vectors again he will find he has less torque.  Eventually he could find the equilibrium position using this method.  I used WM2D for that.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: mondrasek on May 11, 2009, 05:32:01 PM
Should in such centre of gravity/mass analysis the amount of average weight resting on the ramp be excluded? That portion is not affecting the wheel's balance in that position.
But when they are again interacting with the wheel, they may either be taking extra energy from it, or adding more to it, dependant on slot/weight interface timing.

That is exactly why we are using vectors.  We are calculating the force due to the weight on both the guides as well as the wheel slots.  Only the force on the wheel slots actually turns the wheel.  So you are correct and we are excluding the force of the weight on the ramps.

An interesting thing to note is that the force on the wheel is actually greater than the weight of the weights at some times on the left of the wheel where the "cherry pit" type squeezing is going on.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: eisenficker2000 on May 11, 2009, 05:39:27 PM
@Omnibus  9 X Dxf(zipped) 5 degree steps, as requested
Title: Making DXF files
Post by: 0c on May 11, 2009, 05:42:38 PM
FYI:

For any of you who want to help themselves but can't afford sophisticated CAD software, I have discovered that eMachineShop (free software) can export DXF files which work in WM2D.

http://www.emachineshop.com/

Don't have any answers yet. Still working on it.

Have fun!
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: rlortie on May 11, 2009, 05:44:59 PM
I am not following this thread anymore, but the following quote was sent to me by private mail. This I must respond to.

Quote
I have put eight (half) weights in my tiny scrappy wheel. I had no time to make another 8.
The tendencies of the wheel are then a bit amazing:It is very eager to go counter clockwise because of the tilted ellipsoid ramp. The moment one weight falls out. The wheel moves itself accelerating counterclockwise till all weights have come in the lower quadrant..the equilibrium state of an overbalanced wheel.

The equilibrium state of a balanced wheel is when all weights are static at it lowest point. A pendulum is said to be balanced when statically hanging at six o'clock, at any other point it is consider OB.  A wheel is no different than a pendulum in this example.

You obviously have learned that Abeling's wheel even when started in an OB status becomes balanced by finding equilibrium. I find nothing amazing about this as it is the normal thing to happen. Also it is not due to the ellipsoid ramp, it is due to the fact that the majority of the mass is located on that side of the wheel.

If you wish for me to acknowledge a response you will have to e-mail me.

Ralph 
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on May 11, 2009, 05:51:26 PM
@mondrasek,

Quote
That is exactly what I achieve with my pendulum analogy when I push it to one side with a guide.

You’re using wm2d for this purpose, right? Don’t. The equilibrium you’re seeing is a flaw of the program. Wm2d in our case can only be used to promptly determine the center of mass, nothing else.

Quote
If one were to take any system of symmetrically arrayed weights on a wheel, allow them some freedom for displacement (mount them on the ends of springs for example) and then lean it against something on one side so that the balls on that side are pushed towards the axle, you get the same thing.  A wheel with a CoG persistently to one side of the wheel.  At all angles of rotation.  This is not definitive proof that a wheel is a perpetuum mobile.

On the contrary, if the center of mass is persistently sideways to the axle, the system is a perpetuum mobile.  Many such systems can be thought of. You’re pointing to one such system.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on May 11, 2009, 05:53:58 PM
I am not following this thread anymore, but the following quote was sent to me by private mail. This I must respond to.

The equilibrium state of a balanced wheel is when all weights are static at it lowest point. A pendulum is said to be balanced when statically hanging at six o'clock, at any other point it is consider OB.  A wheel is no different than a pendulum in this example.

You obviously have learned that Abeling's wheel even when started in an OB status becomes balanced by finding equilibrium. I find nothing amazing about this as it is the normal thing to happen. Also it is not due to the ellipsoid ramp, it is due to the fact that the majority of the mass is located on that side of the wheel.

If you wish for me to acknowledge a response you will have to e-mail me.

Ralph

Useless post because it ignores obvious facts.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: mondrasek on May 11, 2009, 05:56:58 PM
You’re using wm2d for this purpose, right? Don’t. The equilibrium you’re seeing is a flaw of the program. Wm2d in our case can only be used to promptly determine the center of mass, nothing else.

The equilibrium I am seeing in WM2D is what I also confirmed with my vector analysis.  Good old Statics 101.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on May 11, 2009, 06:17:02 PM
The equilibrium I am seeing in WM2D is what I also confirmed with my vector analysis.  Good old Statics 101.

Good old Statics101 is right. That's the way to go. Like I said, however, you have to correct your calculations and have them the way @eisenficker2000's are. Mind, you, the results from these calculations must be the same as that from the mass-center observations. Otherwise good old Statics 101 goes out the window.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on May 11, 2009, 06:21:06 PM
Thanks for the files, @eisenficker2000. Will have to see how I can handle them now -- like I said, due to lack of experience with AutoCAD placing the vectors on their proper place is a challenge for me but I have to do it so I have to figure out what the most efficient way to that is.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: i_ron on May 11, 2009, 09:40:16 PM

deleted, RP
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: hansvonlieven on May 11, 2009, 11:06:50 PM
@All,

Criteria such as persistent mass-axle discrepancy and persistent negative torque calculated for all positions of the wheel comprising a full circle are definitive scientific criteria for the reality of perpetuum mobile. These criteria categorically point to Abeling's device being such. To substitute them with blabber about skillful engineers is ludicrous. Anybody who talks like that and provides no precise argumentation in scientific terms should be ignored outright.

A bit funny that you are the only one that sees this.

Hans von Lieven
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on May 11, 2009, 11:14:51 PM
@eisenficker2000 and @mondrasek,

These are the results from the wheel shifted at 20 degrees CW compared to first @eisenficker2000’s wheel (unlike @eisenficker I’m counting the spheres CW starting from the top one; notation -- same as @eisenficker2000’s):

1. 0.070m    -0.094N    -0.0066Nm
2. 0.070m    -0.250N    -0.0175Nm
3. 0.070m    -0.253N    -0.0177Nm
4. 0.067m    -0.084N    -0.0057Nm
5. 0.044m   +0.162N    +0.0071Nm
6. 0.032m   +0.247N    +0.0079Nm
7. 0.034m   +0.253N    +0.0086Nm
8. 0.054m   +0.203N    +0.0110Nm

Net Torque = -0.0129Nm

Recall that @eisenficker2000 obtained for the net torque the value -0.0088522Nm. It is seen, that the calculated torque stays practically the same (it’s even higher this time but I’m not rubbing it because @mondrasek expected it to be lower). As expected, the above result is very well in concert with the mass-axle observation of this kind of wheel.

P.S. Please see attached also the jpg of the drawing with the arms and the normal vectors drawn in Cyan.
Title: Re: Making DXF files
Post by: hansvonlieven on May 12, 2009, 12:20:52 AM
FYI:

For any of you who want to help themselves but can't afford sophisticated CAD software, I have discovered that eMachineShop (free software) can export DXF files which work in WM2D.

http://www.emachineshop.com/ (http://www.emachineshop.com/)

Don't have any answers yet. Still working on it.

Have fun!

Thanks Oc,

I have just downloaded it and after a quick test my impression is that it is a very basic intuitive CAD programme that is easy to learn and will do good work. Thanks for finding it. For many here this is all the CAD they will ever need.

The fact that it is free just puts the icing on the cake.

Hans von Lieven
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: i_ron on May 12, 2009, 12:35:55 AM
@eisenficker2000 and @mondrasek,

These are the results from the wheel shifted at 20 degrees CW compared to first @eisenficker2000’s wheel (unlike @eisenficker I’m counting the spheres CW starting from the top one; notation -- same as @eisenficker2000’s):

1. 0.070m    -0.094N    -0.0066Nm
2. 0.070m    -0.250N    -0.0175Nm
3. 0.070m    -0.253N    -0.0177Nm
4. 0.067m    -0.084N    -0.0057Nm
5. 0.044m   +0.162N    +0.0071Nm
6. 0.032m   +0.247N    +0.0079Nm
7. 0.034m   +0.253N    +0.0086Nm
8. 0.054m   +0.203N    +0.0110Nm

Net Torque = -0.0129Nm
snip

It’s called fun with numbers. You have two weights sitting on ramps yet making the claim that they are contributing. What you show is two weights supporting four weights. Also, not that it makes much difference, but the handle of the hockey stick is pointing to the wrong side of the axle as compared to figure eight.

 But the most obvious short coming is this is a dynamic system… if it is to work. In other words it is the falling weight that is the driver. The greater the fall distance the greater the weight gain (in layman’s terms) so a small wheel will never work. There is an optimum size, big. Further there is an ideal RPM window. The peripheral speed needs to be such that the weight drops at near free fall speed to maximize the weight gain. Then when it is on the ramp it transfers this excess energy to the wheel as it climbs.

Nowhere in any of the sims or in this latest attempt are these actual conditions addressed.

Ron
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on May 12, 2009, 12:45:06 AM
@i_ron,

Except for the need to optimize the system everything else you say is defeated by the facts. In terms of optimization, I think you're right that the wheel should be larger and the form of the slots and guides should also be improved. The important thing so far, however, is that perpetuum mobile has been rigorously proved real and that, among other things, gives enough incentive to continue the research.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: hansvonlieven on May 12, 2009, 12:47:48 AM
G'day Ron,

You cannot ever reach free fall speed if the weight is attached to a wheel because of the forced trajectory and the longer path. The terminal velocity, assuming only gravity as propulsive force, is actually quite low.

Hans von Lieven
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: ruggero on May 12, 2009, 01:01:28 AM
G'day Ron,

You cannot ever reach free fall speed if the weight is attached to a wheel because of the forced trajectory and the longer path. The terminal velocity, assuming only gravity as propulsive force, is actually quite low.

Hans von Lieven

The Bessler wheel (one-directional) worked at approx 50 RPM.

How close is that speed to free fall?....Anyone got the calc?

ruggero
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: hansvonlieven on May 12, 2009, 01:11:32 AM
Bessler's wheel was 12 feet in diameter. That means at 50 RPM it took well over a half a second for the weight to travel the distance. How do you think that compares to a weight dropped 12 feet?

Hans von Lieven

Edit: Acceleration due to gravity is 9.81 m/s2 near the surface of the earth
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: i_ron on May 12, 2009, 01:31:32 AM
G'day Ron,

You cannot ever reach free fall speed if the weight is attached to a wheel because of the forced trajectory and the longer path. The terminal velocity, assuming only gravity as propulsive force, is actually quite low.

Hans von Lieven

Correct, that is why I said,"as close to", to emphasize that if
one gently lowers the weigh on a pillow 2 or 3 inches it will
not gain any weight. You know this but for the others what
I was attempting to imply was suppose you were standing on a 100 foot building and you had your assistant throw a 10 lb
weight on a ten foot rope over the parapet ... you could if well
braced stop it. Now repeat the experiment with a 50 foot rope

A different outcome for sure!

Edit:
(I was coming on to this from my pendulum experience where
a 20 Kg bob swinging 120 degrees will lose say 10 Kg's at its upstroke and gain 10 Kg's (weigh 30Kg's) at the 6:00 down stroke. I don't see this being modeled in the sims...)

So all I was saying, the greater the diameter and the greater the rim speed the greater chance this might work.

Ron
 
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: hansvonlieven on May 12, 2009, 01:50:09 AM
That would all be very nice if you didn't have to bring the weight up again. The higher the drop the higher the lift to get to the starting position. It is always even stephens minus losses, whichever way you twist or turn it.

Hans von Lieven
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: i_ron on May 12, 2009, 03:00:50 AM
That would all be very nice if you didn't have to bring the weight up again. The higher the drop the higher the lift to get to the starting position. It is always even stephens minus losses, whichever way you twist or turn it.

Hans von Lieven

G'day Hans,

All to true, but if one looks at this from a pendulum perspective then 10 kg dropped from 2:00 will weigh 15kg
at 6:00 and ride all the way up the ramp to 9:00 where it will weigh zero Kg, just before it changes direction and falls back down.

I was not advocating that this would work... only pointing
out the fallacy of static frame testing which fails to discern
the weight changes that a dynamic model undergoes...

Onyaz,

Ron

PS: near free fall speed is not that hard to achieve... a
pendulum does it automatically. I know how you love pendulums... so here is one of mine...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iI_ooL8hcrE


Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: LarryC on May 12, 2009, 03:07:11 AM
G'day Ron,

You cannot ever reach free fall speed if the weight is attached to a wheel because of the forced trajectory and the longer path. The terminal velocity, assuming only gravity as propulsive force, is actually quite low.

Hans von Lieven

Ah, this brings up an interesting question for you learned gentlemen.

Taking into account Hans statement and since we all know that ignoring air resistance, an object will increase its velocity by 9.8m for each second of fall. So lets say that a gravity machine has an acceleration of 5 m/s2 on the fall and no loss on the lift. Would not the same velocity increase occur for a working gravity machine for each rotation?

Regards, Larry
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: i_ron on May 12, 2009, 04:09:52 AM
Ah, this brings up an interesting question for you learned gentlemen.

Taking into account Hans statement and since we all know that ignoring air resistance, an object will increase its velocity by 9.8m for each second of fall. So lets say that a gravity machine has an acceleration of 5 m/s2 on the fall and no loss on the lift. Would not the same velocity increase occur for a working gravity machine for each rotation?

Regards, Larry

Please Larry, you know I don't qualify for that accolade, LOL

But I'll take a stab at it anyway, no, I don't think so... as
Hans says the weight is under too many restritions for this to
occur.

But I missed Han's terminal velocity statement...to elaborate
further... yes, this maybe correct... but, the weight gain is
considerable, which is what is desired.

 Ron
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: rlortie on May 12, 2009, 07:23:02 AM
The consensus on another forum appear to agree that if a full 360 degree cycle is achieved each weight will start with the motion already achieved, gaining acceleration within each weight cycle.
Newtons law of motion regarding collision seems to support this, or at least the way I interpret it.

Maximum rpm is governed by either centrifugal force preventing mechanical transference or the machine fly's apart.

I understand that configuring CF related to given mass, radius  and velocity is something that wm2d can do!

Ralph

Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Cloxxki on May 12, 2009, 08:44:25 AM
Ron has a valid point which I addressed earlier as well.

2 weight are traveling at different velocities, but arrive at exactly the same time at the bottom of the ramp, aimed at the skies.
Weight A:10m/s
Weight B:20m/s
(G-10m/s2 for ease).
Weight A will make it up 5 metres.
Weight B will make it up 15 metres.
Visualize a simple y=x2 parabole to visualize how nicely this performance ramps up.

A bigger wheel, or faster turning for that matter, will be easier to make to work.

The slots' geometry was mentioned again. Are we not all in agreement that during it's forceful change of direction on the botom ramp, the weight should not be touching the wheel? Slot WILL need to accomodate the weight to bravely leap to a significant advantage. The curved of the slot (long inverted tractor beam) gives it backup from the wheel as the weight gets "tired", and the wheel gives it a boost after the capcitors have been loaded sufficiently. And repeat.
Two ramps and one slot type will need to be very carefully dimensioned to get the maximal, if any, over unity from the wheel. And, if at all possible, we may well need an initial wheel speed to get into over unity.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: ruggero on May 12, 2009, 08:46:58 AM
Bessler's wheel was 12 feet in diameter. That means at 50 RPM it took well over a half a second for the weight to travel the distance. How do you think that compares to a weight dropped 12 feet?

Hans von Lieven

Edit: Acceleration due to gravity is 9.81 m/s2 near the surface of the earth

Why do you repeat my question?

ruggero
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: ruggero on May 12, 2009, 08:53:18 AM

a 20 Kg bob swinging 120 degrees will lose say 10 Kg's at its upstroke and gain 10 Kg's (weigh 30Kg's) at the 6:00 down stroke. I don't see this being modeled in the sims...)

Ron

That's exactly what I am trying to point out with my drawings – again and again ... but nobody seems to care about doing the calc 'of enlightment'...

ruggero
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: mondrasek on May 12, 2009, 04:26:12 PM
@eisenficker2000 and @mondrasek,

These are the results from the wheel shifted at 20 degrees CW compared to first @eisenficker2000’s wheel (unlike @eisenficker I’m counting the spheres CW starting from the top one; notation -- same as @eisenficker2000’s):

1. 0.070m    -0.094N    -0.0066Nm
2. 0.070m    -0.250N    -0.0175Nm
3. 0.070m    -0.253N    -0.0177Nm
4. 0.067m    -0.084N    -0.0057Nm
5. 0.044m   +0.162N    +0.0071Nm
6. 0.032m   +0.247N    +0.0079Nm
7. 0.034m   +0.253N    +0.0086Nm
8. 0.054m   +0.203N    +0.0110Nm

Net Torque = -0.0129Nm

Recall that @eisenficker2000 obtained for the net torque the value -0.0088522Nm. It is seen, that the calculated torque stays practically the same (it’s even higher this time but I’m not rubbing it because @mondrasek expected it to be lower). As expected, the above result is very well in concert with the mass-axle observation of this kind of wheel.

P.S. Please see attached also the jpg of the drawing with the arms and the normal vectors drawn in Cyan.

Well, there are a couple errors.  The big one is on ball #4 where you set up your vectors as if the ball was on the wheel (circle).  Actually it is on the ellipse.  The other errors are minor and are likely due to the spherical weights not having been placed exactly at the intersection of the slot centerline and the circle or ellipse path.  I corrected those CAD imperfections before drawing my vectors.

One other thing to point out is how tricky it is to draw lines perpendicular to the ellipse path of the lower ramp.  It appears to have been exploded and is now many small straight segments.  So I drew another ellipse using the major and minor axis and used it to find perfectly perpendicular vectors.  I left it (offset 10 units) in the attached JPG.

The corrected vectors now sum as:

1. 0.0700000m    -0.092345N    -0.0064642Nm
2. 0.0700000m    -0.244703N    -0.0171292Nm
3. 0.0700000m    -0.253717N    -0.0177602Nm
4. 0.0677295m    -0.027306N    -0.0018494Nm
5. 0.0446039m   +0.164653N    +0.0073442Nm
6. 0.0325249m   +0.245266N    +0.0079773Nm
7. 0.0341605m   +0.256491N    +0.0087619Nm
8. 0.0534965m   +0.201651N    +0.0107876Nm

Net Torque = -0.008332Nm

Let me know if you want the DWG or DXF file of this.


Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on May 12, 2009, 04:44:27 PM
@mondrasek,

I'm using a small Lisp application called plperp.lsp to draw the perpendicular lines. Unfortunately, not all lines are aligned exactly to begin with so that's another source of error. I think, however, that the order of magnitude of the effect is correct. In order to be sure there are no determinate errors of this kind a program in Lisp has to be written for all those calculations. Wonder if it won't be easier to handle that by a script in SolidWorks? Will post more to discuss this further when I'm ready.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: i_ron on May 12, 2009, 04:52:20 PM
That's exactly what I am trying to point out with my drawings – again and again ... but nobody seems to care about doing the calc 'of enlightment'...

ruggero

ruggero,

Most often what happens is the idea is not fully understood
and then the tendency is to, "let somebody else answer"

I thought that it added an un-necessary level of complication,
replacing an ellipsoid ramp with a circular ramp with its attendant friction and complication so didn't follow through.

But don't be discouraged, we are all in learning mode at this time.

Ron
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: mondrasek on May 12, 2009, 05:55:21 PM
I did a new analysis of the wheel at 0 degrees rotation.  Interesting thing here is that the weight at 12 o'clock is in transition between the circular and elliptical path.  So it either had zero net torque value or a small CCW one.  Results are:

1. 0.0700000m   +0.071373N    +0.0049961Nm
2. 0.0700000m    -0.190919N    -0.0133643Nm
3. 0.0700000m    -0.270000N    -0.0189000Nm
4. 0.0700000m    -0.190919N    -0.0133643Nm
5. 0.0552271m   +0.106415N    +0.0058770Nm
6. 0.0359726m   +0.215966N    +0.0077689Nm
7. 0.0317787m   +0.261549N    +0.0083117Nm
8. 0.0422302m   +0.230257N    +0.0097238Nm

Net Torque with #1 on circle = -0.0139472Nm --> Wheel starts Clockwise
Net Torque with #1 on ellipse = -0.0089511Nm --> Wheel starts Clockwise


Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: eisenficker2000 on May 12, 2009, 10:39:16 PM
@Mondrasek: Nice results, so what bring  all 9 positions? 

 
Quote
The other errors are minor and are likely due to the spherical weights not having been placed exactly at the intersection of the slot centerline and the circle or ellipse path.  I corrected those CAD imperfections before drawing my vectors.

Those "Errors" were due to the fact that the axles of the weights are 3 mm in diameter and the slots are 4 mm wide. So yes it is easier to move them to  the centerlines to simplify the model.

As for falling weights, I do hope that size does matter   ;)


Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: mondrasek on May 12, 2009, 11:02:54 PM
@Mondrasek: Nice results, so what bring  all 9 positions? 

If I understand what Omni is trying to do, he is aiming towards a program that will calculate these forces at every angle of rotation.  If he has this, I predict it will show a position where there is no torque.  This is what I believe I have found using the WM2D sim.

It should also be possible to find it by drawing and calculating in AutoCAD like we have been doing, in an iterative fashion.  We would have to move the wheel in the predicted direction some amount until the direction reverses (or does not as Omni supports).  Then we would move back at a smaller step and so on until we find the zero point or become convinced that one does or does not exist.  I'm not inclined to do that many iterations.  Hopefully Omni's programming will do this for us or someone with more patience will do the manual method to our mutual satisfaction.


Those "Errors" were due to the fact that the axles of the weights are 3 mm in diameter and the slots are 4 mm wide. So yes it is easier to move them to  the centerlines to simplify the model.

I completely understand.  The model was still correct for what you built.  I just needed to "idealize" it for the boring analysis.  I also learned some neat things along the way.  Actually, our idealized model in the analysis cannot actually be built (that I know of).  We are assuming that the reaction force of the weights on the wheel act at at a point where the center of the weight touches the wheel.  Actually it is the outside of the axle that touches the wheel and this point is not at the same distance from the main axle due to the shape of the slots and guides. 

Your build looked great!

M.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on May 12, 2009, 11:36:25 PM
@mondrasek,

Quote
If he has this, I predict it will show a position where there is no torque.  This is what I believe I have found using the WM2D sim.

On the contrary, wm2d, if used correctly, that is, only as a calculator of the center of mass, conclusively proves this is a perpetuum mobile -- unlike a pendulum whereby the center of mass shifts form right to left and back until finding itself on the vertical drawn from the axle to the ground, in our case the center of mass is persistently sideways to the right of the axle. There cannot be any more categorical proof than this for perpetuum mobile and we don't even need to do anything else to convince ourselves.

We're doing torque calculations, in addition to the above, and they show results in harmony with the above. The results conclusively prove that at no position this wheel will ever show zero net torque. I still have a couple of frames to calculate and will post the final results of the torque measurements. They have to be perfected, a program in Lisp has to be written for the purposes of optimization but the main question is answered -- yes, perpetuum mobile is real. This is a 'yes' or 'no' question and it has categorically been answered in the positive.

We know about the categorical proof for the discontinuous production of excess energy. Now we already have a definitive proof for the continuous production of excess energy. All that remains are optimization efforts and putting it together as a working machine which isn't a trivial job at all, even more so than the non-trivial engineering of complex machines such as watches, cars or even spaceships. We know spaceships are real and can be made but can our small enthusiastic group here build one? I'm not expecting an answer.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: LarryC on May 13, 2009, 12:23:56 AM
I did a new analysis of the wheel at 0 degrees rotation.  Interesting thing here is that the weight at 12 o'clock is in transition between the circular and elliptical path.  So it either had zero net torque value or a small CCW one.  Results are:

1. 0.0700000m   +0.071373N    +0.0049961Nm
2. 0.0700000m    -0.190919N    -0.0133643Nm
3. 0.0700000m    -0.270000N    -0.0189000Nm
4. 0.0700000m    -0.190919N    -0.0133643Nm
5. 0.0552271m   +0.106415N    +0.0058770Nm
6. 0.0359726m   +0.215966N    +0.0077689Nm
7. 0.0317787m   +0.261549N    +0.0083117Nm
8. 0.0422302m   +0.230257N    +0.0097238Nm

Net Torque with #1 on circle = -0.0139472Nm --> Wheel starts Clockwise
Net Torque with #1 on ellipse = -0.0089511Nm --> Wheel starts Clockwise

Okay, if you guys are going to use this model. Please check Fig 8 in the patent first. Print the pdf out, it is not distorted like in the PDF viewer.  The angle of the hockey sticks are to the left of center (10 degrees or more), not slightly to the right as shown in your current model.

However, I don't expect this change it to help much, as the patent and the inventor has stated that the top left impact is what makes the machine a runner. As long as this important fact is ignored then no amount of modeling will show a runner.

I don't know if it is a runner or not, but at least give it a chance by adding that impact analysis.

Regards, Larry 
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on May 13, 2009, 01:56:22 AM
@eisenficker2000,

Would it be possible to post four more screens between Wheel20 and Wheel30 (possibly 22, 24, 26 and 28)? As far as I can see there's a minimum forming there (after going through a maximum) which needs to be studied. Thanks.

Of course, such fluctuation is to be expected, as seen from the mass-axle discrepancy which, although persistently to the right is not at steady-state. We need to know its fine structure, however.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on May 13, 2009, 02:37:22 AM
@All

I should correct this, to avoid possible confusion in some. The observed slight variations in the now famous criterion for a device to be considered a perpetuum mobile (the persistent one-side axle-center of mass discrepancy), are not fluctuations. Fluctuations are the result of randomness which isn’t the case here. Said variations are set in stone characteristic “fingerprints” for each given construction of a perpetuum mobile and are one of those features which will help us optimize the device for maximum output.

I should also mention that the torque minimum I’m talking about doesn’t go through zero torque so any hopes that that minimum might be the answer why the device isn’t a perpetuum mobile are in vain. This can be seen at once from the center of mass discrepancy which is persistently sideways and at no position of the wheel are the axle and mass center observed to coincide or lie on a vertical line.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: eisenficker2000 on May 13, 2009, 11:35:46 AM
@Omnibus : The wheel from 20 til 30 degrees in increments of 2 degrees in AutoCad format, with "simplified/centered" weights. AutoCad format to prevent curves from being broken up.

Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: eisenficker2000 on May 13, 2009, 12:11:05 PM
For those who would like to do some calculating. My "improved" wheel design, that is more close to Abeling's presentation.

Drawing as zipped dxf.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on May 13, 2009, 02:37:12 PM
Thank you @eisenficker2000. The positions between Wheel20 and Wheel25 are especially important.

@mondrasek, for the wheel not to be a perpetuum mobile and to behave as a pendulum, half of the net torques have to be of a sign opposite to the net torques of the other half. It isn't enough only to have a zero torque at a given position of the wheel. Zero net torque at a given position of the wheel only means that it's not a self-starter at that position.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: mondrasek on May 13, 2009, 03:36:05 PM
On the contrary, wm2d, if used correctly, that is, only as a calculator of the center of mass, conclusively proves this is a perpetuum mobile -- unlike a pendulum whereby the center of mass shifts form right to left and back until finding itself on the vertical drawn from the axle to the ground, in our case the center of mass is persistently sideways to the right of the axle. There cannot be any more categorical proof than this for perpetuum mobile and we don't even need to do anything else to convince ourselves.

This is just bunk.  When I use WM2D with the methodology that I have described over and over, the simulation act exactly like a pendulum.  And it does settle to a position of zero motion while still having the center of mass to the right of the axle.  A static torque vector analysis at this settled position corroborates zero net torque due to the weights, ie a state of equilibrium.  You choose to ignore the proper use of WM2D, the results of the sim, and the corroborating torque analysis.  Instead you have moved on to eisenficker2000 model, abandoning the original sim all together.

Your assertion that WM2D cannot be used correctly for anything other than a calculator for the center of mass is based on your ignorance and outright dismissile of how to use that program.  I accept that you do not trust WM2D, and so I support your efforts to make an analysis tool that you do trust.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Cloxxki on May 13, 2009, 03:49:10 PM
Have I missed a discussion on the geometry of the wheel slots?

To consider:
- Curve radius, if choosing to use a constant curve at all
- Radial placement of inner and outer ends vs the axle (slot pairs). All in line would seem unwise.
- Width on each point along the slot to offer weight max or minimum freedom, anticipating rpm variances

It seem to me, that for the (over)balance of the wheel, slot geometry is quite significant. A lot to do wrong here, and I suppose there will be optimums for various reasons:
- maximum overunity on self-start, getting it to go
- efficiency needed at low or high speed?
- velocity/torque variances through a rotation (constant drive needed?)

To start, I would suggest making sure the axle-end of a slot (lifting) be placed more forward compared to the outer end (working mode). The weights would be forced/allowed to take a radial advantage.
Without that advantage, the weight on the lower ramps will just be passing most if its impulse over to the wheel before it reaches axle height, left to hope of getting enough in return to be able to get back "on schedule".
If the ramps are the "key" to get this design to work, then at least get the most of these ramps.

Just some thoughts. Please tell me if I'm missing something.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on May 13, 2009, 04:20:27 PM
This is just bunk.  When I use WM2D with the methodology that I have described over and over, the simulation act exactly like a pendulum.  And it does settle to a position of zero motion while still having the center of mass to the right of the axle.  A static torque vector analysis at this settled position corroborates zero net torque due to the weights, ie a state of equilibrium.  You choose to ignore the proper use of WM2D, the results of the sim, and the corroborating torque analysis.  Instead you have moved on to eisenficker2000 model, abandoning the original sim all together.

Your assertion that WM2D cannot be used correctly for anything other than a calculator for the center of mass is based on your ignorance and outright dismissile of how to use that program.  I accept that you do not trust WM2D, and so I support your efforts to make an analysis tool that you do trust.

The latest results indicate that wm2d has to be abandoned for simulation studies in the case at hand. It was clear that is has to be abandoned even from the persistent mass-axle discrepancy which wm2d calculates and which is in conflict with the rotation simulation by wm2d. Any methodology applied to the intrinsically flawed program won't do any good. The fact that the conclusions from the sim using wm2d are flawed is confirmed by the latest direct calculations of the net torque which all prove to be negative (for your simulation to be correct half of these torques have to be of the opposite sign). Torque calculations, done correctly, are explicit and cannot be questioned, while wm2d are hidden and one can only deceive himself that he's applying a correct methodology. Like I said there's no correct methodology when using an intrinsically flawed program. The direct method of proving the device in question is a perpetuum mobile is to observe a persistent discrepancy in the position of mass center vs. axle (which is really the case) and also to observe constancy of the non-zero net torque sign for all positions of the wheel (which is also the case). These are the scientific criteria. Everything else is just self-delusion.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: mondrasek on May 13, 2009, 05:08:59 PM
For any who are interested, here is a short video of the sim that has been abandoned.  It shows the pendulum motion that is exhibited when the simulation is allowed to run under near ideal conditions with only low air resistance.  It eventually settles and stops.  Vector analysis of the torque applied to the wheel by each weight at the stopped location summed to ~zero as expected.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XwYlWzu98QM

Please note this is NOT a simulation of the eisenficker2000 CAD model that is currently being evaluated.  No sim of that model has been shown that I know of.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on May 13, 2009, 10:14:12 PM
@eisenficker2000 and @mondrasek,

Here are the first results of this study (see attached). Further on these calculations have to be done with a Lisp program not only to increase the accuracy but to shorten the time of getting the results thus enabling the optimization endeavor. There are a number of methods of optimization and, I guess, @mondrasek being in the field of robotics is familiar with many of them, say the method of planning the experiment and the like. As seen, at no position of the wheel is there any other value of the torques but in the negative. This is a clear indication that we're dealing with a perpetuum mobile. As I said many times over, that this is a perpetuum mobile was confirmed by another easier observation, namely the persistent positioning of the center of mass sideways to the right of the axis of rotation.

If it were a pendulum or a wheel finding its equilibrium the center of mass must be observed to shift to and fro form right to left and back, finally settling on the perpendicular drawn through the axis of rotation. Any simulation that would show that the wheel under discussion reaches equilibrium is in error in view of the above persistent discrepancy.

Here we have an independent direct confirmation (not by using a black-box type sim software) of the perpetuum mobile character of Abeling's wheel. A wheel which exhibits inevitable negative torque at any of its positions, as the wheel we're studying, must be a perpetuum mobile. Further, of course it's necessary to assess how the friction can be lowered to the extent that this wheel would become a fact of practice. However, this is only a practical matter and has nothing to do with the categorical proof that a wheel of this kind is indeed a perpetuum mobile.

As for the figure I'm showing below, I was concerned with a peculiarity which occurred between 20 and 30 degree shift of the wheel. It began to look as if there might be a special point in the diagram of zero torque. As I said before, even if there were such a point it wouldn't have overturned the conclusion for perpetuum mobile but would've only shown that at that point the wheel isn't a self-starter. Appearance of such a point in the diagram would've been very interesting also because no such occurrence is observed in the mass-axle discrepancy.  Therefore, I asked @eisenficker to post drawings with positions of the wheel within this region if interest. As see from the figure there is no such point and the spread of the points is only due to systematic errors during the procedures leading to establishing their values.

These results are of high scientific interest and therefore this study has to be vigorously pursued. Now the Lisp stage is in the agenda and I wonder how one can learn it the fastest. Does anyone have any experince with that language?
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on May 13, 2009, 10:22:41 PM
The region where an ostensible torque maximum (appears as a minimum in the figure bu the higher the absolute value of the negative number, the grater the desired torque) is observed sould also be studied by carrying out calculations on more frames inbetween. It would be interesting if indeed there are more favorable regions in this four times repeating pattern during each individual turn. It very well may be that the pattern in question is just due to my initial inexperience of handling the AutoCAD calculations. Notice, the more experienced I got, the more the points reach a plateau (the right-hand side of te plot). These are, of course, details.

EDIT: Well, I don't know. Someone may argue that there's a clear upward (appear downward in the plot) tendency from higher to lower angles. This detail has to be studied more.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: mondrasek on May 13, 2009, 11:50:30 PM
Well crap Omni!  We've botched the analysis.  I should have noticed this before.  We are not taking into account the angle of the slots!  The weight vectors should not be projected perpendicularly to the the guide contact point vectors.  That perpendicular line needs to be replaced with one that is perpendicular to the *slot* at the point where the weight resides.  I did this with my analysis of the (now abandoned) sim because I was working with forces acting on the outside of the ball weights.  But in this case, where we are analyzing an ideal situation where the weights act upon the wheel exactly at their center, I did not notice this.

I should have followed my first instincts and earlier statements.  The only reason I found a settling point in that sim was because of the slop in the slots relative to the ball diameter and (now I realize) the fact that the weights (or weight axles in this case) have non-zero dimensions as well.  In this idealized case where we are taking the mass effects from the center (axle with zero diameter) we should have a torque of zero in all degrees of rotation.  But we do need to take into account how the weights are supported into those positions.  And that includes the slot angles that we have been neglecting.

Sorry for missing this.  I'll check it out further in the morning.

M.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on May 13, 2009, 11:55:37 PM
@mondrasek,

This will not change the main conclusion but will be good to see a sketch.

I think @eisenficker2000's method is correct because the only thing that matters is the direction of the effective weight. If no track is present the effective weight vector would be the initial weight of the sphere and to obtain the acting vector on the arm we need to multiply it only by the sinus of the angle between the weight vector itself and the arm.

In our case here the effective weight vector is less than the actual weight and this decrease is only determined by the track (the ramp), not the slots. The slots provide only the point of application of the said vectors. The ramp is the piece that does the job of ensuring persistence of the negative torque throughout the whole turn. The method of analysis used is OK.

Recall I turned you attention to that difference between your analysis and that of @eisenficker2000 and mentioned that his is the correct one.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: weri812 on May 14, 2009, 02:07:36 AM
hello all
@mondrasek
 saw video if  you can add a 9th arm and  make shure that you have 5 ball  right of center line should  turn clock wise. and keep going?

lots of luck   great info.

God Bless
wer

Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on May 14, 2009, 02:48:19 AM
hello all
@mondrasek
 saw video if  you can add a 9th arm and  make shure that you have 5 ball  right of center line should  turn clock wise. and keep going?

lots of luck   great info.

God Bless
wer

@mondrasek's video is a reply to this http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9-dT4MZCtYo&feature=channel_page I posted, showing apparent perpetuum mobile. @mondrasek's is at two orders of magnitude lower integration limits and smaller animation step. Both videos are to be discarded because they use wm2d. The approximation methods and who knows what else which wm2d applies make it unsuitable for such simulations.

The only use wm2d may have is to demonstrate directly the persistent sideways position of the center of mass with respect to the axis of rotation for all positions of the wheel. This is a definitive proof that the wheel in question is a perpetuum mobile. This fact is corroborated explicitly by the other rigorous scientific method we are using recently -- calculating the net torque at every position of the wheel. the net torque turns out to be always negative at any position of the wheel, a result in full concordance with the previously mentioned persistent mass-axle discrepancy. Now reality of gravity based perpetuum mobile should be considered established. Similar phenomena govern perpetuum mobile based on the use of magnets. The discussed here case is more interesting in many ways which seem to be obvious. What remains now is to find ways to optimize the effect so that a practical machine based on this principle can be built (as it probably has been in the past but has been suppressed).
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: weri812 on May 14, 2009, 03:04:21 AM
hello!!!! Omnibus :D ;D :D ;D

man you just blew me away. :-[ :-[
but  i can take a licking and keep on ticking ;D ;D ;D

that was a very good info.

keep up the good work  and i will just keep reading. ;)

God Bless
wer
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: mondrasek on May 14, 2009, 03:15:13 PM
Well this is just annoying.  I've re-done the torque vector analysis of the 20 degree rotation (correctly this time) and it did NOT resolve to zero like I expected.  So this wheel design must also have an equilibrium point.  Not sure why, since I thought this resolved to an ideal case because of taking reactive torques from the center of each weight.  Maybe it is because of the multiple angles used in the slots?

Here is the corrected diagram and resultant torques:

1. 0.0700000m    -0.092345N    -0.0064642Nm
2. 0.0700000m    -0.244703N    -0.0171292Nm
3. 0.0700000m    -0.253717N    -0.0177602Nm
4. 0.0677295m    -0.024431N    -0.0016547Nm
5. 0.0446039m   +0.214698N    +0.0095764Nm
6. 0.0325295m   +0.247852N    +0.0080625Nm
7. 0.0341605m   +0.294555N    +0.0100621Nm
8. 0.0534965m   +0.304625N    +0.0162964Nm

Net Torque = +0.0009891Nm  --> Wheel starts Counter Clockwise


Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: mondrasek on May 14, 2009, 03:27:13 PM
@mondrasek,

This will not change the main conclusion but will be good to see a sketch.

I think @eisenficker2000's method is correct because the only thing that matters is the direction of the effective weight. If no track is present the effective weight vector would be the initial weight of the sphere and to obtain the acting vector on the arm we need to multiply it only by the sinus of the angle between the weight vector itself and the arm.

In our case here the effective weight vector is less than the actual weight and this decrease is only determined by the track (the ramp), not the slots. The slots provide only the point of application of the said vectors. The ramp is the piece that does the job of ensuring persistence of the negative torque throughout the whole turn. The method of analysis used is OK.

Recall I turned you attention to that difference between your analysis and that of @eisenficker2000 and mentioned that his is the correct one.

Like I said, I missed it too.  But the method we have been using is not correct.  All but two or three of the weights are in contact with two surfaces:  The ramps and the wheel slots.  Both of those angles must be considered when resolving the forces applied to those surface due to the weight.

For example, if you pick up a 10 lb bowling ball with a flat frictionless plate from the bottom, you must hold it with 10 lbs of force.  If you hold it with two plates in a vee, each plate must apply a force.  The total of these forces is not 10 lbs.  But the vector sum will be.  If the vee is so steep that the flat surfaces are almost directly on the sides of the bowling ball you must exert extreme forces, much greater than 10 lbs each to hold the weight of the 10 lb ball.

But why will this design also keel?
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on May 14, 2009, 03:29:17 PM
@mondrasek,

I already told you that this way of calculating the torques is incorrect. It is non-physical. The correct way to calculate torques is the way @eisenficker2000 has done it. That it is the correct calculation is corroborated by the most important, crucial fact for that wheel, namely, by the fact that the center of mass is persistently situated sideways to the axis of rotation for any position of the wheel. If we are to place vectors frivolously and carry out random calculations we can "prove" this is a non-working device in many other ways. However, every time a calculation is made there is one criterion it must be verified by -- whether or not it conforms with the staying mass-axle discrepancy. If it does not conform, such calculation is out.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Cloxxki on May 14, 2009, 03:29:29 PM
Dusty's first generation replication (2 weights only) also seemed to wants to turn backwards at times?
I would contribute this to the position(s) of enhanced vertical speed and/or acceleration. You're putting energy (back) into the weight there, taking it from the wheel. Start in that position from standstill, and the "up" weight will have increased leverage, and thus pull down the counterweight, despite being closer to the axle.
The slots are effectively an infinitely variable gearbox, shifting up and down on given positions of a revolution. Think like this: If I turn the wheel 1 degree, how much vertically do both weights move? And can I compare this to their average distance from the axle during this 1degree rotation?
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: mondrasek on May 14, 2009, 03:36:13 PM
@mondrasek's video is a reply to this http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9-dT4MZCtYo&feature=channel_page I posted, showing apparent perpetuum mobile. @mondrasek's is at two orders of magnitude lower integration limits and smaller animation step.

Actually this is not the case.

Both videos are to be discarded because they use wm2d. The approximation methods and who knows what else which wm2d applies make it unsuitable for such simulations.

Also incorrect.  The first video shows how WM2D can behave incorrectly, just like any simulation package, if the input and parameters given allow for too large of a calculation error.  The video I posted shows how WM2D does in fact correctly predict the action once the input and parameters have been adjusted to eliminate the source of the large calculation errors and with more accuracy.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: mondrasek on May 14, 2009, 03:45:47 PM
@mondrasek,

I already told you that this way of calculating the torques is incorrect. It is non-physical. The correct way to calculate torques is the way @eisenficker2000 has done it. That it is the correct calculation is corroborated by the most important, crucial fact for that wheel, namely, by the fact that the center of mass is persistently situated sideways to the axis of rotation for any position of the wheel. If we are to place vectors frivolously and carry out random calculations we can "prove" this is a non-working device in many other ways. However, every time a calculation is made there is one criterion it must be verified by -- whether or not it conforms with the staying mass-axle discrepancy. If it does not conform, such calculation is out.

I am sorry Omnibus, but you are wrong.  The vectors are now placed correctly, not frivolously.

You are accepting incorrect methods because they corroborate what you believe is a condition that requires rotation, ie the CoG of the system being to the right of the axle.  But this does not mean it must rotate:

If the wheel was constructed without ramps and guides it would find equilibrium due to a keeling effect.  When the ramps and guides are initially moved into position they do work on the weights to push them into the orbits we are analyzing.  This adds energy to the system.  It also pushes the CoG off center to the right.  But the system is still in equilibrium, not overbalanced.  The energy put into the system by installing the guides and ramps cannot be extracted unless they are allowed to move back out of the system.  This is exactly how I can push the CoG of a pendulum off center by installing a ramp or guide to do so.  Putting that ramp or guide in place inputs energy into the system.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on May 14, 2009, 04:16:46 PM
Actually this is not the case.

Also incorrect.  The first video shows how WM2D can behave incorrectly, just like any simulation package, if the input and parameters given allow for too large of a calculation error.  The video I posted shows how WM2D does in fact correctly predict the action once the input and parameters have been adjusted to eliminate the source of the large calculation errors and with more accuracy.

This is a discussion of something whose workings are unclear to both of us and is just guess work. Therefore, wm2d simulations are to be discarded in this case altogether if we don't want to get into medieval scholastics of counting how many devils reside on a tip of a pin. Instead, we have rigorous scientific tool to rely on -- first and foremost the mass-axle discrepancy as well as the torque calculations. Let's deal with them.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on May 14, 2009, 04:41:11 PM
@mondrasek,

Quote
For example, if you pick up a 10 lb bowling ball with a flat frictionless plate from the bottom, you must hold it with 10 lbs of force.  If you hold it with two plates in a vee, each plate must apply a force.  The total of these forces is not 10 lbs.

That observation is inapplicable in the calculations we’re doing. Like I said, we are only interested in the force resulting from the available 10lb force of the ball. No other forces are of interest. If the point of application of that force, connected rigidly to an axle (to form an arm) is unobstructed by other constraints, the effective force which the ball exerts will be 10lb. Therefore, it is these 10lb that are to be multiplied by the sinus of the angle between the force and the arm to get the force needed to calculate torque. This is the same as your example with the ball sitting on a frictionless plate but stated correctly, that is, focused on the force the ball exerts on the actual point of application and avoiding the forces of reaction. In our calculations no reaction forces take place whatsoever.

So now we have a ball with one constraint – the arm.

If there are no other constraints external to the ball-arm system, then the torque will continue to be calculated in the explained way, using the full 10lb value of the force, independent of whether the ball is glued to the arm or there’s a steep surface attached to the arm where the ball is, not allowing the ball to slide out. In other words, the mechanism of holding the ball in place on the arm has no bearing on the calculation of the torque, as long as there are no constraints external to the ball-arm system.

By keeping in mind that it is only the force which the ball exerts on the point of application that participates in our calculation and nothing else, we find out that when there is an external constraint (external to the ball-arm system) the situation changes. Any external constraint (such as the ramp in our case) that forces the ball to go along a trajectory different from the circular one (due to the arm constraint) will cause modification of the initial 10lb force.

Firstly, that modification must be in the direction of decrease of 10lb because 10lb is the initially available value which cannot become more by itself. That is to be understood very well.

Second, the direction of the available force derived from the ball (not from anything else) when the external constraint is present must be different because vertical direction of the force will only cause a particular circular trajectory of displacement with the particular arm constraint.

As is seen, to do the calculation right (as @eisenficker2000 has done), having the arm length fixed in length, we are specifically focusing on what the magnitude and direction of the force derived from the ball is, involving no other forces. Any other forces involved in such calculation (especially forces of reaction by holding mechanisms, part of the ball-arm system) is completely frivolous. If one is to do calculations with such frivolous forces one can prove literally anything.

And, again, the above, proper, calculation, carried out by @eisenficker2000, corroborates with the most important criterion for perpetuum mobile – the persistent displacement sideways of the center of mass with respect to the axis of rotation at every position of the wheel. This criterion should be the guiding light for the correctness of any calculation done with the aim to explore as to whether or not the wheel in question is perpetuum mobile. The wheel in question is a perpetuum mobile because it fulfills said criterion and any calculation ostensibly showing otherwise must be in error.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: mondrasek on May 14, 2009, 05:31:06 PM
By keeping in mind that it is only the force which the ball exerts on the point of application that participates in our calculation and nothing else, we find out that when there is an external constraint (external to the ball-arm system) the situation changes. Any external constraint (such as the ramp in our case) that forces the ball to go along a trajectory different from the circular one (due to the arm constraint) will cause modification of the initial 10lb force.

There are two external constraints, not one.  There are the ramps.  And there are the slots.  The slots change the angle by which the force of the weights act on the wheel similarly to how the force of the weights changes due to their angles with the ramps.  This is easy to see as the weight can be in the long portion of the slots with one angle, or in the short ends of the slots that are at a different angle.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: mondrasek on May 14, 2009, 07:15:30 PM
Here are the results for the 15 degree rotation.  The equilibrium point due to keeling must be between 15 and 20 degrees (closer to 20).
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: rbe on May 14, 2009, 07:41:32 PM
Hi Guys,

Don't know if anyone posted this before,

http://mooieenergie.nl/index.php/en/home/3-gewichtenergiecentrale/9-nieuwsbrief-mei-2009 (http://mooieenergie.nl/index.php/en/home/3-gewichtenergiecentrale/9-nieuwsbrief-mei-2009)

Nothing new really, unfortunately!

Cheers
rbe
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on May 14, 2009, 07:49:36 PM
@mondrasek,

Quote
There are two external constraints, not one.  There are the ramps.  And there are the slots.  The slots change the angle by which the force of the weights act on the wheel similarly to how the force of the weights changes due to their angles with the ramps.  This is easy to see as the weight can be in the long portion of the slots with one angle, or in the short ends of the slots that are at a different angle.
 

That’s incorrect. The slot is not an external constraint. This is the way the ball is fixed to the arm. The forces that fix the ball to the arm never participate in the calculation. It is immaterial whether the ball is glued to the arm or is placed in a small cup-like groove cut out in the arm, if there are no external constraints the torque will be calculated in the same way. The only external constraint in our case is the track and @eisenficker2000 has correctly accounted for it.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on May 14, 2009, 08:02:46 PM
Hi Guys,

Don't know if anyone posted this before,

http://mooieenergie.nl/index.php/en/home/3-gewichtenergiecentrale/9-nieuwsbrief-mei-2009 (http://mooieenergie.nl/index.php/en/home/3-gewichtenergiecentrale/9-nieuwsbrief-mei-2009)

Nothing new really, unfortunately!

Cheers
rbe

The novelty is that it was proven beyond a shadow of a doubt that such devices are real. I;m not expecting anything from Abeling because he's entertaining the illusions that he can earn money from that. The answer should come about from a different avenue, through the established methods of scientific research, as we're doing here now. The first most important step has been achieved already -- the 'yes' or 'no' question about the reality of these devices is answered in the positive. What remains now, as I said it already, is to optimize the design and have it manufactured. This concept has been known for centuries, has probably been available a a working device but has been vigorously suppressed by the powers that be. Now, probably we're living in a slightly different situation, having the internet, and this time it may take over despite the huge control and official opposition to it.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: mondrasek on May 14, 2009, 08:16:26 PM
@mondrasek,

That’s incorrect. The slot is not an external constraint. This is the way the ball is fixed to the arm. The forces that fix the ball to the arm never participate in the calculation. It is immaterial whether the ball is glued to the arm or is placed in a small cup-like groove cut out in the arm, if there are no external constraints the torque will be calculated in the same way. The only external constraint in our case is the track and @eisenficker2000 has correctly accounted for it.

No, you are incorrect again.  The weights are not fix to the wheel in any locations except when dangling in the farthest end of the slot away from the axle.  In all other location the weights can move freely in the slots.  They are not fixed to the wheel.  They rest against it.  The angle of the surface that they rest against must be taken into account.

Do you believe the round masses in the attached picture are all causing the same amount of torque on the wheel?  The large rectangle represents the non moving guide.  The small rectangle represents the slot and is attached to the wheel.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on May 14, 2009, 08:40:36 PM
@mondrasek,

Please take a look at the illustration below. It is not true that the calculation of torque in a) should be done differently than in b), as you imply. The mode of attachment of the ball to the arm makes no difference in calculating torque.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on May 14, 2009, 08:48:44 PM
No, you are incorrect again.  The weights are not fix to the wheel in any locations except when dangling in the farthest end of the slot away from the axle.  In all other location the weights can move freely in the slots.  They are not fixed to the wheel.  They rest against it.  The angle of the surface that they rest against must be taken into account.

Do you believe the round masses in the attached picture are all causing the same amount of torque on the wheel?  The large rectangle represents the non moving guide.  The small rectangle represents the slot and is attached to the wheel.

No, that's not the case. You're endowing the ball with additional structures which isn't the case. The ball is as given, no additional attachments and it is immaterial how it is attached to the arm to exert the particular force on the arm.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: mondrasek on May 14, 2009, 08:50:55 PM
@mondrasek,

Please take a look at the illustration below. It is not true that the calculation of torque in a) should be done differently than in b), as you imply. The mode of attachment of the ball to the arm makes no difference in calculating torque.

Please refere to your prevously posted diagram.  The force vector m1 is NOT perpendicular to the moment arm.  It must be projected on it.

In the glue case the mass is acting perpendicular to the moment arm.

It is not the mode of attachement.  It is the angle that the weight leans against the wheel.  In the glue case there can be no angle and so the force is applied perpendicular. 

Those two cases do in fact need to be calculated differently.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: mondrasek on May 14, 2009, 08:53:10 PM
No, that's not the case. You're endowing the ball with additional structures which isn't the case. The ball is as given, no additional attachments and it is immaterial how it is attached to the arm to exert the particular force on the arm.

The other structures (the slots in our case) must be considered.  They are necessary in order to get the balls into the prescribed locations, the same as the guides are.  Remove them and you remove the ability for the balls to achieve the desired positions.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on May 14, 2009, 08:59:54 PM
Please refere to your prevously posted diagram.  The force vector m1 is NOT perpendicular to the moment arm.  It must be projected on it.

In the glue case the mass is acting perpendicular to the moment arm.

It is not the mode of attachement.  It is the angle that the weight leans against the wheel.  In the glue case there can be no angle and so the force is applied perpendicular. 

Those two cases do in fact need to be calculated differently.

I'm pinpointing the mistake you're making. The two cases a) and b) calculate the torque in exactly the same way. It is not true that in the glue case force F is acting perpendicular to the arm. Only its component F sin(alpha) is, same as in case a). It is obvious from the picture. How can you say that F is perpendicular to the arm when it most obviously isn't?
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: mondrasek on May 14, 2009, 09:36:09 PM
I'm pinpointing the mistake you're making. The two cases a) and b) calculate the torque in exactly the same way. It is not true that in the glue case force F is acting perpendicular to the arm. Only its component F sin(alpha) is, same as in case a). It is obvious from the picture. How can you say that F is perpendicular to the arm when it most obviously isn't?

Sorry, I ment the mass' resultant force of F sin(alpha), the same as you understand.  But again, please note that m1 is NOT perpendicular to the arm.  And therefore CANNOT be applied as such.  It must first be projected normal to the arm.  A slightly differnt force than sin(alpha) will result.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: mondrasek on May 14, 2009, 09:40:24 PM
Here is the results of the torque vector analysis at 25 degrees.  I figure if we do all 9 we should get a sine wave the crosses the zero around 19 degrees, the point of equilibrium.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on May 14, 2009, 09:42:44 PM
Masses m1 and m2 of the walls attached to the arm are negligible. If you want, instead of gluing you may secure the ball to the arm by a screw of the same mass as (m1 + m2). The main point is that the mode of attaching of the ball to the arm makes no difference, the torque will be calculated the same. Only external constraints which will also require change of arm's length (as in our case) will make a difference.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: mondrasek on May 14, 2009, 09:46:16 PM
Masses m1 and m2 of the walls attached to the arm are negligible. If you want, instead of gluing you may secure the ball to the arm by a screw of the same mass as (m1 + m2). The main point is that the mode of attaching of the ball to the arm makes no difference, the torque will be calculated the same. Only external constraints which will also require change of arm's length (as in our case) will make a difference.

The majority of the masses are not fixed to the wheel at all.  They are leaning against it at a specific angle.  If this angle is not the same as the angle of the mass' CoG to the center of axle of the wheel, the forces you are calculating are also not normal to the arm.  Only the normal component of that force can provide torque.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on May 14, 2009, 09:49:57 PM
@mondrasek,

Quote
I figure if we do all 9 we should get a sine wave the crosses the zero around 19 degrees, the point of equilibrium.

See, but that’s gonna be the result of incorrect calculation considering that how a ball is attached to the arm makes a difference which it doesn’t. So far, calculations have been done by applying correct methodology and the result is in concordance with the crucial criteria for perpetuum mobile -- the mass-axle discrepancy at every position of the whel. We can't change this firmly established fact by trying to twist mechanics and push it into calculations which have no physical meaning.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: mondrasek on May 14, 2009, 09:50:59 PM
Masses m1 and m2 of the walls attached to the arm are negligible. If you want, instead of gluing you may secure the ball to the arm by a screw of the same mass as (m1 + m2). The main point is that the mode of attaching of the ball to the arm makes no difference, the torque will be calculated the same. Only external constraints which will also require change of arm's length (as in our case) will make a difference.

Omni, I realized I did not understand your diagram.  I thought m1 and m2 were the force vectors you wanted to consider.

So, assuming they are walls of zero mass.  If both are attched to the wheel, both cases are calculated the same, as you say.  But if only m2 is attached to the wheel, and m1 in not, they are NOT calculated the same.  This is our actual case where m2 represents the slots, and m1 represents the guides.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: mondrasek on May 14, 2009, 09:53:55 PM
@mondrasek,

See, but that’s gonna be the result of incorrect calculation considering that how a ball is attached to the arm makes a difference which it doesn’t. So far, calculations have been done by applying correct methodology and the result is in concordance with the crucial criteria for perpetuum mobile -- the mass-axle discrepancy at every position of the whel. We can't change this firmly established fact by trying to twist mechanics and push it into calculations which have no physical meaning.

To use your own logic, which is more likely to be correct?  Your scatter shot graph of jumbled torque values that follows no pattern?  Or a smooth sine wave that is the signature of a pendulum?
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on May 14, 2009, 09:58:37 PM
The majority of the masses are not fixed to the wheel at all.  They are leaning against it at a specific angle.  If this angle is not the same as the angle of the mass' CoG to the center of axle of the wheel, the forces you are calculating are also not normal to the arm.  Only the normal component of that force can provide torque.

Who is arguing with the fact that only normal components participate in the calculation of the torque? Of course only the perpendicular components participate in the calculation of the torque and in both cases a) and b) those components are exactly equal as well as the length of the arms, therefore, the torque in case a) is exactly equal to the torque in case b). That's beyond obvious.

Quote
The majority of the masses are not fixed to the wheel at all.  They are leaning against it at a specific angle. If this angle is not the same as the angle of the mass' CoG to the center of axle of the wheel, the forces you are calculating are also not normal to the arm.

How come? I thought you already understood that force F is unaffected by whether or not the ball is loose but leaning on walls (as in a) of my illustration) or glued to the arm (as in b)). F is F, no matter what and it's not applied differently in case a) compared to case b). Center of mass in both cases is at exactly the same place. I thought you already understood that.

Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: mondrasek on May 14, 2009, 10:23:19 PM
Please review.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on May 14, 2009, 10:47:17 PM
@mondrasek,

This is all messed up. Neither m1 nor m2 are moving with respect to the mass-arm system. They are part of it. Especially m1 isn't a guide. And why are you only using one of the components of F to resolve it along the normal of the arm? Doesn't the other component exist and play a role in the torque? Let alone that in the way you're shown it you dramatically underestimate the component normal to the arm by which the effect I calculate becomes even larger.

The way F should be decomposed is straight to the arm's normal. Again the point of you confusion -- the ball doesn't lose mass, hence doesn't lose any part of its force F just because it's leaning against the wall. You seem to think that the wall causes somehow mass to leak and F to not be the same F that should participate in Fn = F sin(alpha), which multiplied by arm's length L would equal torque T = FnL. Not so, though. Like I already said, F is F and it is that whole F whose normal component Fn participates in T = FnL. It is the same in a_ as in b) of my illustration.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: mondrasek on May 14, 2009, 11:02:21 PM
@mondrasek,

This is all messed up. Neither m1 nor m2 are moving with respect to the mass-arm system. They are part of it. Especially m1 isn't a guide. And why are you only using one of the components of F to resolve it along the normal of the arm? Doesn't the other component exist and play a role in the torque? Let alone that in the way you're shown it you dramatically underestimate the component normal to the arm by which the effect I calculate becomes even larger.

I repeat:  If m1 and m2 are both moving with the arm then yes, both your case a) and b) calculate the same.

But in OUR case m1 DOES NOT move with the arm.  And the correct vector analysis is what I am showing.  Why do you keep bringing up a case where m1, which is analogous to our fixed guides, moves with the wheel?  IT DOES NOT APPLY.  What I am showing you is the correct method for OUR case where m1 does not move with the arm.

BTW, I'm on the road tomorrow and then we are into the weekend.  Might not be posting much.  Have a good one.

M.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on May 14, 2009, 11:07:27 PM
I repeat:  If m1 and m2 are both moving with the arm then yes, both your case a) and b) calculate the same.

But in OUR case m1 DOES NOT move with the arm.  And the correct vector analysis is what I am showing.  Why do you keep bringing up a case where m1, which is analogous to our fixed guides, moves with the wheel?  IT DOES NOT APPLY.  What I am showing you is the correct method for OUR case where m1 does not move with the arm.

BTW, I'm on the road tomorrow and then we are into the weekend.  Might not be posting much.  Have a good one.

M.

First of all agree that the torque calculated for a) and b) is the same (m1 and m2 are part of the ball-arm system). Before you understand that these two torques are equal it's impossible to continue the discussion.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: i_ron on May 15, 2009, 05:05:20 PM
Before you understand that these two torques are equal it's impossible to continue the discussion.

Omni, I really like you but I am concerned at the time you put into writing your nearly 3 thousand posts now.  Just a suggestion but I have made up a code sheet for you and from now on all you would have to do is write in a number, eg: 1,
or if it called for stronger language, 1,5, 10. See how much
time this would save you? Here is a first draft...

1)   you are wrong

2)   you are completely wrong

3)   your are clearly wrong

4)   your post is irrelevant

5)   with an IQ of less than 70 you should not use
          big words,  the meaning of which is beyond you

6)   you know nothing of this subject

7)   your post shall be ignored

8)   what I say is the only correct answer

9)   it is right because I say so

10)   you are absolutely wrong


Cheers, Ron

Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on May 15, 2009, 05:27:47 PM
Yeah, these are applicable sometimes and should be clearly stated. What's with numbering them and putting them together in one post?
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on May 15, 2009, 05:48:45 PM
Funny how some people have a chip on their shoulder and don’t hide it. Where is the list of the correct concepts, such as @eisenficker2000’s, for example, or, most importantly of the fact that perpetuum mobile has been proved real beyond a shadow of a doubt? Well, human psychology, what can I say …

Now the struggle is to have a nice little AutoLISP routine to calculate the torques automatically. Not only this would avoid the tedious job of decomposing vectors and other calculations but also will increase accuracy. We need this to be able to quantify the effect more accurately and to optimize the design for maximizing the output so that it can overwhelm the friction.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Cloxxki on May 15, 2009, 06:53:07 PM
Omni, I really like you but I am concerned at the time you put into writing your nearly 3 thousand posts now.  Just a suggestion but I have made up a code sheet for you and from now on all you would have to do is write in a number, eg: 1,
or if it called for stronger language, 1,5, 10. See how much
time this would save you? Here is a first draft...

1)   you are wrong

2)   you are completely wrong

3)   your are clearly wrong

4)   your post is irrelevant

5)   with an IQ of less than 70 you should not use
          big words,  the meaning of which is beyond you

6)   you know nothing of this subject

7)   your post shall be ignored

8 )   what I say is the only correct answer

9)   it is right because I say so

10)   you are absolutely wrong


Cheers, Ron
Might I suggest alternate wordings to each of the numbered statements, to enhance the tone in this topic's discussions?

1) Your interpretation of the facts seems to, on some accounts, differ from mine
2) It seems most probable that you and yours truly have been using different sources to come to our hypothoses.
3) My notes imply different facts than your's, judging from your latest contribution
4) My dear friend in science, it seems you're wandering away from the main topic of our discussion.
5) We seem to be affected by a harmless case of language barrier. Please let me re-state my opinions and findings.
6) I have consoderable experience in this field, and would gladly grant you an intership to further add to your already considerable knowledge.
7) Your latest contributions might best be reviewed and considered to be re-written to more accurately represent your research.
8 )After reviewing my notes multiple times from various appraoches, I have not been able to find the obviously existing error on my part.
9) I would appreciate it dearly, if you were so kind to, in order to be able to advance with our discussion, to consider the option that my claims may hold some unexpected merit.
10) Let us conceign to compare our notes and sources. There seems to be a slight difference between them, and being able to pin-point it can only contribute to the world of science for both the near and far future.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on May 15, 2009, 06:55:58 PM
@Cloxxki,

I didn't know this forum is a United Nations summit to negotiate nuclear disarmament.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Cloxxki on May 15, 2009, 07:05:01 PM
Now the struggle is to have a nice little AutoLISP routine to calculate the torques automatically. Not only this would avoid the tedious job of decomposing vectors and other calculations but also will increase accuracy. We need this to be able to quantify the effect more accurately and to optimize the design for maximizing the output so that it can overwhelm the friction.
If you are so highly impressed with Abeling's apparent invention as presented in his patent application, why would you sepnd your valueble time on proving it's validy as perpetuum mobile? You are offering your services to Abeling for free, no-one can benifit from it until he starts offering lower-cost energy with it.

After centuries of persuing PPM's, why don't we for now consider Abeling's invention one, and go ahead finding a way to legally work around his patent's claims in creating an even better, open source solution?

We'd need to:
- Pin-point WHY Abeling's invention works, where others like it didn't
- Define the circumstances where gravity can be used to obtain overunity
- Find new designs, not using any of Abeling's claims
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Cloxxki on May 15, 2009, 07:12:06 PM
@Cloxxki,

I didn't know this forum is a United Nations summit to negotiate nuclear disarmament.
Haha, of course it's not. But as clearly a more educated man than I am (who isn't), you will surely be able to take the hint with a wink.
Let's get this thread moving, or make a new one to bring the world FREE over unity, still in 2009. Great minds working together, each in their respective specialty.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on May 15, 2009, 07:24:41 PM
@Cloxxki,

Quote
If you are so highly impressed with Abeling's apparent invention as presented in his patent application, why would you sepnd your valueble time on proving it's validy as perpetuum mobile? You are offering your services to Abeling for free, no-one can benifit from it until he starts offering lower-cost energy with it.

Abeling’s invention rehashes well known principles for constructing such machines. So far, however, to the best of my knowledge, rigorous proof for the reality of perpetuum mobile hasn’t been shown. This is is the first time such proof is provided (for continuous production of excess energy; discontinuous production of excess energy, violating CoE has already been shown elsewhere). All we know so far about the workings of such devices are incoherent ramblings such as those of Dismanek or completely unjustified fascist ban on research in this area imposed by governmental organizations such as the French Academy of Sciences (or whatever its exact name is). If you’re concerned with the money Abeling would earn, relax. Abeling or anybody for that matter, dealing with such machines won’t earn any money from them. As I said before, these machines are as much as anti-business as anything can get. The most important thing that has to be done in this area is to prove it definitively according to the scientific principles, that is, exactly what we’re doing here and try to find ways to optimize the effect. The actual constructing of the wheel comes after that as with everything else scientific. This is a very favorable scientific case whereby we are not to rely on luck or serendipitous occurrences to discover the phenomenon. This phenomenon, turns out, can be handled explicitly theoretically and its reality can be proved first on paper, as has already been done.

Quote
After centuries of persuing PPM's, why don't we for now consider Abeling's invention one, and go ahead finding a way to legally work around his patent's claims in creating an even better, open source solution?

We'd need to:
- Pin-point WHY Abeling's invention works, where others like it didn't
- Define the circumstances where gravity can be used to obtain overunity
- Find new designs, not using any of Abeling's claims

Like I said, Abeling’s device isn’t the issue here. These devices have been known for centuries and they have worked but have been suppressed by the powers that be. So far, up until now, there hasn’t been a rigorous scientific proof for their reality. Now we have the rigorous scientific proof and we have to work on further studying it and optimizing the construction.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: i_ron on May 15, 2009, 07:37:05 PM
Funny how some people have a chip on their shoulder and don’t hide it. Where is the list of the correct concepts, such as @eisenficker2000’s, for example,…
snip

Because it would be such a short list people might miss it, lol

Besides, I am not of the opinion the eisenficker's concept is
correct. The OD of the weight seems to be on the ramp and
not the axle for example and if the forces were correctly stated then there should be an RPM reading given so as to
indicate at what speed the readings were applicable.

Glad you saw the humor of my list! Fortunately I have broad
shoulders and can carry the chip load as a perpetuum mobile!

Ron
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Cloxxki on May 15, 2009, 07:39:05 PM
Alright then, while we're looking at Abeling's and -like devices...should we not try and set up an agenda, and work from there?

Vital in my humble opinion towards getting someone's replication to work, at any scale:
 deciding what the ramps are exactly used for, and then optimize the ramps and slots to maximize this effect
a) They are to use the weight's energy at 6:00 to give the wheel a nice nudge in the back, and at the same time taking a low-torque upward trajection along the axle.
b) Use the weight's top speed (result from a low-torque situation on the other weight?) to gain serious height (radial advantage I called it, not knowling better) while off the wheel, to have the wheel only do half or less of the work in lifting it back to 12:00.
c) some of both?

Before we have this clear, any setup will be guesswork, until the torque figures have been investigated.
c) A bit of both

Another idea.
What if Abeling is planning to completely do away with weight bearings.
What about glass surface weights zipping along glass tracks, in a chamber filled with foamy lubricant? The image of a glass holder for a lead weight, over a glass floor in green soap...just seems pretty frictionless. Polish once, administer soapy solution or some sort of PTFE all the time, and have a silent low-friction setup.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on May 15, 2009, 07:43:05 PM
@i_ron

Quote
Besides, I am not of the opinion the eisenficker's concept is
correct. The OD of the weight seems to be on the ramp and
not the axle for example and if the forces were correctly stated then there should be an RPM reading given so as to
indicate at what speed the readings were applicable.

That's incorrect. RPM's should have no bearing on the @eisenficker2000's torque analysis whatsoever.

We can imagine the wheel moving infinitely slowly, to avoid the talk about centrifugal or centripetal forces. The important, crucial conclusion is that the wheel will keep turning due to its own construction and the presence of gravity without spending any energy from a pre-existing energy reservoir. This is the revolutionary here. It's practical implementation is only a matter of proper, skillful I should say, engineering.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: i_ron on May 15, 2009, 08:57:06 PM
@i_ron

That's incorrect. RPM's should have no bearing on the @eisenficker2000's torque analysis whatsoever.

snip

No, it is not incorrect, because then at a given RPM a whole
new set of factors appears as the weights, because they are
in motion change their weight. A proper simulation, or even calculation, has to account for this.

Ron

Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on May 15, 2009, 09:25:34 PM
No, it is not incorrect, because then at a given RPM a whole
new set of factors appears as the weights, because they are
in motion change their weight. A proper simulation, or even calculation, has to account for this.

Ron

Like I said, RPM -> 0. The very fact, however that the wheel keeps on making full turns only because of its construction and the availability of gravity, at the expense of no pre-existing energy reservoir, has immense, far-reaching scientific consequences which is the most important aspect of this study.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: i_ron on May 16, 2009, 02:44:06 AM
snip The very fact, however that the wheel keeps on making full turns only because of its construction and the availability of gravity, at the expense of no pre-existing energy reservoir, has immense, far-reaching scientific consequences which is the most important aspect of this study.

But omni, there is no evidence to support such extravagant
claims.

Ron
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: LarryC on May 16, 2009, 03:55:25 AM
But omni, there is no evidence to support such extravagant
claims.

Ron

Dang Ron, I hope you got your pee deflecting suit on, because you're surely pissing into the wind.

BTW Ron, the OB cheat sheet was brilliant, also liked Cloxxki's explanation of what a normal person would say.

Allthough, I'm sure it is all for nought, afterall OB is a genius in his own mind and no one will ever change that delusional opinion.

Regards, Larry

 
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: i_ron on May 16, 2009, 05:25:59 AM
Dang Ron, I hope you got your pee deflecting suit on, because you're surely pissing into the wind.

BTW Ron, the OB cheat sheet was brilliant, also liked Cloxxki's explanation of what a normal person would say.

Allthough, I'm sure it is all for nought, afterall OB is a genius in his own mind and no one will ever change that delusional opinion.

Regards, Larry

Thanks Larry, its a funny world sometimes, after all the insults
and battles with Mr T, it all ended... but now I am accepted
into the inner circle and receive direct little nuggets of info denied the hoi poloi, go figure

So when an intelligent, traveled, interesting person who demands, precise wording and rigorus proof in all things...
violates his own rulings like we see here... it is only second nature for me to comment. But one shouldn't take things so
seriously that one can't have fun, right?

Take Care Larry

Ron


Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: hansvonlieven on May 16, 2009, 05:40:15 AM
Like I said, RPM -> 0. The very fact, however that the wheel keeps on making full turns only because of its construction and the availability of gravity, at the expense of no pre-existing energy reservoir, has immense, far-reaching scientific consequences which is the most important aspect of this study.

Let's all go home now and eat crow. Omnibus has solved perpetual motion.

All we need to do now is wait for his motor.

Hans von Lieven
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on May 16, 2009, 09:04:04 AM
But omni, there is no evidence to support such extravagant
claims.

Ron

This statement is funny as hell.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on May 16, 2009, 09:04:44 AM
Let's all go home now and eat crow. Omnibus has solved perpetual motion.

All we need to do now is wait for his motor.

Hans von Lieven

Theoretical physics is still around.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Pirate88179 on May 16, 2009, 11:40:46 AM
Theoretical physics is still around.

Theoretically.

Bill
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: AB Hammer on May 16, 2009, 03:35:14 PM
Theoretically.

Bill

Ditto

Well! without proof it can only be Theoretical, and without proof, science holds the upper hand on impossibilities. Show the working wheel and hold on for the ride!



"Our education can be the limitation to our imagination and our dreams". AB Hammer / Alan
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on May 16, 2009, 03:35:58 PM
Theoretically.

Bill

No, not theoretically. Theoretical physics is very much practically alive. Research universities consider it as the basis of their study.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on May 16, 2009, 03:41:37 PM
Ditto

Well! without proof it can only be Theoretical, and without proof, science holds the upper hand on impossibilities. Show the working wheel and hold on for the ride!

How come? You're denying then that science has achievements which pinpoint which is possible and which isn't. The working model is only the engineering part. It comes after the scientific proof.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: AB Hammer on May 16, 2009, 03:50:48 PM
How come? You're denying then that science has achievements which pinpoint which is possible and which isn't. The working model is only the engineering part. It comes after the scientific proof.

Omnibus

Incomplete ideals and mental impossibilities prevents this. It takes some offbeat person to break and bring these mental limitations to light. They won't follow until proven wrong and a proper unable to disputed working wheel is shown.

Just a lesson from real world experience. Show it!
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on May 16, 2009, 04:59:14 PM
Omnibus

Incomplete ideals and mental impossibilities prevents this. It takes some offbeat person to break and bring these mental limitations to light. They won't follow until proven wrong and a proper unable to disputed working wheel is shown.

Just a lesson from real world experience. Show it!

As for the real world, you're right. Don't we see how much crap is all around us intellectually? However, there are strict scientific methods, very well established, and if one is concerned with the truth one has to follow these methods, no matter how distracting to that the real world is.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: mondrasek on May 16, 2009, 07:03:37 PM
First of all agree that the torque calculated for a) and b) is the same IF m1 and m2 are part of the ball-arm system. Before you understand that these two torques are equal it's impossible to continue the discussion.

I have repeatedly stated that you are correct:  The torque calculated for a) and b) is the same (m1 and m2 are part of the ball-arm system).  I have also stated that a) and b) do not represent how the weights are supported in the diagrams for weights resting on both the guides and slots.

Omni, please refere back to the mark up of your case a) where I drew force vectors.  Let's call this case c).  It is different from case a) and case b) and you need to understand this.

In case c), m1 represents the guides.  It is NOT moving with the wheel.  It is fixed to the Earth.  So the vector portion of the force due to the mass of any weights pushing against it is pushing against the Earth and NOT the wheel.  There is no way this portion of the weight can cause rotation of the wheel.  M2 represents the slots in the wheel.  So the vector portion of the force of the mass of any weights pushing against it is able to create a torque on the wheel.  This is the only vector portion of the weight that can do so. 

The method I am showing is the CORRECT method to resolve the forces on the wheel.  The mass of each weight is being supported by either the slots alone, or is being supported by both the guide and the slot.  Any weight being supported by the guides is simply resting on the Earth and is NOT causing a torque on the wheel.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on May 16, 2009, 07:58:05 PM
@mondrasek,

Of course, that's correct:

Quote
In case c), m1 represents the guides.  It is NOT moving with the wheel.  It is fixed to the Earth.  So the vector portion of the force due to the mass of any weights pushing against it is pushing against the Earth and NOT the wheel.  There is no way this portion of the weight can cause rotation of the wheel.  M2 represents the slots in the wheel.  So the vector portion of the force of the mass of any weights pushing against it is able to create a torque on the wheel.  This is the only vector portion of the weight that can do so.

and that's what @eisenficker2000 is taking into account, not you.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: mondrasek on May 16, 2009, 08:30:40 PM
Eisenficker2000's vectors do not correctly show the forces due to the mass of each weight.  They always show the force vector on the wheel perpendicular to the moment arm (line from the weight CoG to the wheel axle).  But the weights are NOT in contact with a surface that is on this moment arm.  They are, in fact, in contact with the slots.  And the ANGLE of the slots is not the same as the angle of the moment arm.

Nowhere in your calculations have you looked at the correct angle that the weights are is in contact with the wheel.  Instead, you are assuming a contact angle that is always normal to the moment arm.  And this is not correct.

Using a force vector perpendicular to the moment arm as you have been doing does not take into account the CORRECT contact angle of the ball on the wheel.  That is why the vector diagram must first be drawn as I have shown, with the force vector due to the weight first as perpendicular to the SLOT.  Then the portion of this resultant vector that is normal to the moment arm angle is calculated as it is the true vector that is applying torque to the wheel.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: eisenficker2000 on May 16, 2009, 11:18:50 PM
@Mondrasek You are right. I did not take into account the effect of the slot in the wheel. If the (yellow) slot was perpendicular to the center of the wheel, the yellow slot. I could have used: vector v1 to v2 to get the force alongside the track and then get the resulting force v5....

But the (white) slot is not perpendicular to the track. From v1 to v3 resulting force on the slot. From there to the resulting force v4, thus resulting in a torque that is significantly less.

Explaining why the model does not show that resulting torque as seen from my wrong first calculations

Grin I did make a good NOT working model...else I would  have kept doubting my engineering skills   ::)
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: eisenficker2000 on May 16, 2009, 11:22:38 PM
@Mondrasek And now the good way....

But the (white) slot is not perpendicular to the track. From v1 to resulting force caused by track v2. from v2 to v3, resulting force on the slot. From there to the resulting force v4..

 
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: mondrasek on May 16, 2009, 11:37:56 PM
@eisenficker2000,

This model is much more difficult for me to do correct vector diagrams on than the earlier one of the sim that I did.  In that earlier one I was calculating the vectors on spherical weight where the guide and slots were in contact with the OD of the sphere and the correct vector angles were obvious.  When we look at your analysis where we holding the weights at their CoG, the angle of the slots becomes much less obvious.  I looked at it several times and had convinced myself that your method was correct for that ideal case each time.  It was only when Omni's analysis of the complete 45 degrees of rotation gave unexpected results that I was able to realize how we were missing the angle of the slots.  And in my recent exchanges with Omni it is ever more clear to me how tricky this case is.  And that is why I love gravity wheel concepts.  Though they seem so simple, there is a lot to be learned in order to understand them.

I am still curious why this design will keel if supported at the CoG of the weights.  I believe it would be due to either 1) energy input to the system when the guides are installed (similar to why the CoG of the system is not coincident with the axle), or b) due to the fact that there are two different angles in the slot, or c) something I have yet to learn or consider.

M.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: eisenficker2000 on May 17, 2009, 12:07:01 AM
@Mondrasek Yes, the vectors are much more complex and confusing in the end..

I wonder what the effect is of curved slots, like Dusty is using.. And no too much work to calculate their effects.

I am trying to make a simple computer animated model (in VB). One weight only, but the geometry of the track makes it already challenging. Let alone to get all the vectors and their geometry. And I am already leaving out the dynamic part....

Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on May 17, 2009, 12:41:40 AM
I think you should not now try to twist the whole thing every which way to appear you're right. You now understand @eisenficker2000's method is the correct one. Let's move on.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on May 17, 2009, 12:45:27 AM
@Mondrasek Yes, the vectors are much more complex and confusing in the end..

I wonder what the effect is of curved slots, like Dusty is using.. And no too much work to calculate their effects.

I am trying to make a simple computer animated model (in VB). One weight only, but the geometry of the track makes it already challenging. Let alone to get all the vectors and their geometry. And I am already leaving out the dynamic part....

The dynamic part should, of course, be left out. The wheel may be made to turn very slowly (to avoid talk about centrifugal and centripetal force) and yet make full turns which is the gist of the phenomenon.

Now that we have definitive proof for the reality of the phenomenon, optimization is in order, indeed.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: i_ron on May 17, 2009, 01:33:34 AM

Now that we have definitive proof for the reality of the phenomenon, optimization is in order, indeed.

No definite proof has been shown... only mistakes in math.

Ron
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: LarryC on May 17, 2009, 01:36:48 AM
How come? You're denying then that science has achievements which pinpoint which is possible and which isn't. The working model is only the engineering part. It comes after the scientific proof.

What? I'm really glad and billions of others that the Wright brothers didn't follow the so called scientific opinions of their times.

Regards, Larry
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on May 17, 2009, 01:38:38 AM
No definite proof has been shown... only mistakes in math.

Ron

These are unsupported statements and you should restrain from filling the forum with such.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on May 17, 2009, 01:41:44 AM
What? I'm really glad and billions of others that the Wright brothers didn't follow the so called scientific opinions of their times.

Regards, Larry

Enough with these Wright brothers. Their's was not science but technology. Also, it's inapplicable in the current case. Wright brothers argument is the resort of the weak and insecure.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: stgpcm on May 17, 2009, 02:00:49 AM
These are unsupported statements and you should restrain from filling the forum with such.
"we have definitive proof" is indeed an unsupported statement, and it would be better if the forum was not filled with such.

At best we have a proof no-one has discovered a problem with, although I would say that assertion was tenuous given errors are being discovered in the vector calculations
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on May 17, 2009, 02:16:02 AM
"we have definitive proof" is indeed an unsupported statement, and it would be better if the forum was not filled with such.

At best we have a proof no-one has discovered a problem with, although I would say that assertion was tenuous given errors are being discovered in the vector calculations

What I said applies to you as well. Don't return to me what I said. It doesn't apply to me. I've given proof. You haven't.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: LarryC on May 17, 2009, 02:19:33 AM
Enough with these Wright brothers. Their's was not science but technology. Also, it's inapplicable in the current case. Wright brothers argument is the resort of the weak and insecure.

Actually, I just threw this out there to get OB's obviously response.

My question to all is:

Do you personally know anybody with OB's arrogants and total disregards for others opinions that he would not have been stomped into a mudhole by his fellow man?

OB has to be in some protected environment, institutional, hiding behind the internet, rich daddy, trust or whatever to exist.

Regards, Larry

 
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: i_ron on May 17, 2009, 02:46:19 AM
I think you should not now try to twist the whole thing every which way to appear you're right. You now understand @eisenficker2000's method is the correct one. Let's move on.

Omni,

This is completely asinine, the man admits to errors in the
original procedure and you want him to paper over the errors
and move on using the incorrect model?

Ron


 
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: i_ron on May 17, 2009, 02:51:26 AM
The dynamic part should, of course, be left out. The wheel may be made to turn very slowly (to avoid talk about centrifugal and centripetal force) and yet make full turns which is the gist of the phenomenon.
snip

A very irresponsible statement. The wheel is a dynamic
system and should be studied as such. What you espouse
would be the equivalent of a study of flight but never having seen a bird fly... by studying dead birds.

Ron


Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: LarryC on May 17, 2009, 02:52:26 AM
Delete, I'm hoping it was just an internet errror when my previous post was bypassed.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: i_ron on May 17, 2009, 03:03:05 AM
Delete, I'm hoping it was an internet errror.

lol, I was modifying my message... your turn now
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on May 17, 2009, 03:03:11 AM
A very irresponsible statement. The wheel is a dynamic
system and should be studied as such. What you espouse
would be the equivalent of a study of flight by studying
dead birds.

Ron

That's a ridiculous comparison. I'm not saying the wheel should be considered at rest but it should be observed at conditions whereby the centrifugal and centripetal forces are negligible. The effect isn't connected with the centrifugal/centripetal forces.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on May 17, 2009, 03:05:21 AM
Omni,

This is completely asinine, the man admits to errors in the
original procedure and you want him to paper over the errors
and move on using the incorrect model?

Ron

The man is incorrect. He understood that but is unwilling to admit it. You, on the other hand, can't even understand why but like to participate in the discussion for not having anything else to do. Don't bother.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on May 17, 2009, 03:08:09 AM
Actually, I just threw this out there to get OB's obviously response.

My question to all is:

Do you personally know anybody with OB's arrogants and total disregards for others opinions that he would not have been stomped into a mudhole by his fellow man?

OB has to be in some protected environment, institutional, hiding behind the internet, rich daddy, trust or whatever to exist.

Regards, Larry

I know that when nonsense is spewed, it should be nipped in the bud. That's what responsibility is. You may disagree but the world doesn't exist because of you as you so arogantly perceive it.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: LarryC on May 17, 2009, 03:17:43 AM
Do you personally know anybody with OB's arrogants and total disregards for others opinions that he would not have been stomped into a mudhole by his fellow man?

OB has to be in some protected environment, institutional, hiding behind the internet, rich daddy, trust or whatever to exist.

Regards, Larry

"I know that when nonsense is spewed, it should be nipped in the bud. That's what responsibility is. You may disagree but the world doesn't exist because of you as you so arogantly perceive it."

That was OB's deceptive response, do we have any others?

Regards, Larry

Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on May 17, 2009, 03:41:46 AM
"I know that when nonsense is spewed, it should be nipped in the bud. That's what responsibility is. You may disagree but the world doesn't exist because of you as you so arogantly perceive it."

That was OB's response, do we have any others?

Regards, Larry

So this isn't a thread to explore a gravity device but a training session for mediocre amateur sociologists. You have no restraint.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: i_ron on May 17, 2009, 03:45:50 AM
snip
That was OB's response, do we have any others?

Regards, Larry

Hi Larry,

There seemed to be a lull in proceedings as the founder is
off with the mylow thing, Mondrasek and eisenficker are working out the correct way to measure the vecters and we await Dusty's  "working" model... that I became even more aware of the gross posts by ob.

I was really trying to determine what he was, I have my hunches...

But even though I am guilty of quoting his posts I will give
it a rest... I have made my point... so I wouldn't recommend
starting a collection...lol

Take Care,

Ron

"Never argue with an idiot... the onlooker might not be able
to tell the difference."
 


Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on May 17, 2009, 03:52:33 AM
Hi Larry,

There seemed to be a lull in proceedings as the founder is
off with the mylow thing, Mondrasek and eisenficker are working out the correct way to measure the vecters and we await Dusty's  "working" model... that I became even more aware of the gross posts by ob.

I was really trying to determine what he was, I have my hunches...

But even though I am guilty of quoting his posts I will give
it a rest... I have made my point... so I wouldn't recommend
starting a collection...lol

Take Care,

Ron

"Never argue with an idiot... the onlooker might not be able
to tell the difference."
 

I said you don't get it but you arrogantly continue. @eisenficker2000 doesn't agree with Wmondrasek, let alone that @mondrasek himself understood his mistake. You don't get it. Hear it again.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: stgpcm on May 17, 2009, 03:54:08 AM
What I said applies to you as well. Don't return to me what I said. It doesn't apply to me. I've given proof. You haven't.
the proof you've provided fails to determine what happens to the net torque.

Consider the simple system attached.

We follow your method, and calculate the torque for each weight, and we discover the system has a net torque of -1.

At this point you say this is a perpetuum mobile.

At this point, I apply the net torque to each weight in turn, and discover that applying that torque to the right weighthas no net effect, but applying it to the left sphere causes an equal and opposite force from the shelf someone inconsiderately left in the way. My revised figure for net torque is zero
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: stgpcm on May 17, 2009, 03:55:40 AM
I said you don't get it but you arrogantly continue. @eisenficker2000 doesn't agree with Wmondrasek, let alone that @mondrasek himself understood his mistake. You don't get it. Hear it again.

you're missing the bit where eisenficker2000 has admitted a mistake
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on May 17, 2009, 03:59:23 AM
you're missing the bit where eisenficker2000 has admitted a mistake

Where? Cite it?
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: stgpcm on May 17, 2009, 04:01:42 AM
Where? Cite it?
http://www.overunity.com/index.php?topic=7150.msg179252#msg179252
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on May 17, 2009, 04:04:10 AM
@stgpcm,

after this statement you should give it up too:

Quote
At this point you say this is a perpetuum mobile.

No, I'm not claiming perpetuum mobile in your case. Now, it's for you to understand why. I've explained it enough. Save your efforts and try to think before posting.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: LarryC on May 17, 2009, 04:07:32 AM
@Ron,

Good point,

"Never argue with an idiot... the onlooker might not be able
to tell the difference."

But OB's response to you was:

"I said you don't get it but you arrogantly continue. @eisenficker2000 doesn't agree with Wmondrasek, let alone that @mondrasek himself understood his mistake. You don't get it. Hear it again."


But, I am not arguing with an idiot, just trying to get a concensus among knowledgeable people, which eliminates OB's opinion. So back to my original question.


My question to all is:

Do you personally know anybody with OB's arrogant and total disregards for others opinions that he would not have been stomped into a mudhole by his fellow man?

OB has to be in some protected environment, institutional, hiding behind the internet, rich daddy, trust or whatever to exist.

Regards, Larry
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: stgpcm on May 17, 2009, 04:19:22 AM
@stgpcm,


No, I'm not claiming perpetuum mobile in your case. Now, it's for you to understand why. I've explained it enough. Save your efforts and try to think before posting.

It's called the scientific method. You've posed your hypothesis, I've posted an antithesis. your job is to explain why this system doesn't match your criteria.

 Obviously I have chosen a case where it clearly isn't going to spin, but you need to explain why your reasoning disqualifies it.



Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: stgpcm on May 17, 2009, 04:41:02 AM
@eisenficker2000 or @Mondrasek

with the static vector methods, given the simple system attached, at what angle would the left weight need to meet the vertical 'ramp' for it to just manage to slide up its slot? (with the 0.9:1 lengths).

Obviously, at 0 degrees to the vertical, the system would stop, and at 90 degreees it would continue, but what is different in those analyses?

Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on May 17, 2009, 04:51:24 AM
It's called the scientific method. You've posed your hypothesis, I've posted an antithesis. your job is to explain why this system doesn't match your criteria.

 Obviously I have chosen a case where it clearly isn't going to spin, but you need to explain why your reasoning disqualifies it.

No, scientific method isn't about refuting every stupid thought that might occur to somebody.

Now, you answer your own question.

Recall, the most conclusive criterion for perpetuum mobile is the persistent staying of the center of mass sideways to the axis of rotation. Persistent. Put the emphasis on this word and you'll be all set in distinguishing the trivial examples you give from the novelty. In a pendulum or in any other non-perpetuum mobile device the center of mass constantly shifts from left to right with respect to the axle until finally finds rest on the perpendicular passing through the axle. Your case is even worse (why?), so it doesn't even deserve attention. On the other hand, any device that displays the above persistent discrepancy is a perpetuum mobile. It always seeks equilibrium and never achieves it. A perpetuum mobie, that is. I'm explaining this for the umptieth time. Hopefully it will get across some day to some.

The above is corroborated fully by the torque measurements.

Reality of perpetuum mobile is proved rigorously, based on the scientific method, beyond a shadow of a doubt.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on May 17, 2009, 05:19:29 AM
@All,

Here are the results from the net torque of that particular wheel (see attached). Unfortunately, the ramp (track) consists of numerous small segments and isn't really a curve. That is the reason for the observed spread. The accuracy of determination is much improved compared to the previous curve I showed you because an elaborate program written AutoLisp has been applied for the obtainment of these torques, eliminating to a great extent the random errors. It's becoming clearer that we're dealing with a system which displays a practically constant value of the torque at any of its states -- a clear perpetuum mobile. Mechanically this is a more satisfying case than initially thought whereby variations of the torque seemed to be apparent.

Now we're on our way. Perpetuum mobile has been definitively proven real and the optimization efforts are under way.

P.S. The point at 30 degrees is missing because at that position the curve is really performing bad and the value obtained is of unrealistically higher torque than the rest of the points.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: AB Hammer on May 17, 2009, 05:53:08 AM
Nope!

Omnibus

Take your top slot on the role and move it back to the 11:30. It now has more anti torque than the on close to the 1:30 mark so this leaves 2 slots with weights to lift 4. Sorry it is not going to happen. Your evidence is flawed, for something is incomplete. Real world experience tells you what will work and what will not. Or science would have figured it out long ago.

I just finished a test wheel that has 75% positive reaction and only 25% negative reaction. Now if I add another set that places the 75% positive reaction to over lay the 25% negative reaction. I might just have a runner. But even then there is no absolutes. LOL keep trying boys
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on May 17, 2009, 06:10:27 AM
Nope!

Omnibus

Take your top slot on the role and move it back to the 11:30. It now has more anti torque than the on close to the 1:30 mark so this leaves 2 slots with weights to lift 4. Sorry it is not going to happen. Your evidence is flawed, for something is incomplete. Real world experience tells you what will work and what will not. Or science would have figured it out long ago.

I just finished a test wheel that has 75% positive reaction and only 25% negative reaction. Now if I add another set that places the 75% positive reaction to over lay the 25% negative reaction. I might just have a runner. But even then there is no absolutes. LOL keep trying boys

Science has figured it out long ago but has suppressed it. Leave this argument alone. Also, the laws of mechanics applied here are well understood and no error can be expected in calculations using these well-understood laws. The problem is yours. You haven't figured out how to overcome the friction so that the well-established perpetuum mobile effect can show itself.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: rlortie on May 17, 2009, 06:14:39 AM
Jeez you guys are having fun, I do believe there is perpetual motion here. You have contributed 139 posts to my delete folder today!

I have three questions:
Is any body actually attempting to build this thing besides Dusty? Second: is any body offering any collaborating assistance with Dusty? 
Third: why have we not heard from Dusty or did I miss his latest update?

Ralph
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: stgpcm on May 17, 2009, 08:31:33 AM
No, scientific method isn't about refuting every stupid thought that might occur to somebody.

Now, you answer your own question.

Recall, the most conclusive criterion for perpetuum mobile is the persistent staying of the center of mass sideways to the axis of rotation.

FALSE

As long as you believe that you'll be building devices that fail to work.

Both of my diagrams persistantly have the center of offset to the axis of rotation. neither of which will turn. And because neither will turn it is persistant,

Quote
The above is corroborated fully by the torque measurements.


but you're not measuring the torgue, you're calculating it. And you're failing to calculate the effect of the resultant force.

see the shelf diagram.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: stgpcm on May 17, 2009, 09:22:34 AM
@All,


Now we're on our way. Perpetuum mobile has been definitively proven real and the optimization efforts are under way.
FALSE, you have not proven that.
Quote
P.S. The point at 30 degrees is missing because at that position the curve is really performing bad and the value obtained is of unrealistically higher torque than the rest of the points.

"that result doesn't fit my expectation, so I'm deleting it."

it's irrelevant, because your core assertion is flawed, but ignoring facts you don't like appears to be your speciality.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: stgpcm on May 17, 2009, 09:59:08 AM

Recall, the most conclusive criterion for perpetuum mobile is the persistent staying of the center of mass sideways to the axis of rotation.

No, the most conclusive criteria is a persistent tendency to accelerate.

(It's not required to be persistent, but if there are sections that decelerate you've got to do a whole shedful of extra calculation to show the acceleration phases overcome the deceleration phases, and you don't have a system that can self start from any position, but you can still have perpetual motion)

in order to accelerate from any position, there has to be net torque in any position.

as you've been objecting to the simplified models - on the grounds that they don't show the other (irrelevent) parts of the perpetual motion machine, I've include the whole thing. you will find the centre of mass is always to the right of the axis. You will also find a static torque analysis shows there is always a clockwise torque. You will also find that if you built it the device would stop in this position, despite a static torque analysis showing it should rotate.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: stgpcm on May 17, 2009, 10:18:32 AM
But three simple questions:

1) does a static torque analysis (as performed for the SA wheel) show the "shelf" diagram would rotate clockwise, at the point shown? (I expect you to answer yes)

2) would machine in the diagram rotate? (I expect you to answer no)

3) is something missing from the analysis? (I expect you to bluster and ignore the question as irrelevant)
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Philip Hardcastle on May 17, 2009, 11:02:13 AM
@stgpcm

Do not bother with Omni.

I tried to nicely tell him on page 3 or about.

He claims things proved based upon nonsense.

I admire his tenacity but feel he causes harm by inducing others to blindly follow his twisted logic.

BTW I like your diagram, it is a pity OB will not look at it closely.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: stgpcm on May 17, 2009, 11:55:31 AM
@stgpcm

Do not bother with Omni.


I know. I've got me a serious case of "somebody is wrong on the internet"

Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: AquariuZ on May 17, 2009, 01:01:55 PM
This thread is growing out of proportions...

At this time I´d like to suggest:

1) a separate replication thread with just information of real world builds
2) a separate model thread with just information of virtual builds
3) Keep this thread for general discussion and updates from Abeling (if any)

No objections? Thank you.-

AZ
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Cloxxki on May 17, 2009, 01:14:16 PM
Question posed above: is somebody offering collaboration to Dusty?

Dusty seems to be doing more than fine by himself, but if he'd be open to assistants, I'm sure they'd line up to get their hands dirty in his workshop.
Should by chance his 6-foot wheel not turn as wished, I'll be glad to dedicate some of my hours to coming up with recommendations for adjustments or even replacement ramps and/or wheel plates. Others might want tot run those, or their own, through their vector and torque calculators to obtain optimal figures for Dusty to take advantage of.
But, what's going on with Dusty? Did the MIB snatch his magic wheel before he could complete it? Why is he chasing magnetic toy motor dreams when he's got a nearly completed gravity driven KW generator in his garage? :-)

I think that once Dusty has his frame setup the way he likes, and when the results should be close, but just not there yet, coming up with replacement wheels and such might be relatively low-effort for him and his assistants. And work might be done to further bring down friction. I hope that when Dusty should identify a field where he could use help, he'd get it in an instant. OB seems like a good candidate, as he's so certain there will be success.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on May 17, 2009, 01:57:25 PM
@stgpcm,

Quote
Both of my diagrams persistantly have the center of offset to the axis of rotation. neither of which will turn. And because neither will turn it is persistant,

No, they don't. It's for you to see why.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on May 17, 2009, 01:58:50 PM
I know. I've got me a serious case of "somebody is wrong on the internet"

No, you don't know. You think you know but you don't. Your "arguments" prove that.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on May 17, 2009, 02:02:33 PM
@stgpcm

Do not bother with Omni.

I tried to nicely tell him on page 3 or about.

He claims things proved based upon nonsense.

I admire his tenacity but feel he causes harm by inducing others to blindly follow his twisted logic.

BTW I like your diagram, it is a pity OB will not look at it closely.

You're despicable human being who breaks his word and therefore should be ignored outright.

As for your opinion on page 3 it's nothing but ridiculous.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on May 17, 2009, 02:10:26 PM
No, the most conclusive criteria is a persistent tendency to accelerate.

(It's not required to be persistent, but if there are sections that decelerate you've got to do a whole shedful of extra calculation to show the acceleration phases overcome the deceleration phases, and you don't have a system that can self start from any position, but you can still have perpetual motion)

in order to accelerate from any position, there has to be net torque in any position.

as you've been objecting to the simplified models - on the grounds that they don't show the other (irrelevent) parts of the perpetual motion machine, I've include the whole thing. you will find the centre of mass is always to the right of the axis. You will also find a static torque analysis shows there is always a clockwise torque. You will also find that if you built it the device would stop in this position, despite a static torque analysis showing it should rotate.

The right-hand two balls are fixed while the left-hand ones can move freely along the arms, right? In absence of friction it will turn CW. It isn't a perpetuum mobile, though, and it's for you to answer why.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on May 17, 2009, 02:39:57 PM
In this example as well as in the perpetuum mobile case the constructions, materials, lubricants and what not have to ensure that the friction forces on the left are less than the excess torque provided by the weight on the right. That's only a matter of engineering and not of whether or not perpetuum mobile is real which it actually is.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: stgpcm on May 17, 2009, 02:52:32 PM
The right-hand two balls are fixed while the left-hand ones can move freely along the arms, right? In absence of friction it will turn CW. It isn't a perpetuum mobile, though, and it's for you to answer why.

no, all for balls move along the arms, there is an catch mechanism that is holding them fixed on the right that releases at 3:00

in absence of friction the model would not rotate from the position it is in, other wise it would be a perpetual motion machine. Until you can understand why it doesn't rotate you are wasting everyones time
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Cloxxki on May 17, 2009, 02:52:43 PM
Omnibus, might I suggest you channel part of the energy you put in stting "the obvious", to making the obvious visible to us mere mortals? If you are so certain, come up with an over-torque design, and build it would less than the maximum friction to get it to run.
I am noticing repetitive pattern in your posts here which seems greater than even mine.

Your efforts are most commendable, but really could be put to much better use. Getting fellow inventors and free energy proponents more p'd off than you aremotivating them, cannot be a desired result of your postings? The way you prefer to state the truth as it is clearly quite apparent to you, you are alienating those potentially able to make a real difference here.
How are do'ers like Dusty in their spare time going to get to constructive advice when you are filling pages (from cut up or repetitive posts) on the only thread dedicated to this design?
Please open a separate thread "Perpetuum Mobile proven in 1001 ways, by Omnibus" to vent your genious. The mere mortals will crawl along using their pre-historic brains to their fullest, getting further than with your help.

Everyone is entitled to an opinion, but no-one should be allowed to vent this opinion so violently that it is undermining the future of free energy.

Thank you. Looking forward to your more constructive advice to actual replicators like Dusty and Eisenficker.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on May 17, 2009, 03:05:33 PM
@stgpcm,

Quote
in absence of friction the model would not rotate from the position it is in, other wise it would be a perpetual motion machine. Until you can understand why it doesn't rotate you are wasting everyones time

You are the one wasting everyone's time claiming that your model is a perpetuum mobile which it isn't. As for moving CW in absence of friction, it will, and it's for you to say until what position, if you've studied the discussion so far and have understood it.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: AquariuZ on May 17, 2009, 03:21:37 PM
Omnibus, might I suggest you channel part of the energy you put in stting "the obvious", to making the obvious visible to us mere mortals? If you are so certain, come up with an over-torque design, and build it would less than the maximum friction to get it to run.
I am noticing repetitive pattern in your posts here which seems greater than even mine.

Your efforts are most commendable, but really could be put to much better use. Getting fellow inventors and free energy proponents more p'd off than you aremotivating them, cannot be a desired result of your postings? The way you prefer to state the truth as it is clearly quite apparent to you, you are alienating those potentially able to make a real difference here.
How are do'ers like Dusty in their spare time going to get to constructive advice when you are filling pages (from cut up or repetitive posts) on the only thread dedicated to this design?
Please open a separate thread "Perpetuum Mobile proven in 1001 ways, by Omnibus" to vent your genious. The mere mortals will crawl along using their pre-historic brains to their fullest, getting further than with your help.

Everyone is entitled to an opinion, but no-one should be allowed to vent this opinion so violently that it is undermining the future of free energy.

Thank you. Looking forward to your more constructive advice to actual replicators like Dusty and Eisenficker.

There are now three threads on Abeling.

One for modelling in the REAL world
One for modelling in the virtual world
One for general discussion and updates (old one)

In addition I have added a poll to test sentiments.

You can either ignore that and keep to this thread, or post the relevant discussion in the new threads.

Up to you.

AZ
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: stgpcm on May 17, 2009, 03:25:14 PM
@stgpcm,

You are the one wasting everyone's time claiming that your model is a perpetuum mobile which it isn't
I'm not, I'm claiming that by your criteria it is, but that it isn't.
Quote
As for moving CW in absence of friction, it will, and it's for you to say until what position, if you've studied the discussion so far and have understood it.
No it wont. You're doing your vector calculations incorrectly
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: eisenficker2000 on May 17, 2009, 03:32:10 PM
I gave it a go with my old wheel. Polishing all the surfaces with 600 wet sandpaper, yes I know there are finer grains. Tediously polishing the narrow slots, widening them..etc. etc.

Yes with 1 weight it does make a 270 degree clockwise turn launched a little bit, like 5 degrees clockwise position. From 0 degrees on top..also 270 degrees..anticlockwise.

Yes it did show more detailed action with 4 weights...it does have a perfect and consistent equilibrium position.

And with 8 weights... a nice piece of art, machinery and modeling.
No sensible torque. Moving it fast clockwise, it does go easier. The centrifugal force and the accelerating of the 9 o clock to 12 o clock position do have an effect.

Anticlockwise, centrifugal forces eject the weights from their tracks ending up blocking the entire wheel.

But is it enough to support Abelings claims ? His fears for not being able to manage the huge forces and having no fear that his wheel will not start, or turn.

Is it a matter of scale? It would for me be the only explanation, last resort , for giving Abeling the benefit of the doubt.

Okay until I see them building in the north..I put Abeling in the green dream team.

So no "pocket size" cell phone charger from this design..Thank god I did not order that container with replications in China  ;)

As for the VB model, I will keep working on it, a nice programming exercise.

(pictures available on request, but not showing anything useful..)
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Philip Hardcastle on May 17, 2009, 03:45:28 PM
You're despicable human being who breaks his word and therefore should be ignored outright.

As for your opinion on page 3 it's nothing but ridiculous.

Omni you are a liar.

You tell people you have proof of the possibility of what you rave on about but what you say is already proved, was a paper by a fool with obvious flaws.

You then try and shift the blame to me for your stupidity and bare faced misrepresentation to the good people here.

You do not listen and are so arrogant as to suggest to me that you are mentally unhinged.

I could safely say that you are a poorly educated wannabe.

Stop wasting everyones time with your unsupported and childish claims.

You are claiming a device that produces energy from nothing.

Not from zero point, just plain nothing. You are by all counts stupid to believe that something can ouput power without there being a source.

Why do you push onto good people your pseudo science.

Grow up.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: stgpcm on May 17, 2009, 03:48:10 PM

And with 8 weights... a nice piece of art, machinery and modeling.
Is it a matter of scale? It would for me be the only explanation, last resort , for giving Abeling the benefit of the doubt.


The video showed slots numbered 1, 16 and 15, which implies 16 weights, so the discrepancy could be here - although I don't think so.

It would be nice, for completeness, for someone to waste their time building a 16 slot version.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: spinner on May 17, 2009, 04:37:01 PM
@stgpcm,

You are the one wasting everyone time claiming that your model is a perpetuum mobile which it isn't. As for moving CW in absence of friction, it will, and it's for you to say until what position, if you've studied the discussion so far and have understood it.

Congrat's, Omni! Is this your 500'th or 600'th post in this very thread?

I just wander, will you ever be capable of listening to what other people say? Except those few opinions which are beneficial to your program?

I mean, it's noble to stick with your own opinions and beliefs, but, eventually (sooner or later) anyone would understood that the rest of the people can think (and have a more appropriate/valid/ answers), too.

I admire all the people who tried to explain all the (obvious) problems to you, o, mighty robot!
No wander that in many debates/ forums people were starting to call you "OmniBot"!
It seems that you are the only Earthling not capable of thinking at least a bit differently... Like you have been preprogrammed before....?
 
Gee, I never saw anyone who would persist in his (faulty) opinions without any kind of valid proof for so long.... "Perpetual motion has been proved without a doubt..."  How many concepts, again? I lost count years ago...
I swear I read this sentence of yours at least 3000 times....

What Perpetual motion, please? Where is "theoretical science" saying that? Ah, you're not from Earth?
Theoretical science says (!!!) that "gravitational PM's" are impossible... (I'm sure you know all the reasons why...)

So, if you want to prove the opposite "without a doubt", you need to build a solid proof of a concept device, all by your very self... (you don't want to do it right now?)
That's beyond your capabilities, eh? You're a theoretical scientist, right? I know, I know...
Trapped in a human body...

You miss each and every good post... Poor Mondrasek, he will need a long rest now (after a very patient conversation with you...)

Like I said early on, you can start with understanding the force parallelograms (torque component force under known conditions (static gravity force to wheel torque evaluations), )
Yeah, I allways "wanted to sound scientific"... ;D

Then, the dynamic evaluation comes (it's quite different world...)


When you will prove your version (that Abeling wheel is constantly OOB CW and it starts to spin in that direction for more than 360 degrees ALL by it's own, we will discuss it further).
(The real "what would happened" scenario was presented to you a few times by some of us members)...

Oh, yes, you don't believe anyone... And, you shouldn't!
So, prove it, please!
You need some time? Just tell us how long.
Shall we meet here, say, in six months? Maybe a year, or more? How long, just say?

I do hope I'll look like a total idiot then.... ;)

P.S.
As you're a newbee, a few hints to you...

-You can always use the basic physics knowledge. (historical knowledge, methods, procedures, prescriptions, "laws",...)
or,
-Start with a sincere understanding of prof. Simanek pages... (yes, the one you dismissed as .......). That's for a good start.
-Check out the history wrt. to gravity perpetual motion claims... I'm sure you'll find hundreds similar (if not almost the same) concepts... Ah, you need to check back all the way to the 18 century (for documented sources).... Yes, wheels, weights, ramps and eternal unbalance....
 >:(
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: i_ron on May 17, 2009, 05:08:18 PM
There are now three threads on Abeling.

One for modelling in the REAL world
One for modelling in the virtual world
One for general discussion and updates (old one)

In addition I have added a poll to test sentiments.

You can either ignore that and keep to this thread, or post the relevant discussion in the new threads.

Up to you.

AZ

Good to see you back AZ,  mylow is in my opinion a very clever scam... but it is entertaining to see the belief pour
forth, eh? 

You have identified a problem with this list but failed to put
a name to it. Omnibot, if you were to remove all his posts and all the answers refuting his posts this list would only be what,
ten pages long? By failing to name the disrupter and deal with
this in the proper way you have merely diluted the problem,
not solved it. His recent bout of rudeness and disruption
should have been adequate grounds to take the necessary
step.

But it is your list and I will abide your decision.

Regards,

Ron

PS: can you post the addy for the new lists, please



Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on May 17, 2009, 07:04:43 PM
@Cloxxkki,

Quote
If you are so certain, come up with an over-torque design, and build it would less than the maximum friction to get it to run.

That's exactly what I'm repeating over and over again. Now that perpetuum mobile has been proven real we have to put efforts on determining what the right conditions, sizes, construction, materials etc. would be to have the perpetuum mobile effect overwhelm forces of friction. This optimization should be done prior to actual building the machine. Of course, I'm admiring the work done by @Dusty and @eisenficker2000 in their effort to build the machine from scratch. However, a lot of effoer and money can be saved by exploring the optimization patterns first theoretically.

And, by the way, I'm not here to encourage anybody or to build friendships. I'm looking for the truth and most of the posts here (excluding @mondrasek's and @eisenficker2000's and probably one or two others, @Dusty's, of course) are completely useless in this respect.

Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on May 17, 2009, 07:10:21 PM
Omni you are a liar.

You tell people you have proof of the possibility of what you rave on about but what you say is already proved, was a paper by a fool with obvious flaws.

You then try and shift the blame to me for your stupidity and bare faced misrepresentation to the good people here.

You do not listen and are so arrogant as to suggest to me that you are mentally unhinged.

I could safely say that you are a poorly educated wannabe.

Stop wasting everyones time with your unsupported and childish claims.

You are claiming a device that produces energy from nothing.

Not from zero point, just plain nothing. You are by all counts stupid to believe that something can ouput power without there being a source.

Why do you push onto good people your pseudo science.

Grow up.

This post is ignored.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on May 17, 2009, 07:13:29 PM
I'm not, I'm claiming that by your criteria it is, but that it isn't. No it wont. You're doing your vector calculations incorrectly

So, we're in agreement then. Yours is not perpetuum mobile and you shouldn't waste everybody's time with that. Also, saying that I'm doing my vector calculations incorrectly isn't enough for what you're saying to be true. At least @modrasek is trying, to no avail, but trying. You have no clue, though, as seen from the examples you're giving.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: AquariuZ on May 17, 2009, 07:32:33 PM
Now you see, this is the only disadvantage of an internet forum: Threads that grow out of proportion.

That is for whatever reason. I am not going to choose sides in battles unless I have a strong opinion backed by strong understanding of the matter.

I do feel this thread is too large and for clarity I have opened the two other threads.

Right or wrong, I would suggest not to attack anyone personally, for any reason. It is just not productive.

Thanks to all for your continuing interest and input.

Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: stgpcm on May 17, 2009, 07:42:24 PM
So, we're in agreement then. Yours is not perpetuum mobile and you shouldn't waste everybody's time with that.
apart from the fact they fit YOUR definition of one.

So, please stop using a broken definition, and I'll stop providing you with machines that match your definition.

Quote
Also, saying that I'm doing my vector calculations incorrectly isn't enough for what you're saying to be true.

OK, do the vector caluculations for the instance shown  in  the two weight diagram, and I'll tell you where yo are making your mistake - I have the correct calculations that show why it would (contrary to your understanding) actually turn Counter Clockwise
Quote
At least @modrasek is trying, to no avail, but trying. You have no clue, though, as seen from the examples you're giving.

I am trying to help by making sure we are performing the correct calculations - surely that is a really good starting point?

I am doing this by providing simple examples that I believe exhibit the errors in your calculations, based on my understanding of them. If your calculations don't have the errors. Then I have misunderstood your methodology, and we have eliminated a potential reason for misattributing the status of perpetuum mobile to the system
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on May 17, 2009, 07:57:48 PM
@stgpcm

Quote
apart from the fact they fit YOUR definition of one.

No, you've shown persistently (pun not intended) that you don't understand my definition. You have to study that problem more.

Quote
OK, do the vector caluculations for the instance shown  in  the two weight diagram, and I'll tell you where yo are making your mistake - I have the correct calculations that show why it would (contrary to your understanding) actually turn Counter Clockwise

OK, show it.

Quote
I am doing this by providing simple examples

No, simple examples won't do. I've said that to @mondrasek as well. If the simple examples were doing the job then this would've been proven much earlier. Proven, I say, not having it working, because I believe it has existed as working devices in the past but has been suppressed. Not by mediocrities like Simanek who are only the ones who'd love to be the lackeys and laboriously strive to somehow please whoever they perceive as their masters, not very successfully, at that. The powers that be are different.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: stgpcm on May 17, 2009, 08:05:32 PM
@stgpcm

No, you've shown persistently (pun not intended) that you don't understand my definition. You have to study that problem more.
Indeed I don't understand your definition. To me it seems flawed. I'me asking you to show how the models presented fail your definition to gain clarity.

you say if the center of mass is always to the right of an axle it will turn clockwise. Others have said not if you've got guides involved.
I've provided a model that I believe has its center of mass always to the right of the axis of rotation, and we both agree it isn't perpetual. So, can you clarify?


Quote
OK, show it.
no, I have observed you tendency to be dishonest. show your working - and we'll see if that matches mine. If it does, you get an apology from me.

Quote
No, simple examples won't do. I've said that to @mondrasek a well.

You are right, simple examples wont prove perpetual motion, but they will let us test our tools for testing them. what's the point of saying "my calculations say it works" if the maths behind those calculations is misunderstood?

Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on May 17, 2009, 08:29:08 PM
@stgpcm,

If there's anyone dishonest that's that fellow who broke his word. He's really dishonest. As for me being dishonest for not showing proof, you're out of your mind to call me that in view of all the proof I've provided. It's a different story that you don't get it. And, obviously you're afraid to go ahead with vector diagrams because they will be refuted at once.

As for the persistent sideways residing of the center of mass, it applies for all possible positions of the rotatiing part. Not so in your case.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: stgpcm on May 17, 2009, 08:35:49 PM
@stgpcm,

If there's anyone dishonest that's that fellow who broke his word. He's really dishonest. As for me being dishonest for not showing proof, you're out of your mind to call me that in view of all the proof I've provided. It's a different story that you don't get it. And, obviously you're afraid to go ahead with vector diagrams because they will be refuted at once.

so, you can't do them.
Quote
As for the persistent sideways residing of the center of mass, it applies for all possible positions of the rotatiing part. Not so in your case.
where don't they in the third diagram?
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on May 17, 2009, 08:42:57 PM
The CCW motion due to guides isn't possible because guides are not providers of driving force. @mondrasek at one point was having these ideas but they are wrong -- mass doesn't leak into the guides. he only role of guides it to change the direction of the driving force derived from the ball and thus divert the ball from the natural path it would have under the action of the entire force derived from it. Therefore, the presence of guides is to diminish the value of the total force derived from the ball as well as change its direction of action. This, combined with the forced shortening of the corresponding arm inevitably leads to lower torque value. All these considerations are in absence of friction. Presence of friction is variable and discussing its role comes only after the above is understood well. In other words, only after it is understood that in absence of friction this wheel is a perpetuum mobile. When this is understood the engineering part of the project kicks in whereby situations should be sought to decrease the forces of friction to levels which will not overcome the excess torque which makes the device a perpetuum mobile. First thing to be understood is what is this construction which would ensure the greatest value of the net torque at every position of the wheel. That's the theoretical part of the engineering side of the project. Once this is understood, search for materials, lubricants etc. begins. That's approximately the general scheme of research which is usually followed in such projects and that's not a whimsical idea to do it that way. If done in the above way reaching the goals of the project will be achieved sooner and with less bumping into stone walls.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Cloxxki on May 17, 2009, 08:49:02 PM
The CCW motion due to guides isn't possible because guides are not providers of driving force. @mondrasek at one point was having these ideas but they are wrong -- mass doesn't leak into the guides. he only role of guides it to change the direction of the driving force derived from the ball and thus divert the ball from the natural path it would have under the action of the entire force derived from it. Therefore, the presence of guides is to diminish the value of the total force derived from the ball as well as change its direction of action. This, combined with the forced shortening of the corresponding arm inevitably leads to lower torque value. All these considerations are in absence of friction. Presence of friction is variable and discussing its role comes only after the above is understood well. In other words, only after it is understood that in absence of friction this wheel is a perpetuum mobile. When this is understood the engineering part of the project kicks in whereby situations should be sought to decrease the forces of friction to levels which will not overcome the excess torque which makes the device a perpetuum mobile. First thing to be understood is what is this construction which would ensure the greatest value of the net torque at every position of the wheel. That's the theoretical part of the engineering side of the project. Once this is understood, search for materials, lubricants etc. begins. That's approximately the general scheme of research which is usually followed in such projects and that's not a whimsical idea to do it that way. If done in the above way reaching the goals of the project will be achieved sooner and with less bumping into stone walls.
All very nice, but you are neglecting to take into account the role that the slots play. Design these wrong, and you will indeed see a wheel turning the wrong way. I've explained this before, but it probably got lost in someone's yes/no game.
If you don't believe me, write out a contest and I'll take the prize.

When the weights are carefully distributed, the CCW effect can be overcome and all we get is a short but sharp decelleration of the wheel, for the benefit of the weight at 9-12:00 which will be catching up with the rest of the wheel.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on May 17, 2009, 08:49:15 PM
@stgpcm,

Quote
where don't they in the third diagram?

That's for you to answer.

The crucial feature of the perpetuum mobile is that never for a given weight the guide is sloping the same within one full turn. The guides themselves retain their constant slopes throughout but they are experienced in turn by successive weights. Thus, seen as a whole the weights are on an infinite slippery slope.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on May 17, 2009, 08:52:34 PM
@Cloxxki,

We're discussing  a wheel of the type Abeling has, not something else that you have in mind.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: stgpcm on May 17, 2009, 08:57:53 PM
The CCW motion due to guides isn't possible because guides are not providers of driving force. @mondrasek at one point was having these ideas but they are wrong -- mass doesn't leak into the guides.

mass doesn't leak into them, but it they still cause CCW rotation.
It happens in the wheels simulated by the 2d software,
it happens in the wheels people built,
it happens in my calculations.


Quote
The only role of guides it to change the direction of the driving force derived from the ball and thus divert the ball from the natural path it would have under the action of the entire force derived from it. Therefore, the presence of guides is to diminish the value of the total force derived from the ball as well as change its direction of action. This, combined with the forced shortening of the corresponding arm inevitably leads to lower torque value.

If by lower you mean of greater magnitude I agree. but I suspect you don't.


Quote
All these considerations are in absence of friction. Presence of friction is variable and discussing its role comes only after the above is understood well.

absolutely. thowing mu-r around just increases the complexity, and is only an issue once you have identified an over unity device.

Quote
First thing to be understood is what is this construction which would ensure the greatest value of the net torque at every position of the wheel. That's the theoretical part of the engineering side of the project.

And it's vital that the torque is being calculated correctly. Hence this discussion. And that's why I want to see the calculations done on a simple model, so they don't have to be computer assisted, and hence opaque.

Quote
If done in the above way reaching the goals of the project will be achieved sooner and with less bumping into stone walls.
Absolutely.

So, are you going to be open about your calculation technique, by performing them on a simple example for those of us that want to understand your method? Or is an open source site the wrong place for you?

oh, I chose the 30 degree case because:
sin(30) = cos(60) = 1/2
sin(60) = cos(30) = SQRT(3/4)
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: stgpcm on May 17, 2009, 09:21:47 PM
@stgpcm,

That's for you to answer.



My answwer is there is no such place. you are the one that claims there is.

Put up, or shut up.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Cloxxki on May 17, 2009, 09:28:50 PM
@Cloxxki,

We're discussing  a wheel of the type Abeling has, not something else that you have in mind.
Your words confirm that you do not comprehend what you're being told.

Please will you both shut up and use your energy in a contructive manner? You are both too stubborn (or stupid) to win this fight.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: i_ron on May 17, 2009, 10:11:53 PM

Please will you both shut up and use your energy in a contructive manner? You are both too stubborn (or stupid) to win this fight.

Please cloxxki, stgpcm is an intelligent contributing member.

His posts are honest and well thought out, based on a clear understanding of the wheel in the real world.

The abusive, abrasive, bulling attacks are from one source only, omnibus. These three lists are toast while this constant
harassment of contributing members is allowed to continue.

This list could be fun and constructive if individual members could post their ideas in comfort, free from ridicule and abuse. But as long as ONE member is allowed to make 75% of the posts and stomp down any member who might dare to violate the "master bully's" guide lines then this is exactly what you will see... chaos.

Ron

Edit: "to win this fight."
    ... explain to me, why should it be a fight?

Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: LarryC on May 18, 2009, 05:48:29 AM
Please cloxxki, stgpcm is an intelligent contributing member.

His posts are honest and well thought out, based on a clear understanding of the wheel in the real world.

The abusive, abrasive, bulling attacks are from one source only, omnibus. These three lists are toast while this constant
harassment of contributing members is allowed to continue.

This list could be fun and constructive if individual members could post their ideas in comfort, free from ridicule and abuse. But as long as ONE member is allowed to make 75% of the posts and stomp down any member who might dare to violate the "master bully's" guide lines then this is exactly what you will see... chaos.

Ron

Edit: "to win this fight."
    ... explain to me, why should it be a fight?

Cloxxiki,

I would like to second Ron's opinion.

Regards, Larry
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Cloxxki on May 18, 2009, 09:05:50 AM
Thanks gentlemen. I could in this case tell the difference between the two fighting dogs here already.
But as I read recently : if you argue with an idiot in public, the public may not be able to tell a difference.
Obviously, OB is not reponding to the treatment administered to him by stgpcm. Their exchange of messages obscured the topic of this thread.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on May 18, 2009, 01:42:35 PM
@stgpcm,

This reveals it all:

Quote
Quote
The only role of guides it to change the direction of the driving force derived from the ball and thus divert the ball from the natural path it would have under the action of the entire force derived from it. Therefore, the presence of guides is to diminish the value of the total force derived from the ball as well as change its direction of action. This, combined with the forced shortening of the corresponding arm inevitably leads to lower torque value.


If by lower you mean of greater magnitude I agree. but I suspect you don't.

You don’t know what you’re talking about.

The presence of guides can in no way increase the torque when a body of a given mass is considered. The weight of this given mass will always be the same independent of whether this mass is sitting on a table, freely falling or sliding on an incline Any force that is derived from this mass can only be of lower (smaller, lesser) magnitude than its initial one. Given mass can only deliver as much as ti actually is, no more.Therefore with guide, considering the effective mass which acts to create a torque, as in our case, the torque which this mass will create can only be lower (smaller, lesser) than the torque this mass can create without a guide but for the same arm. Guides cannot create more mass than the mass than the mass initially given.

Now, after this exchange, quite useless, as a matter of fact, you only deserve to be ignored. Your obvious blabber needs no further response.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: i_ron on May 18, 2009, 05:34:36 PM
@stgpcm,

You don’t know what you’re talking about.

Now, after this exchange, quite useless, as a matter of fact, you only deserve to be ignored. Your obvious blabber needs no further response.

AQUARIUZ,

Different day... same shit  (why do you tolerate this?)

I see the mylow hoax has come unraveled (small pun)       ... it was string drive.

Now we need to apply the same scrutiny to the wheel. Two working models show that it doesn't... are we missing something?

Could I suggest you, or someone, phone Sjack again and see if there has been any progress on the weight plant, after all it is mid May.

We need some confirmation, better yet would be his promised (?) explanation that he was going to do.

Regards

Ron

 
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on May 18, 2009, 09:28:30 PM
Abeling states it clearly that he won't release any additional information due to a ban from his investors or he'll lose their support. Otherwise I'd pay him a visit personally right away.

This project has to be continued without Abeling's input and I've outlined earlier the general scenario for the research, now that the reality of perpetuum mobile has been confirmed beyond any doubt. Incidental mishaps with the reproduction cannot serve as a basis to conclude that something confirmed to be doable isn't so.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: stgpcm on May 18, 2009, 09:34:04 PM
The top weight, all of it's force acting upon the wheel, can have it's torque calculated in the standard manner, 1 unit mass, acting on the wheel, calculate the component of the force due to gravity perpendicular to the line between the pivot and the center of mass of the weight = 1 . cos (60) = 1/2, multiplied by the distance from the pivot = 1 . 1/2, = 1/2 (or 0.5)

The method I believe you've been taking to caluculate the torque for the lower one, is to resolve it's interaction with the guide (which as the guide is vertical has no effect), and then use resolve that resultant with the wheel. This would produce a resultant of 1/2, multiplied but the distance 9/10, giving a CCW toque of 0.45. I may have misunderstood your method, but you won't work my simple example, so I can't tell.

Instead, as the weight is free to side on the wheel slot, you instead have to calculate a slightly more complex system -  force (f) applied to the weight by the slot (not the wheel, yet),  must have a vertical component sufficient to match the force due to gravity. (the horizontal component, as you rightly say, is leached away by the guides, and used to push the earth sideways, just a teeny bit). For this case,  f . sin(30) = 1, so f . 0.5 = 1, f = 2. If this force "f" is required by the slot to hold the weight against gravity, this must be the force the weight (due to gravity) is applying to the slot. So the torque is 2 . 9/10 = 18/10 or 1.8 CCW.

The system has a net torque of 1.3 CCW, so would rotate Counter Clockwise.

I hope this helps.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on May 18, 2009, 10:07:32 PM
Not at all. The only force that causes torque is derivable solely from the unit force due to the given mass. Slots and guides cannot create mass to derive torque creating force from it.

The guide in this case is perpendicular, so the torque-creating force is of the magnitude and direction as it would be without a guide.

All this is in absence of forces of friction.

The above (considering the guides as some kind of mass generating entities) was a mistake @mondrasek was making but I think he understood it in the end.
Title: NEWSFLASH: WEBSITE UPDATED
Post by: AquariuZ on May 18, 2009, 10:36:39 PM
Question: Will you sell the energy yourself?
Initially that was what we had in mind, but this is no longer our goal. We have been advised to sell our systems to the current energy providers instead for the production of "beautiful energy" (electricity) as a substitute for power plants, wind turbines etc.


DAMMIT

I am going to call him again.  Selling is the same in this case as shelving.

GRRRRRRRRRRRRRRR %$$%**!

Edit: sorry here is the link with the newly posted information on Abelings website:
http://mooieenergie.nl/index.php/en/component/content/article/3-gewichtenergiecentrale/9-nieuwsbrief-mei-2009

Sjack, sjack, sjack. You know what´s going to happen with your invention don´t you?

Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: mondrasek on May 18, 2009, 10:48:53 PM
Not at all. The only force that causes torque is derivable solely from the unit force due to the given mass. Slots and guides cannot create mass to derive torque creating force from it.

The guide in this case is perpendicular, so the torque-creating force is of the magnitude and direction as it would be without a guide.

All this is in absence of forces of friction.

The above (considering the guides as some kind of mass generating entities) was a mistake @mondrasek was making but I think he understood it in the end.

Not at all Omni.  You are still making the same mistake.  Even Eisenficker2000  confirmed the mistake in his (and your) original method and agreed that the way I explained and used is correct.  That was in this thread.  If you did not understand that you may re-read it.

The slots change the angle that the weights lean against the wheel.  So the angle of the slots may cause more of the weight to lean against the guides which are attached to the Earth.  The component that is pressing against the guides/Earth we agree can not cause rotation.  So the resultant force that *can* cause rotation is dependant on the angle of the slots.  You are not taking this into account.

Please realize that I will never agree with you that your current methods are correct.  That would be like asking me to agree that 1+1+1=2.  There is only one correct answer.  I am sorry that you have not been able to understand that the method you are employing is flawed.  And it is not just my opinion.  If you cannot trust that myself and Eisenficker2000 are now using the correct method, maybe you could discuss this with a local physics or mechanics instructor.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: stgpcm on May 18, 2009, 11:00:17 PM
Yes this is without friction.

This is the answer found by people that build the wheel.

This is the answer wm2d gives you.

But you disagree with my static analysis?

OK, I'll do a dynamic analysis.

I will assume, as you believe, the system would rotate clockwise, I'll rotate the system one degree from angle a=29.5 to angle a=30.5. I will call the height of the pivot P

for the top weight, due to the inertialess catch (or the shape of the slot) the distance from the hub is constant. cos (a) is height/distance, so height = P + cos(a)/1

I'm adding, because the weight is above the Pivot

for the bottom weight, the vertical guide keeps the horizontal distance of the center of the mass from the hub a constant (in this case 0.45m), so the height of the mass is determined by tan(a) = 0.45/height, so height = P - 0.45/tan(a)

I'm (EDIT:typo) subtracting because the weight is below the Pivot

travelling from 29.5 to 30.5 degrees, the difference in height of the top weight would be END - START
(P + cos(30.5)) - (P + cos(29.5)),
= cos(30.5) - cos(29.5)

the difference in height of the lower weight would be
(P - 0.45/tan(30.5)) - (P - 0.45/tan(29.5)),
= 0.45 . (1/tan(29.5) - 1/tan(30.5))

at this point, I need to use my five figure tables, or a calculator. For speeds sake, I'll use a calculator

the difference in height for the top weight is

cos(30.5) - cos(29.5)
= 0.86162916044152574545106204815061 - 0.87035569593989968041595026212419
(quick check, the end is higher than the start... yes)
= -0.0087265354983739349648882139735844
(quick check, the object has got lower... yes)

the difference in height for the bottom weight is
0.45 . (1/tan(29.5) - 1/tan(30.5))
= 0.45 . (1/0.5657727781877700776025887010584 - 1/0.58904501642055107438483608526909 - )
= 0.45 . (1.7674940162428909073599175537677 - 1.6976631193260889100263622699454)
(quick check - START (P - 1/tan(29.5) is further below the pivot than END (P - 1/tan(20.5)... yes)
= 0.45 . 0.069830896916801997333555283822369
= 0.031423903612560898800099877720066
(quick check, the weight has gone up)

so turning clockwise the top weight has converted ~0.0087 potential energy into kinetic energy, to give to the system, and the bottom weight has taken ~0.0314 kinetic energy from the system to convert into potential energy. so turning the system clockwise has caused a LOSS of kinetic energy. So... the system would not actually accelerate clockwise, it would accelerate counter clockwise.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: stgpcm on May 18, 2009, 11:30:12 PM
now, and here's the kicker. lets calculate what torque you would have to apply in order to do those amounts of work.

Bear in mind that we only have an approximation of the work being done. to get accurate figures would have look at the limit cases of (cos(30+delta) - cos(30-delta)) and (0.45 . (1/tan(30-delta) - 1/tan(30+delta))

That said, work done by applying a torque "t" through "s" radians =

t . s

and to convert "a" degrees to radians  is
a . PI/180

the work done by rotating the top weight through 1 degree at my statically calculated torque of 0.5 =

(work done is the conversion of potential energy to kinetic energy)

t . a . PI/180
= 0.5 . 1 . PI/180
= PI/360
= 0.0087266462599716478846184538424431

that's within .00127% of the value calculated dynamically



the work done by rotating the bottom weight through 1 degree at my statically calculated torque of 1.8 =

(work done is the conversion of potential energy to kinetic energy)

t . a . PI/180
= 1.8 . 1 . PI/180
= PI/100
= 0.031415926535897932384626433832795

that's within 0.0254% of the value calculated dynamically.

as the lower weight is moving faster, the conditions upon it are changing more quickly, making the approximation more unreliable - but here it is less than 3 parts in 10 thousand, so I'm content.




Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: hansvonlieven on May 19, 2009, 12:17:51 AM
Nice work stgpc,

You don't need all that though to see that such a device cannot work.

In any gravity device you have a weight that drops from say A to B and is supposed to do work on the way down. In order to re-start the cycle the weight has to be returned to A.

Now, the most efficient way we know of doing this is to lift it straight up as in an Atwood machine. There you have only minor friction losses in the bearing of the pulley.

The next best way is to roll it up an inclined plane. Here you have the same losses in the bearing plus the friction between the plane and the rolling weight.

One of the worst ways to lift the weight is via a scissor mechanism as proposed. Here you have the forces between the wheel and the ramp acting against each other, preventing the weight to rotate to minimise friction and in fact acting as a brake. It needs a lot of energy to overcome this, energy that simply is not there.

These forces, though very really present, do not show up if you only look at the centre of gravity and torque generated by the individual weights.

Simple as that. See diagram.

Hans von Lieven
                         
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: i_ron on May 19, 2009, 12:26:24 AM
Yes this is without friction.

This is the answer found by people that build the wheel.

This is the answer wm2d gives you.

 So... the system would not actually accelerate clockwise, it would accelerate counter clockwise.

Absolutely amazing your easy flow of math here! I am in awe.

Now the next question is... will it continue to accelerate?

What a strange twist of fate if this does turn CCW.
Thank you for taking the time to explain this.

Ron
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Tink on May 19, 2009, 12:35:36 AM
Hans, you are right.
Flying machines heavier then air can't fly and the earth is still flat.
If you really think Sjack's machine can't work then tell us why not, follow the rules of science!!!!
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: stgpcm on May 19, 2009, 12:36:59 AM
Nice work stgpc,

You don't need all that though to see that such a device cannot work.


Hansvon Lieven

Ah, but simply saying that excludes a potential twist no one has yet thought of. Which I firmly hope exists - I don't believe in perpetual motion per se, but that there are ways of tapping free and currently unknown energy sources - a traditional water wheel leads to the hydro-electric turbine, as a method of capturing the suns thermal output - giving free energy

I'm interested in making sure we have the tools to analyse these devices to find the twist that powers them, because once you have the twist you can refine it.

Much the approach Omnibus has, I think.
Title: Re: NEWSFLASH: WEBSITE UPDATED
Post by: Tink on May 19, 2009, 12:49:31 AM
Question: Will you sell the energy yourself?
Initially that was what we had in mind, but this is no longer our goal. We have been advised to sell our systems to the current energy providers instead for the production of "beautiful energy" (electricity) as a substitute for power plants, wind turbines etc.


DAMMIT

I am going to call him again.  Selling is the same in this case as shelving.

GRRRRRRRRRRRRRRR %$$%**!

Edit: sorry here is the link with the newly posted information on Abelings website:
http://mooieenergie.nl/index.php/en/component/content/article/3-gewichtenergiecentrale/9-nieuwsbrief-mei-2009

Sjack, sjack, sjack. You know what´s going to happen with your invention don´t you?

Sjaak had allang al een filmpje op youtube moeten gooien van zijn draaiende machine, al was het alleen maar om de schijn van een hoax te doen kortsluiten.
Jammer dat ie niets werkelijks van zich laat horen.
Hij heeft het ei van Columbus gevonden volgens mij maar hij wil er graag het maximum uitslepen wat hem niet gaat lukken de PTB kennende.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: hansvonlieven on May 19, 2009, 12:50:15 AM
Hans, you are right.
Flying machines heavier then air can't fly and the earth is still flat.
If you really think Sjack's machine can't work then tell us why not, follow the rules of science!!!!

 This was only Lord Kelvin that said that about flying machines for his own strange motives and was never part of accepted science. Anyone looking at birds knew that heavier than air flying machines can and do exist.
 
 I thought I had explained in simplified scientific terms why Sjack Abelings machine, as disclosed, cannot function. When analysing the forces at play one must look at ALL the forces present, not just some of them as Omnibus does.
 
 Hans von Lieven
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: stgpcm on May 19, 2009, 12:54:38 AM
Absolutely amazing your easy flow of math here! I am in awe.
well, I simplified Sjacks model to the point of absurdity to make the maths easier - all ramps are vertical, and all slots lie along the radii...

I can't do a 45 x 0.5 degree analysis of Sjacks wheel by hand, just working out the positions of each ramp and slot would take forever - which is why I need to make sure the automated calculations are being done correctly

However, it does fulfil what I understand to be Omnibus's "proof" of perpetuum mobile (as do other D shaped wheels) that at all points the centre of mass is to the right of the axle.

I wish he would explain how I have misunderstood his theory, so I can better understand unbalanced wheels.
[/quote]
Quote
Now the next question is... will it continue to accelerate?

What a strange twist of fate if this does turn CCW.

Unfortunately not, at the 3:00 position, for example, there is a strong clockwise torque the right weight having torque 1, the left 0.45

I am 99% certain that no wheel, ramp and slots design will work, even involving momentum and ballistics, but I want to be able to work out what is happening when/if something looks promising


Quote
Thank you for taking the time to explain this.

Ron

Thanks for listening, and checking (even if only cursorily) my maths
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Tink on May 19, 2009, 12:56:45 AM
Okay Hans,

I want you too know I have an other opinion then yours.
I am not your enemy, just someone opposing your views.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: hansvonlieven on May 19, 2009, 12:58:35 AM
Okay Hans,

I want you too know I have an other opinion then yours.
I am not your enemy, just someone opposing your views.

That is fine, a good debate is healthy. If we all had the same ideas there would be no progress.  ;D

Hans
Title: Re: NEWSFLASH: WEBSITE UPDATED
Post by: Cloxxki on May 19, 2009, 08:46:53 AM
Sjaak had allang al een filmpje op youtube moeten gooien van zijn draaiende machine, al was het alleen maar om de schijn van een hoax te doen kortsluiten.
Jammer dat ie niets werkelijks van zich laat horen.
Hij heeft het ei van Columbus gevonden volgens mij maar hij wil er graag het maximum uitslepen wat hem niet gaat lukken de PTB kennende.
Waarom iets "mooie energie" noemen, en dan gaan voor de makkelijkste verzilvering? Als de man echt omhoog zit kan ik het me voorstellen. Maar heeft hij wel de juiste mensen om zich heen verzameld?
Als hij een patent pending heeft, kan hij net zo goed een werkend apparaat tonen, om meer aandacht te krijgen, en buitenlandse investeerders geinteresseerd te krijgen.
Als blijkt dat zijn ontwerp echt werkt, ga ik meteen aan de slag met een ander ontwerp op hetzelfde principe, en ga ik grote press papiers aanbieden die lekker onverstoorbaar doorgaan, jaren lang. Al verdien je er weinig mee, je bouwt wel een bedrijf op, het is dan als elk bedrijf, en die kunnen groot worden.

Kunnen wij als NL uitvinders iets doen? Ik vertrouw ENECO toch minder met dat patent dan mijzelf...
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on May 20, 2009, 01:33:46 AM
@mondrasek,

Quote
The slots change the angle that the weights lean against the wheel.  So the angle of the slots may cause more of the weight to lean against the guides which are attached to the Earth.  The component that is pressing against the guides/Earth we agree can not cause rotation.  So the resultant force that *can* cause rotation is dependant on the angle of the slots.  You are not taking this into account.

That’s incorrect.

The torque-generating force can only be derivable from the given weight. No surface this given weight might be in contact with can generate more mass (respectively weight) than the given circular weight. Therefore, for a given circular weight and a given length of the arm the resulting toque in the presence of surfaces the observed weight is contact with can only be less than the torque when such surfaces are absent and never greater than the torque in absence of touching surfaces.

The mistake that guides can somehow generate somehow more mass is at the bottom of your misunderstanding and you have to correct this.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on May 20, 2009, 01:36:23 AM
@mondrasek,

Don't speak for @eisenficker2000. There's no way that he would agree that mass can be generated when such isn't there. And, never mind instructors. Discuss this with me and be reasonable.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on May 20, 2009, 01:39:05 AM
Yes this is without friction.

This is the answer found by people that build the wheel.

This is the answer wm2d gives you.

But you disagree with my static analysis?

OK, I'll do a dynamic analysis.

I will assume, as you believe, the system would rotate clockwise, I'll rotate the system one degree from angle a=29.5 to angle a=30.5. I will call the height of the pivot P

for the top weight, due to the inertialess catch (or the shape of the slot) the distance from the hub is constant. cos (a) is height/distance, so height = P + cos(a)/1

I'm adding, because the weight is above the Pivot

for the bottom weight, the vertical guide keeps the horizontal distance of the center of the mass from the hub a constant (in this case 0.45m), so the height of the mass is determined by tan(a) = 0.45/height, so height = P - 0.45/tan(a)

I'm (EDIT:typo) subtracting because the weight is below the Pivot

travelling from 29.5 to 30.5 degrees, the difference in height of the top weight would be END - START
(P + cos(30.5)) - (P + cos(29.5)),
= cos(30.5) - cos(29.5)

the difference in height of the lower weight would be
(P - 0.45/tan(30.5)) - (P - 0.45/tan(29.5)),
= 0.45 . (1/tan(29.5) - 1/tan(30.5))

at this point, I need to use my five figure tables, or a calculator. For speeds sake, I'll use a calculator

the difference in height for the top weight is

cos(30.5) - cos(29.5)
= 0.86162916044152574545106204815061 - 0.87035569593989968041595026212419
(quick check, the end is higher than the start... yes)
= -0.0087265354983739349648882139735844
(quick check, the object has got lower... yes)

the difference in height for the bottom weight is
0.45 . (1/tan(29.5) - 1/tan(30.5))
= 0.45 . (1/0.5657727781877700776025887010584 - 1/0.58904501642055107438483608526909 - )
= 0.45 . (1.7674940162428909073599175537677 - 1.6976631193260889100263622699454)
(quick check - START (P - 1/tan(29.5) is further below the pivot than END (P - 1/tan(20.5)... yes)
= 0.45 . 0.069830896916801997333555283822369
= 0.031423903612560898800099877720066
(quick check, the weight has gone up)

so turning clockwise the top weight has converted ~0.0087 potential energy into kinetic energy, to give to the system, and the bottom weight has taken ~0.0314 kinetic energy from the system to convert into potential energy. so turning the system clockwise has caused a LOSS of kinetic energy. So... the system would not actually accelerate clockwise, it would accelerate counter clockwise.

I told you where your mistake is and you don't need to beat around the bush trying to prove the unprovable. A given weight can only give rise to a gien torque when unobstructed. When obstructed the torque can only be less and never more that what it was when unobstructed.

Learn this once and for all and don't try to finagle. It's just a waste of forum resources.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on May 20, 2009, 01:46:45 AM
Nice work stgpc,

You don't need all that though to see that such a device cannot work.

In any gravity device you have a weight that drops from say A to B and is supposed to do work on the way down. In order to re-start the cycle the weight has to be returned to A.

Now, the most efficient way we know of doing this is to lift it straight up as in an Atwood machine. There you have only minor friction losses in the bearing of the pulley.

The next best way is to roll it up an inclined plane. Here you have the same losses in the bearing plus the friction between the plane and the rolling weight.

One of the worst ways to lift the weight is via a scissor mechanism as proposed. Here you have the forces between the wheel and the ramp acting against each other, preventing the weight to rotate to minimise friction and in fact acting as a brake. It needs a lot of energy to overcome this, energy that simply is not there.

These forces, though very really present, do not show up if you only look at the centre of gravity and torque generated by the individual weights.

Simple as that. See diagram.

Hans von Lieven
                       

This is inapplicable in the present analysis where friction is absent. In absence of friction the machine in question is a perpetuum mobile. What will happen when friction is present is another story and the first thing which has to be considered is the reality of perpetuum mobile which can only be achieved with certain very special constructions. These constructions may not provide the best conditions for the lowest friction but the are perpetuum mobile in the limit which other constructions with more favorable (less friction) are not. Therefore, in no way should the fact that certain constructions appear to be friction deprived should be an argument against the principle possibility of producing a practical perpetuum mobile. Like I said, however, discussing this is furthe down the line. At this moment @mondrasek and @stgpcm cannot figure out even the simplest case -- in lack of friction. Thus, that has to be resolved first.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on May 20, 2009, 01:48:16 AM
Absolutely amazing your easy flow of math here! I am in awe.

Now the next question is... will it continue to accelerate?

What a strange twist of fate if this does turn CCW.
Thank you for taking the time to explain this.

Ron

Why are you thanking him for providing an incorrect analysis? That's not something one should be thanked for.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: stgpcm on May 20, 2009, 09:13:02 AM
Why are you thanking him for providing an incorrect analysis? That's not something one should be thanked for.
because the analysis is correct.

The static analysis matches a dynamic analysis, "proving" it - If you can show where both calculations are flawed then you have disproved my method of calculating torque.

It matches the observed results by builders, "proving" it - if you can otherwise explain why people who put two weights in their replications observe this counterclockwise acceleration from rest where your method indicates a clockwise torque, then you method becomes a viable method for calculating.

Remember, friction can only decelerate a system, never accelerate it.


Put up, or shut up.

Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: hansvonlieven on May 20, 2009, 09:56:51 AM

Remember, friction can only decelerate a system, never accelerate it.


Unless you are talking about screwing of course  ;D ;D

Hans von Lieven
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: stgpcm on May 20, 2009, 10:50:22 AM
I told you where your mistake is and you don't need to beat around the bush trying to prove the unprovable.
the dynamic analyis is entirely different to the static one, so you have shown nothing about this one.

I have disproved your mathmatical method, so your "proof" is no such thing.
Learn this once and for all and don't try to finagle. It's just a waste of forum resources.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: stgpcm on May 20, 2009, 12:23:56 PM

The mistake that guides can somehow generate somehow more mass is at the bottom of your misunderstanding and you have to correct this.

Ah... here it is. This is your error.

The "classic" machines - the lever, the inclined plance, the pulley, all provide "mechanical advantage" - a force multiplier. That's the whole point.

"Mechanical advantage" is the maths short hand way of saying the sum of the magnitude of the components of a vector is greater than the magnitude of the resultant (except in the limit case where all components are acting in the same direction, at which piont it is equal)

The balance of forces calculation I did for the lower weight showed that clearly.

The reactive calculation doesn't - because you don't complete the calculation. (you fail to acount for the resultant force that lies along the radius of the wheel).

I wil do I full reactive analysis for you later - which will be tiresome, but it will show the same result (as much as anything involving examining the limit can)

You can calculate the torque on a system in three ways, all of which will give you the same result -

1) reactive
2) balance of forces
3) change of energy

if you don't get the same result, you have either found a new principle, or have made a mistake.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on May 20, 2009, 01:39:49 PM
Any torque-generating force for a given weight F and a given arm L can only be derived from the given weight F and from nothing else. Any calculation showing that for that F and L there can be a torque greater than FL is in error.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: stgpcm on May 20, 2009, 02:54:57 PM
Any torque-generating force for a given weight F and a given arm L can only be derived from the given weight F and from nothing else. Any calculation showing that for that F and L there can be a torque greater than FL is in error.
Sorry, that only applies if there is no interaction with anything else.

In this case the am and weight are interacting with an inclined plane, and so you need to account for that. failing to account for other interactions in the system is the souce of your error, which has lead you to potentially mistakenly claim you have proved this is a perpetuum mobile.

If your method of calculation is correct,  the four weight system I have presented is a perpetuum mobile.

To deny it, you need to deny your maths - my analysis using your maths shows a varying, yet always net CW torque

Alternately, you could show I have incorrectly applied your maths by demonstrating just one position in which your maths shows a net CCW torque.

Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Cloxxki on May 20, 2009, 03:09:53 PM
If we break apart Abeling's design to the core:
- Weight on left side takes short cut.
- In a frictionless system, a weight on the rim would have made a lateral (out to 9:00) on top of the vertical movement.
- Said lateral movement is now taken out, and brought back only at the very top (acceleration)
- The surplus in lateral potential goes towards increased friction (zero to something) PLUS the impact of the weight in the slot at 1:00.
- When the added friction is low enough, the weight has a net lateral potential on top of the rim speed when reaching 12:00/1:00.

Making it work is of course the hard part.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: mondrasek on May 20, 2009, 03:32:18 PM
@mondrasek,

Don't speak for @eisenficker2000. There's no way that he would agree that mass can be generated when such isn't there. And, never mind instructors. Discuss this with me and be reasonable.

No one has said that mass can be generated.  I only said that eisenficker2000 also realized the factor that was being overlooked in the analysis and agrees that the correct way must take into account the angle of the slots.  You can reread that starting here:  http://www.overunity.com/index.php?topic=7150.msg179252#msg179252

No reason for you to put words in anyone's mouth.

Here is another way to look at it that might help you understand.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on May 20, 2009, 03:56:08 PM
Like I said, any torque-generating force for a given weight F and a given arm L can only be derived from the given weight F and from nothing else. No interactions, walls, slots, guides, whatever can be the generator of said torque. Any calculation showing that for that F and L there can be a torque greater than FL is in error. This is the error both of you @mondrasek and @stgpcm make. You shouldn't try to put words in @eisenficker2000's mouth. I have never seen him agree that anything else but the weight in question is the torque-generating factor, which is obviously the case.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on May 20, 2009, 03:59:45 PM
Remember, as a rule of thumb, if you have a weight F acting on an arm L the largest torque there can be for these F and L is FL, independent of whether or not there are guides, slots, walls, contact surfaces or whatever else. Such additions would only cause decrease of the torque and never make it greater than FL.

These slots, walls, guides etc. are hindrances and not enhancers of rotation.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: mondrasek on May 20, 2009, 04:18:45 PM
Yet they can.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: stgpcm on May 20, 2009, 04:31:18 PM
If we break apart Abeling's design to the core:
- Weight on left side takes short cut.
- In a frictionless system, a weight on the rim would have made a lateral (out to 9:00) on top of the vertical movement.
- Said lateral movement is now taken out, and brought back only at the very top (acceleration)
- The surplus in lateral potential goes towards increased friction (zero to something) PLUS the impact of the weight in the slot at 1:00.
- When the added friction is low enough, the weight has a net lateral potential on top of the rim speed when reaching 12:00/1:00.

I don't see where the surplus in lateral movement is coming from -
in a simple wheel the weight moves outwards by the radius between 6:00 and 9:00, and then moves inwards between 9:00 and 12:00.

In the Abeling wheel the weights on the left don't travel as far outward, but they also don't travel as far back. However, during the ballistic phase of the movement, the ball isn't connected to the wheel, so that movement doesn't count as being on the wheel. Is that what you mean?

In a frictionless system in a vacuum, the weight will rejoin the wheel with the same kinetic energy it left it with, plus or minus any energy convertred to or from potential energy due to the change in height. all that energy was put into the weight by the wheel when it accelerated it, so the wheel gains nothing when it reclaims the energy as it slows.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on May 20, 2009, 04:40:49 PM
@mondrasek,

That's incorrect. You're adding vectors frivolously, as I told you before.

If the length of the arm in 'Still More Vectors for OB.jpg' is L and the mass of support, part of the arm, is ignored (that is, without the sphere there will be no torque) the torque will be exactly 10L and not 15.75L as you imply.

The support cannot create more mass (weight) than the given mass of the sphere.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: mondrasek on May 20, 2009, 05:22:54 PM
Nothing frivolous about it.  In the picture shown, the 10 kg ball is pushing against the 20 degree wall with a force of 16.73 and against the 45 degree moment arm with a force of 22.24.  That is basic vector math.  The sine of 45 degrees x 22.24 = 15.72.  The angles of the guides and slots do in fact allow for a 10 kg weight to apply a torque on the wheel that is greater than FL.

This is like the previously used cherry pit being shot out from between pinched fingers example, only in reverse.

The support is not creating more mass.  It is being used to leverage the existing mass into a Force greater than the weight of the mass.

Remember, if a spherical weight is supported by two parallel frictionless plates on the sides (90 degrees and 270 degrees), the force necessary to hold the weight is INFINITY.  If the plates are rotated so that they are now at 89 and 271 degrees, the forces are a bit less than infinity, but still much more than just the gravitational force of the weight.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Cloxxki on May 20, 2009, 05:30:30 PM
The scissor action of the slots and ramps together (very shallow angle between them) forces the weight to be propelled by a greater distance (height>work) PER DEGREE than even when it had been connected to the rim (FL).
Dusty's most recent build showed a torque so great that the weight was jammed in place. One degree of the wheel might have required the weight to displace perhaps as much as several meters. It doesn't get much clearer than that: the slot+ramp system can create huge torque peaks.

If you pitch a baseball at 100mph, the torque required may well be greater than it sitting at the end of a level rod between pitch hill and base hole. Mass, torque, either way : you can't get a thing for free.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on May 20, 2009, 05:34:22 PM
@mondrasek,

Not so, the torque on the horizontal arm is only created by the vertical component of the given mass (remember, without the given spherical mass there is no torque, no matter what support there is on the arm). A given mass creating, say, 10kg vertical force can only create that much and no more, no matter what weightless supports are installed to hold the sphere to the arm of same length L. Supports cannot create mass (weight).

The vertical component on the support you're talking about is part of the 10kg force which is set in stone. No more. That's how much we have to begin with.

The cherry-pit case is a completely different story, not applicable here. In the cherry-pit case we have actually existing counteracting forces which compensate each other and a steady-state of the pit cannot be distinguished from a situation whereby no forces are acting on the pit. This isn't the case here. Here we're talking about uncompensated forces which readily demonstrate themselves. In absence of a sphere there's no vertical force. When sphere is present the vertical force is only as much as is supplied by the mass of the sphere, no more. No constructive details can change that weight-creating mass.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Cloxxki on May 20, 2009, 05:47:26 PM
@mondrasek,

Not so, the torque on the horizontal arm is only created by the vertical component of the given mass (remember, without the given spherical mass there is no torque, no matter what support there is on the arm). A given mass creating, say, 10kg vertical force can only create that much and no more, no matter what weightless supports are installed to hold the sphere to the arm of same length L. Supports cannot create mass (weight).

The vertical component on the support you're talking about is part of the 10kg force which is set in stone. No more. That's how much we have to begin with.

The cherry-pit case is a completely different story, not applicable here. In the cherry-pit case we have actually existing counteracting forces which compensate each other and a steady-state of the pit cannot be distinguished from a situation whereby no forces are acting on the pit. This isn't the case here. Here we're talking about uncompensated forces which readily demonstrate themselves. In absence of a sphere there's no vertical force. When sphere is present the vertical force is only as much as is supplied by the mass of the sphere, no more. No constructive details can change that weight-creating mass.
Your arguments seem quite valid for a static wheel. In a rotating one, the cherry pit/scissor action makes the affected weight the one with the greatest acceleration and possibly even greatest velocity, vertically.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: mondrasek on May 20, 2009, 05:51:39 PM
Omnibus, I am not an instructor.  I have tried to teach you what you do not or are unwilling to understand.  And so I will once again recommend that you find a qualified instructor in physics or mechanics if you want to pursue this further.

It is very clear that the forces needed to support a spherical weight by two surfaces can each be much greater than the weight.  It is those forces, not the weight, that are acting on the wheel.  I cannot say it any clearer.  I am sorry that I cannot find a way to explain this that you can understand.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: mondrasek on May 20, 2009, 06:00:08 PM
Your arguments seem quite valid for a static wheel. In a rotating one, the cherry pit/scissor action makes the affected weight the one with the greatest acceleration and possibly even greatest velocity, vertically.

Cloxxki, the torque analysis is only for the static case.  So yes, it does not show how any dynamic forces are interacting.  We only got into the static torque calculations when I tried to show that the pendulum type motion and eventual settling point demonstrated by the WM2D simulation did in fact result in a position that could manually be calculated to have no torque.  But there is a case that can be made that once under speed, the wheel would work by some other phenomenon than just weight imbalance.  This is not supported by the sim, but also could be an effect the sim cannot predict.  I personally do not believe there is anything yet revealled that leaves any hope for that, but I would not dissuade you or any others from ferreting it out.

M.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on May 20, 2009, 06:12:01 PM
Omnibus, I am not an instructor.  I have tried to teach you what you do not or are unwilling to understand.  And so I will once again recommend that you find a qualified instructor in physics or mechanics if you want to pursue this further.

It is very clear that the forces needed to support a spherical weight by two surfaces can each be much greater than the weight.  It is those forces, not the weight, that are acting on the wheel.  I cannot say it any clearer.  I am sorry that I cannot find a way to explain this that you can understand.

You're not only not an instructor but you understand incorrectly the problem at hand and are unwilling to learn.

It is very clear that no other forces act on the horizontal arm of length L you're drawing to cause torque but the force derived from the spherical weight of 10kg. You may decompose that weight into many components by having the support that holds it on to the wheel made up of many segments. This won't change the fact that the torque-creating force is only 10kg. The many segments that make up the support can in no way create more weight than the weight of 10kg initially given. This is as clear as can be said. You have to understand this and move on. It's ridiculous to have such problem cause a hitch in the conversation.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Cloxxki on May 20, 2009, 06:28:02 PM
Cloxxki, the torque analysis is only for the static case.  So yes, it does not show how any dynamic forces are interacting.  We only got into the static torque calculations when I tried to show that the pendulum type motion and eventual settling point demonstrated by the WM2D simulation did in fact result in a position that could manually be calculated to have no torque.  But there is a case that can be made that once under speed, the wheel would work by some other phenomenon than just weight imbalance.  This is not supported by the sim, but also could be an effect the sim cannot predict.  I personally do not believe there is anything yet revealled that leaves any hope for that, but I would not dissuade you or any others from ferreting it out.

M.
Thanks, I'm a rookie at this.
The big thing about this patent is that the weight are no longer at fixed distances, they get to all have their own speed to come to an average which may or may not match the average speed at the rim. Actually, should average speed be the same, then a time advantage was made, from taking the shorter route.
Key seems to be a higher-than-average release velocity at 6:00.
Imagine a stuttering wheel, always spitting out weights at 6:00 at top speed, the weight up would be done quicker than down. I case of an Abeling setup, imagine if the wheel would slow down greatly after the spitting, allowing the weight to make up mayor ground and nearly it nearly to the top, while still sitting inside the slot that as it's outmost part barely left 6:00? Dusty's slots would need to be aimed the other way for this.

I'd love to have a powerful simulation in which I could play around with geometries to verify what I'm seeing here.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: mondrasek on May 20, 2009, 06:48:51 PM
Cloxxki, one of the things that is not easily noticed is that anytime a weight moves further away from the axle on a spinning wheel, it must accelerate (be given outside energy), or the wheel must slow down.  This is why an ice skater spins faster when they pull their arms and legs in and slows down again when they spread them out.  So as the weights are allowed or even forced away from the axle, they absorb energy from the wheel in order to do so.  They actually slow the wheel down significantly just in moving out.

Likewise, if the weights are accelerated to a speed faster than the wheel in order to fling out to the ends of the slots, that energy too must come from the wheel.  And that takes way more energy than just letting weights move out;  now they must go *faster* than the wheel.

So all those neat movements on the left side where the weight is launched out and back to to the ends of the slots takes energy.  It is all coming from the wheel.  That is why the only time we see it in the build models is when someone is pushing the wheel to show the action.  If they do not push, it will not happen, and the wheel actually wants to run the other way.

M.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on May 20, 2009, 07:31:55 PM
Cloxxki, one of the things that is not easily noticed is that anytime a weight moves further away from the axle on a spinning wheel, it must accelerate (be given outside energy), or the wheel must slow down.  This is why an ice skater spins faster when they pull their arms and legs in and slows down again when they spread them out.  So as the weights are allowed or even forced away from the axle, they absorb energy from the wheel in order to do so.  They actually slow the wheel down significantly just in moving out.

Likewise, if the weights are accelerated to a speed faster than the wheel in order to fling out to the ends of the slots, that energy too must come from the wheel.  And that takes way more energy than just letting weights move out;  now they must go *faster* than the wheel.

So all those neat movements on the left side where the weight is launched out and back to to the ends of the slots takes energy.  It is all coming from the wheel.  That is why the only time we see it in the build models is when someone is pushing the wheel to show the action.  If they do not push, it will not happen, and the wheel actually wants to run the other way.

M.

That's correct. That's something @Cloxxki has a problem understanding but he should.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: mondrasek on May 20, 2009, 07:54:46 PM
That's correct. That's something @Cloxxki has a problem understanding but he should.

This is a useless post.  Sorry, but I had to say it.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Cloxxki on May 20, 2009, 07:57:25 PM
That's correct. That's something @Cloxxki has a problem understanding but he should.
Understanding the basics (which I do as described) is something else than getting the most out of it, using basic laws of nature to your advantage. That separates the (supposed) PPM inventors from the school teachers and wannabes. I intend to, if there is a way to obtain overunity, be in the group making it happen rather than the one reading about it in the latest edition school book.

Alright then, having established that increasing radius along a spoke of a weight asks for a speed reduction of the wheel, the opposite should also be true. Forcing the weight inside, also speeds it up. Providing that slots allow for this speeding, gaining advantage, what could this extra speed (vertically) be used for? Gaining lots of height in a short time, while letting go or speed relative to the rim.

I propose setting some key features of the wheel, such as offering the weight at 6:00 to carry greater speed than the average of the wheel, the wheel then slowing down for the portion that the weight is rolling its way op the bottom ramp, gaining great advantage. The working weight on the other side of the wheel would have many "hours" to lift the first weight up and over the 0:00 point, with surplus erergy being put into and used up by the wheel to bring the upper weight outward and onto the rim hook.

Of course, all fanatasy until somehow proven. But I'm naive, a man going on TV saying he has a self-destricting gravity power plant, I believe a bit in that until I find proof he's a fraud. If we take the factor of trust out of this world, things just fall apart. We just can't go blind on it.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on May 20, 2009, 07:59:27 PM
This is a useless post.  Sorry, but I had to say it.
Agreed. @Cloxxki should've known these things from the get go.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: mondrasek on May 20, 2009, 08:23:04 PM
Alright then, having established that increasing radius along a spoke of a weight asks for a speed reduction of the wheel, the opposite should also be true. Forcing the weight inside, also speeds it up.

You are correct here.  But look closely at your last statement:  Forcing the weight inside, also speeds it up.  A Force must be applied in order to move the weights towards the axle.  When a skater pulls his arms and legs in and speeds up, that skater is doing work by pulling.  That's the catch 22 here.

So it takes energy to pull/push weights toward the axle.  But you get an acceleration of the wheel.  You loose that same energy when the weight is allowed to move back out.  And the wheel slows down again.  Without friction or other losses, these things balance exactly.  At least for all constructions that we know of. 

Bessler may have had a way of constructing something that used these known phenomenon in an unbalanced way.  Or maybe it came from a different known phenomenon or an unknown one?
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Cloxxki on May 20, 2009, 09:06:56 PM
You are correct here.  But look closely at your last statement:  Forcing the weight inside, also speeds it up.  A Force must be applied in order to move the weights towards the axle.  When a skater pulls his arms and legs in and speeds up, that skater is doing work by pulling.  That's the catch 22 here.

So it takes energy to pull/push weights toward the axle.  But you get an acceleration of the wheel.  You loose that same energy when the weight is allowed to move back out.  And the wheel slows down again.  Without friction or other losses, these things balance exactly.  At least for all constructions that we know of. 

Bessler may have had a way of constructing something that used these known phenomenon in an unbalanced way.  Or maybe it came from a different known phenomenon or an unknown one?
Indeed.
But, the wheel only slows down if you use the wheel to speed up radially. The ramp is offering a means to convert purely horizontal momentum at 6:00 into vertical. When we visually a radially spoked wheel, the weight will pass spokes "get ahead". If the exit speed at 6:00 is sufficient, it could make it all the way up to 0:00, but would a lacking amount of radial speed, being due right. A second ramp could come into place. Anyways, velocity lost along the rim was traded for getting to 0:00 sooner. But, are these equal?
I keep coming back to a logically occuring stuttering action where exit of the weight would be at top speed, and re-entry at minimum speed, to get the most out of the "launch". What else could be making this work, if anything?
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: stgpcm on May 20, 2009, 09:21:51 PM
mondrasek, Omnibus is correct in this aspect of mechanics, the angle of the slot in  contact with the weight does not alter the torque on the wheel.

It does increase the force applied by the slot, but the increase is only in the radial component of the force, not the rotational component, and so doesn't alter the torque. This increase in radial force increases the reaction force the force the ball is subject to from the guide, and will in a live system increase friction, making the wheel harder to turn. a slot perpendicular to the radius at the point it contacts the weight will simply have no resultant torque whatsoever, and has fallen off the wheel.

the angle between the guide and the radius of wheel (not the slot) on the other hand has the effect you and I describe.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: mondrasek on May 20, 2009, 09:21:52 PM
Indeed.
But, the wheel only slows down if you use the wheel to speed up radially. The ramp is offering a means to convert purely horizontal momentum at 6:00 into vertical. When we visually a radially spoked wheel, the weight will pass spokes "get ahead". If the exit speed at 6:00 is sufficient, it could make it all the way up to 0:00, but would a lacking amount of radial speed, being due right. A second ramp could come into place. Anyways, velocity lost along the rim was traded for getting to 0:00 sooner. But, are these equal?
I keep coming back to a logically occuring stuttering action where exit of the weight would be at top speed, and re-entry at minimum speed, to get the most out of the "launch". What else could be making this work, if anything?
Well, conventional physics says that all the ways of moving a weight in any path where the start and finish are the same results in the same amount of potential energy at the end as at the start.  So no matter how you move it along the path, every gain in energy is balanced by a loss in energy along the circuit.

I have tried every way I can think of to move a weight in a wheel.  So far, with ideal conditions, I always get exactly perfect balance of forces.  That is why I am looking for something that I have not already tried.  And in the Abeling design I have not found anything new as presented.  So I am of the mind that it does not work as presented.  But I'd be thrilled to be proved wrong or to be shown any yet undiscovered phenomenon or undisclosed mechanism!
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on May 20, 2009, 10:10:52 PM
Well, conventional physics says that all the ways of moving a weight in any path where the start and finish are the same results in the same amount of potential energy at the end as at the start.  So no matter how you move it along the path, every gain in energy is balanced by a loss in energy along the circuit.

I have tried every way I can think of to move a weight in a wheel.  So far, with ideal conditions, I always get exactly perfect balance of forces.  That is why I am looking for something that I have not already tried.  And in the Abeling design I have not found anything new as presented.  So I am of the mind that it does not work as presented.  But I'd be thrilled to be proved wrong or to be shown any yet undiscovered phenomenon or undisclosed mechanism!

See, you're making the same mistake over and over again. This is your second misconception (the first one is the implication that guides can somehow create mass). It's not about a given object. The phenomenon we're talking about is sort of a cooperative phenomenon whereby totality of all objects in certain particular configurations display a perpetuum mobile effect. It can never be achieved with just one object or with the combination of objects which are not arranged in a particular favorable way.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: eisenficker2000 on May 20, 2009, 10:32:53 PM
@Stgpcm, some vectors
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: stgpcm on May 21, 2009, 01:01:18 AM
@Omnibus, as promised, a calculation of forces using reactive calculatuions.

As you will see, no mass is created or destroyed.

I hope the sequence of pictures is easy to follow, start at the top left, and work down; when you reach the bottom of the first column, start at thetop of the middle column, and work down; when you reach the bottom of this second column, move to the top of the right column and moev down.

First diagram of first column:
Starting at the intial state, where gravity is is acting the weight to form a force "1". as the guide is vertical, there is no initial interaction.

second diagram of first column
I resolve the vector into its components, as the angle from vertical is 30, the component that generates torque is
1 . sin(30)
= 1/2
The component that acts along the radius between the axle and the centre of mass is
1. cos(30)
= square root of 3/4

third diagram of first column:
I've removed the original weight vector, leaving just the components. if the mass were fixed to the wheel in some way, the radial force component would pull against the wheel axle, without generating torque. and as that is fixed to the earth it would be absorbed (well, it would push the earth a tiny bit left and down).

fourth diagram of first column
at this point I got bored of drawing arrowheads on the vectors, it was much too fiddly, and just made things cluttered
Unfortunately, the weight is free to slide, so the radial component of the original force causes the weight to push against the guide, with force root 3/4. Decomposing that force into the components perpendicular and parallel to the guide, we get a perpendicular force of
sin(angle from parallel). input
sin(30) . root(3/4)
= root(3/4)/2
which is absorbed by the earth, and we can ignore - except for calculating friction (as the god of this mathematical model, I declare the coefficient of friction between the weight and the guides to be zero.)
The vertical component, which the vertical guide cannot act against is
sin(angle from perpendicular) . input
= sin(60) . root(3/4)
= root(3/4) . root(3/4)
= or 3/4

Fifth diagram of first column
I've removed the first calculated radial component, and the horizontal component of that, which has been absorbed by the fixed guide rail. This leaves a vertical vector, which remains to be accounted for of 3/4.

First diagram of second column
Decomposing the unaccounted vector into radial and rotating components, we get a rotating component of
sin(angle from radial) . input
= sin(30) . 3/4
= 1/2 . 3/4
= 1/8
this is added to the first torque producing resultant (1/2)
The radial component, is
sin(angle from rotation) . input
= sin(60) . 3/4
= root(3/4) . 3/4

second diagram of second column
as before, in the third diagram of the first column, I've rmoved the decomposed force, but the weight still isn't attached, so it still attempts to slide down the slot, and still works against the guide.

third diagram of second column
as before I decompose the radial motion into the forces perpendicular and parallel to the guide, as before these are in the ratio 1/2 and root(3/4) of the radial force. As before the guide absorbs the vertical component.

forth diagram of second column
the as yet unaccounted vertical force is
root(3/4) . ( root(3/4) . 3/4 )
= 3/4 . 3/4
= 9/16

fifth diagram of second column
as in the second diagram of the first column, and the first diagram of the second column, we decompose the unaccounted vertical force into radial and rotary components, as before, the rotary component is 1/2 the vertical force, and the radial component is root(3/4) of the vertical force,
rotary = 1/2 . 9/16
= 9/32
radial = root(3/4) . 9/16

Third column
the process is repeated until there is no component of the original force that isn't acounted for, either by being converted to torque, or by being absorbed by the axle, or by being absorbed by the guide.

This takes an infinite number of steps.

the result is the sum of 1/2 + 3/8 + 9/32 + 81/128 + ...
or the sum of (2^n+1) / (2^(2n+1) for all integer values of n between 0 and infinity.

I hope you can see from the diagram, the sum of the rotational vectors forms the hypotenuse of a triangle, the top angel of which is 60 degrees, and the height is the original 1
cos(angle) = adjacent/hypotenuse
cos(60) = 1 / f
f = 1 / cos(60)
f = 1 / (1/2)
f = 2

The distance of the mass from the pivot is 0.9, so the torque is 1.8 Counter clockwise.

You will recall the result I obtained by balance of forces was also 1.8 counter clockwise, and the approximation of the torque by calculating the change in energy as the system rotated through one degree was equivalent to that.

So, my calculation by reactive forces match my calculation by balance of forces, which match my calclation of change of energy.

Unless you can identify an error in ALL THREE, you're making an extraordinary claim, and that requires an extraordinary proof.

Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on May 21, 2009, 02:12:07 AM
@stgpcm,

Study carefully what @eisenficker2000 has shown you. Notice also that it is a discussion of your case and isn't the way our guide works.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: stgpcm on May 21, 2009, 02:57:51 AM
I have taken not of it, and it confirms you are failing to acount or the radial resultant force.

you are ignoring part of the system.

Please note, I have shown 3 independent methods for calculating the system all of which agree.

if you wish to make the extraordinary claim that the single method (and hence unverified) you've used is correct you will need to demonstrate the error in all 3 of mine.

I acknowledge the simple case I've presented isn't identical to the Abeling wheel, but the maths used is to analyse them is the same maths. Proving the simple model isn't a perpetuum mobile doesn't say anything about the Abeling wheel, it only lets us say we are more confident in our maths.

Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on May 21, 2009, 03:08:00 AM
@stgpcm,

Study @eisenficker2000's illustration more.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: stgpcm on May 21, 2009, 03:32:26 AM
@stgpcm,

Study @eisenficker2000's illustration more.
eisenficker posted those to show how the maths was done.
I fully understand how the maths is being done.

The right of the two green arrows in the first diagram shows the force used to develop torque on the wheel. This force is being balanced by the acceleration of the wheel.

What is happening to the force depicted by the left of the two green arrows? (the radial component)

no amount of studying of the diagram will tell me what you are doing with it, because nothing is being done with it. If nothing is being done with it, it will cause the weight to accelerate from the centre of the wheel.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: hansvonlieven on May 21, 2009, 03:37:24 AM
The counter-forces that develop as a result of the scissor action are practically incalculable.

True, one can get an idea but in the real world there are too many variables to give meaningful results. Material composition, surface condition, dimensions, lubricants used etc. all influence the behaviour. Only experiment and measurement are capable of giving accurate data under these conditions.

This is not to say that maths are useless in this situation but they do give little more than an indication.

Hans von Lieven
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: stgpcm on May 21, 2009, 09:48:45 AM
The counter-forces that develop as a result of the scissor action are practically incalculable.

True, one can get an idea but in the real world there are too many variables to give meaningful results. Material composition, surface condition, dimensions, lubricants used etc. all influence the behaviour. Only experiment and measurement are capable of giving accurate data under these conditions.

Absolutely:
Materials are not perfectly inelastic, so they will deform slightly as forces are applied to them. This deformation takes energy from the system to occur, and generates heat as it occurs. if you are lucky, when the force is reduced, the materials return to their original shape, returning the energy to the system as they do so, this also generates heat, and the chances are the energy won't actually be returned usefully.

The frame is not entirely rigid. all the forces you dump into the guides/axle don't just vanish, they flex the frame, causing the geometry to shift again, and generating heat as they do so. if you are lucky, it will return to it's original shape, and return the energy in a useful way.

Friction can be calculated, but mu-r assumes that mu is constant despite variations in heat and pressure. The use of bearings and lubricants makes these calculations much harder because they are more susceptible to variations in those. (they make the wheel turn much easier though, so they might be worthwhile at some level)

The earth is not of infinite mass. It's close enough, but is a source of error.

Scissor forces are particulary bad for these sources of error, as the component forces can be very large, but all of these are sources of loss to the system, so they reduce the efficiency of your real world device.

Losses to the system are really only an issue of you manage to create an over-unity machine in the first place - if your friction calculations tell you your wheel given an initial push will stop after 100 turns, and in the real world it happens after 90, does it really matter? It's only when you have designed a device that accelerates turn on turn in the absence of friction, air resistance etcetera, that the practical aspects of engineering come into play.

If the machine isn't overunity in principle, no amount of smoothing and greasing are going to make it so. As they say, "you can't polish a t***"

Quote
This is not to say that maths are useless in this situation but they do give little more than an indication.

It's true, a week in the workshop will save billions of MIPS worth of analysis, and hopefully leave you with a beautiful device. It will also let you check your maths was accurate.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: hansvonlieven on May 21, 2009, 10:27:27 AM
@ stgpcm,

 You sound like a man that has "been there, done that". Welcome brother.  ;)

Hans
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: mondrasek on May 21, 2009, 03:44:49 PM
Here is a sim in WM2D of the case that I illustrated here:  http://www.overunity.com/index.php?topic=7150.msg180738#msg180738

I have place the weight sphere on a wheel above a ramp at 45 degrees (also attached to the wheel) and a guide block at 20 degrees that is fixed to the background.  On the opposite side I have also attached a ramp (so the two ramps balance and create zero torque).  I then attached an identical weight sphere on the opposite side.  But this weight sphere is moved out 1.572 times further from the axle than the weight sphere simply supported by the ramp and guide block.  This extra distance is to compensate for the increased torque imparted to the wheel by the simply supported ball as calculated in the above referenced diagram.  The system is in balance.  This shows that the angle of the ramp (slots) and angle of the guide blocks do result in a force on the wheel that creates a torque greater than just the weight of the wheel times the length of the moment arm.

Omni, I understand you take issue with the use of WM2D, but it is the only tool that I have readily available.  Hopefully someone can mock up a real world test and post a video which we would all find more suitable.

Stgpcm, I guess I did not fully understand your explanation where you said Omni was correct for this aspect of mechanics.  But please take a look at this and let me know if I am doing something wrong.

Thanks,

M.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on May 21, 2009, 04:06:55 PM
@mondrasek,

I see where might be the problem in this discussion. It is being diverted into examples which do not illustrate the problem at hand.  Why do you even bother to post this (both the link and the wm2d)? The wheel we're discussing doesn't have such obstructions and the torques are presenting themselves in their natural state, without obstructions. In our problem, the only thing that affects the torque is the forced change of path and length of arm, causing torque's decrease from its natural state without the induced changes of path. In your wm2d example not only have you placed an obstruction but you have also fixed the length of the arm. That doesn't illustrate what's being discussed here.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: mondrasek on May 21, 2009, 05:49:01 PM
@mondrasek,

I see where might be the problem in this discussion. It is being diverted into examples which do not illustrate the problem at hand.  Why do you even bother to post this (both the link and the wm2d)? The wheel we're discussing doesn't have such obstructions and the torques are presenting themselves in their natural state, without obstructions. In our problem, the only thing that affects the torque is the forced change of path and length of arm, causing torque's decrease from its natural state without the induced changes of path. In your wm2d example not only have you placed an obstruction but you have also fixed the length of the arm. That doesn't illustrate what's being discussed here.

It shows that both the angle of the ramps and the slots do in fact need to be included in the calculations for static torque.  It also shows that the static torque can be greater than just the weight x moment arm.  These are things that you have said are not true.

The "obstruction" are illustrative of the angle of the slots (by use of the ramp fixed to the wheel) and the angle of the guides (angled block not fixed to the wheel).  The weight between them does not have a fixed arm.  The fixed weight on the other side is used to show clearly that more torque is generated on the left than weight x moment arm.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on May 21, 2009, 06:16:58 PM
@mondrasek,

Don't play with words. It is known what we mean here by arm. It is not

Quote
The weight between them does not have a fixed arm.


The weight between them does have a fixed arm relative to the axle.

This is also not so:

Quote
The "obstruction" are illustrative of the angle of the slots (by use of the ramp fixed to the wheel) and the angle of the guides (angled block not fixed to the wheel).
 

The ball on the left is always leaning against the guide in our case and is never obstructed from above, as you show it. In our case the torques are always in their natural state as torques, without additional obstruction. The only difference, in our case, is that the guides direct the motion differently which causes the driving torque-causing vector to be always less than the torque-vector if the direction were retained to be that of the weight without the guide.

You can always obstruct the motion with an additional force but that's not part of the torque. Again, the ball we're observing has no such obstructions but only guides changing the direction and length of arm. Nothing to do with ypur example.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: mondrasek on May 21, 2009, 06:52:40 PM
Omni, then perhaps you can show the proper method for analyzing the torques on the eisenficker2000 model at 25 degrees?  The weight at 9:30 seems to have a force vector of 30.3349 causing torque.  Yet the weight vector was only 29.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on May 21, 2009, 08:15:44 PM
Not so. As seen from the drawing below, weight (Red) is 28.9009 while torque-generating force (Cyan) is 26.9533.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: mondrasek on May 21, 2009, 10:08:40 PM
And here is the WM2D of that same weight with the same ramp and slot angles.  I have again placed a second weight at the same diameter on the right side.  If I make that weight the value of 26.9533 grams that you calculate the system is not balanced.  If I make that weight the value of 30.3349 that I calculate, the system does balance.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on May 21, 2009, 10:23:04 PM
Stay with the AutoCAD and leave this wm2d alone. When all the eight torques are calculated, not only that at 9:30, for that 25 degree shift of the wheel the net torque with @eisenficker2000 track is on the order of -0.009Nm.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: mondrasek on May 21, 2009, 10:39:32 PM
Stay with the AutoCAD and leave this wm2d alone. When all the eight torques are calculated, not only that at 9:30, for that 25 degree shift of the wheel the net torque with @eisenficker2000 track is on the order of -0.009Nm.

Nope.  The method that I have been showing for calculating vectors and torque is correct.  WM2D is also correct.

See you around.

M.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on May 21, 2009, 11:50:03 PM
Nope.  The method that I have been showing for calculating vectors and torque is correct.  WM2D is also correct.

See you around.

M.

I showed you directly your method is incorrect but you still insist it's correct. Stubbornness isn't a good adviser. As for wm2d, like I said, don't bother with it. You don't know what's really happening there. Unless, you want to hide behind such muddling. When everything is out in the open, as I've shown you, your understanding needs correcting.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: LarryC on May 22, 2009, 12:21:17 AM
Nope.  The method that I have been showing for calculating vectors and torque is correct.  WM2D is also correct.

See you around.

M.

Okay, just a vote,

It seems that mondrasek is planning on leaving the thread. This would be a lost.

From my education,  mondrasek is correct and omnibus is wrong.

Would anybody else like to weight in on this issue?

Regards, Larry

 
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on May 22, 2009, 12:34:54 AM
Okay, just a vote,

It seems that mondrasek is planning on leaving the thread. This would be a lost.

From my education,  mondrasek is correct and omnibus is wrong.

Would anybody else like to weight in on this issue?

Regards, Larry

 

No. Truth in science isn't decided by voting. You don't know what you're talking but you like the fact that @mondrasek seems negative. That's a despicable behavior on your part.

If @mondrasek is too embarrassed and wants to leave the thread that's his prerogative. I don't think that he should be embarrassed at all because anyone can be wrong. Now he is wrong, at other time I might be wrong. That's the way search for the truth goes.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on May 22, 2009, 01:10:53 AM
Now we know what we're looking for, after it is well understood that constructively there are no planes of obstruction. Guides are exactly what they are called -- guides -- serving only to redirect the motion of the weights.

Armed with that knowledge and the calculations made we now know that perpetuum mobile is real.

The only forces of obstruction are the forces of friction. These are variable forces, depending on the engineering skills of those who are attempting to make the device. These are specific problems whose successful solving is non-trivial may be beyond the reach of even the best constructor of traditional machines. Although, there's a reason why some Swiss watches are considered better than other Swiss watches, let alone from most watches produced in the world. Engineering secrets to make these champion watches are transferred from father to son and they are not at all a trivial matter. Otherwise everybody would make true Patek Philippes (not those fake ones sold in Battery Park by street vendors). I'm talking about watches because they are mechanical devices such the one at hand and not even touching on the microelectronics where the problems of making a high-end processor are beyond the reach of any individual family. No wonder why USA are the leaders in microprocessors and no matter how they try Japan, Korea, China can't reach the technological level set by the US. These are the realities of life and they are still more applicable to making a device which is viciously suppressed by the powers that be. Even developed countries cannot make a quality processor, the viciously suppressed perpetuum mobile is even harder to make with all the impediments, shunned from the proper infrastructure and so on.

All power to @Dusty and @eisenficker2000, though, and kudos to their brave efforts. We're all waiting to hear from them about their success, and if not, that will only confirm what I said above and in no way will indicate that such a machine cannot be made.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: LarryC on May 22, 2009, 01:23:08 AM
No. Truth in science isn't decided by voting. You don't know what you're talking but you like the fact that @mondrasek seems negative. That's a despicable behavior on your part.

If @mondrasek is too embarrassed and wants to leave the thread that's his prerogative. I don't think that he should be embarrassed at all because anyone can be wrong. Now he is wrong, at other time I might be wrong. That's the way search for the truth goes.

No, I never said anything about mondrasek being negative. Despicable behavior, what drugs are you taking?

I am only looking for others with an education is this area that could give an opinion to gain a consensus about the argument. This would certainly eliminate any opinion from you as it has always been Omnibus's way or the highway.

Regards, Larry

 
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on May 22, 2009, 02:12:36 AM
No, I never said anything about mondrasek being negative. Despicable behavior, what drugs are you taking?

I am only looking for others with an education is this area that could give an opinion to gain a consensus about the argument. This would certainly eliminate any opinion from you as it has always been Omnibus's way or the highway.

Regards, Larry

 

Oh, so you want others to tell you what the truth is because you can't find it out for yourself. Well, you're in for big surprises if you always act in life like that.

In this case it happened so that I'm right. In other cases it may not happen so. This you have to understand through your own analysis. Majority of the educated people won't touch this question with a ten foot pole fearing for their jobs, mortgages to pay, kids to send to college. They don't want to stick their necks uttering opinions about this. So, don't expect them to kick in and tell you what the truth is. Besides there are some lackey-activists, some even paid to do that, who will do nothing else but deliberately disinform you. How would you know who to trust? Give it up. Either try to sort it out yourself or don't even bother.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: i_ron on May 22, 2009, 06:45:05 AM


I am only looking for others with an education is this area that could give an opinion to gain a consensus about the argument. This would certainly eliminate any opinion from you as it has always been Omnibus's way or the highway.

Regards, Larry
 

Larry,

The sad part is how fleeting is our memory of how Obot stiffles and closes down lists... here, mainly from this list...ron

The Essence of Omni

These are unsupported statements and you should restrain from filling the forum with such.

I think you should not now try to twist the whole thing every which way to appear you're right.

I know that when nonsense is spewed, it should be nipped in the bud. That's what responsibility is. You may disagree but the world doesn't exist because of you as you so arogantly perceive it.

The man is incorrect. He understood that but is unwilling to admit it. You, on the other hand, can't even understand why but like to participate in the discussion for not having anything else to do. Don't bother.

That's a ridiculous comparison.

I said you don't get it but you arrogantly continue.

You're despicable human being who breaks his word and therefore should be ignored outright.

No, they don't. It's for you to see why.

This post is ignored.

You are the one wasting everyone's time…

I told you where your mistake is and you don't need to beat around the bush trying to prove the unprovable.

That’s incorrect….

Why are you thanking him for providing an incorrect analysis? That's not something one should be thanked for.

That's incorrect. You're adding vectors frivolously, as I told you before.

You're not only not an instructor but you understand incorrectly the problem at hand and are unwilling to learn…

See, you're making the same mistake over and over again. This is your second misconception…..

As your overall participation in the discussions indicates, you're not qualified enough to make such pronouncements. Learn more before allowing yourself the audacity to teach others.

You should go away and not continue to clutter the discussion with incompetent blabber.

Moderators should take care of the likes of you, impudently imposing their own confusion on others.

So, what do you prove with this little nothing you've written?
On what grounds are you asking us to accept that he has found something let alone that whatever you think he has found is remotely noteworthy?

No, I'm not willing to discuss this again. This is a settled issue,

I've already answered you. It can be shown that with a proper construction displacement can be induced under the action of a conservative force without the expenditure of energy from a pre-existing energy reservoir. That has already been proven conclusively

You did not keep the agreement. I did not ask for your opinion …I specifically said I don't want to discuss this. Uttering the nonsense you've uttered above is starting a discussion and this is deplorable once you've agreed not to discuss it.

Posts like this are useless. What you're presenting are not arguments but some hunches of yours which are hardly of interest to anyone because they are trivial. Probably you'd do much better to keep them to yourself.



Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on May 22, 2009, 07:22:38 AM
Larry,

The sad part is how fleeting is our memory of how Obot stiffles and closes down lists... here, mainly from this list...ron

The Essence of Omni


These are unsupported statements and you should restrain from filling the forum with such.

I think you should not now try to twist the whole thing every which way to appear you're right.

I know that when nonsense is spewed, it should be nipped in the bud. That's what responsibility is. You may disagree but the world doesn't exist because of you as you so arogantly perceive it.

The man is incorrect. He understood that but is unwilling to admit it. You, on the other hand, can't even understand why but like to participate in the discussion for not having anything else to do. Don't bother.

That's a ridiculous comparison.

I said you don't get it but you arrogantly continue.

You're despicable human being who breaks his word and therefore should be ignored outright.

No, they don't. It's for you to see why.

This post is ignored.

You are the one wasting everyone's time…

I told you where your mistake is and you don't need to beat around the bush trying to prove the unprovable.

That’s incorrect….

Why are you thanking him for providing an incorrect analysis? That's not something one should be thanked for.

That's incorrect. You're adding vectors frivolously, as I told you before.

You're not only not an instructor but you understand incorrectly the problem at hand and are unwilling to learn…

See, you're making the same mistake over and over again. This is your second misconception…..

As your overall participation in the discussions indicates, you're not qualified enough to make such pronouncements. Learn more before allowing yourself the audacity to teach others.

You should go away and not continue to clutter the discussion with incompetent blabber.

Moderators should take care of the likes of you, impudently imposing their own confusion on others.

So, what do you prove with this little nothing you've written?
On what grounds are you asking us to accept that he has found something let alone that whatever you think he has found is remotely noteworthy?

No, I'm not willing to discuss this again. This is a settled issue,

I've already answered you. It can be shown that with a proper construction displacement can be induced under the action of a conservative force without the expenditure of energy from a pre-existing energy reservoir. That has already been proven conclusively

You did not keep the agreement. I did not ask for your opinion …I specifically said I don't want to discuss this. Uttering the nonsense you've uttered above is starting a discussion and this is deplorable once you've agreed not to discuss it.

Posts like this are useless. What you're presenting are not arguments but some hunches of yours which are hardly of interest to anyone because they are trivial. Probably you'd do much better to keep them to yourself.

Someone good for nothing tries to be my biographer for having nothing else to do (incapable, rather, of doing anything creative). Didn't I say there are lackeys-activists who try to divert the discussion from its fruitful direction? Here's one -- @i_ron.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: stgpcm on May 22, 2009, 12:45:41 PM
Here is a sim in WM2D of the case that I illustrated here:  http://www.overunity.com/index.php?topic=7150.msg180738#msg180738



Stgpcm, I guess I did not fully understand your explanation where you said Omni was correct for this aspect of mechanics.  But please take a look at this and let me know if I am doing something wrong.

Thanks,

M.

Sorry for failing to correctly explain myself. You are correct that the discrepancy between Omnibus's maths and wm2d (and the real world) is down to an angle. I believe you fixed on the angle of the physical slot in relation to direction of gravity, because that made sense visually, and gave results that looked about right

The angle that actually matters (for calculating the torque)  is the angle between the direction of motion* of the weight, and the radius that runs from the pivot.

Where the your slot constrains the weight to a motion that is purely radial this is exactly the same.

This is shown in your diagram More vectors for OB.JPG (http://www.overunity.com/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=7150.0;attach=34135)

The component that formed torque you found in both of the top and middle diagram was 10.

the middle and bottom diagrams both have the slot so the force is at 135 degrees to gravity, but you calculate a different force for the lower diagram - because the angle between the radius and the direction of travel of the weight is now at around 5 degrees. Unfortunately, the diagonal vector you've constructed shows the original error of failing to account for the radial component of that second vector calculation - which is why you show a lower torque than you would if the guide wasn't there

In the middle diagram you also found the force on the slot was 10.root(2) (the diagonal), the lateral component of that force (10 right) was transferred through the fabric of the wheel, as strain, to the hub, and so into the frame. The lateral force on the wheel (10 left), is passed (as the direction of the perpendicular there's no nasty resultants) into the guide, which is bolted to the frame. The frame manfully absorbs 20 units of force as strain.

Basically, vector triangles (or parallelograms) are a great way to work with forces BUT every time you split one force into two, you have to say what happens to both parts. In the normal case, you are splitting the vector into two parts, one direction of which works against the earth and so can be discarded.

*yes, in a static system there is no motion, but if it were to move, you know the direction the weight would move in. It's just another limit case.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: stgpcm on May 22, 2009, 02:14:43 PM
stgpcm's simple instructions for calculating static torque.

1. normalise the input force to the direction of travel.

this step calculates the effects of the guides, after which you can discard all the physical aspects of the system, and deal with a nice simple mathematical weight glued to a spoke calculation. This calculates all your scissor forces, cams, and weights on strings, but not a reactive way.

if F is the force and A is the angle between the radial (from the axle to the centre of mass of the weight) and the direction of travel of the weight (for a weight on the rim of a wheel this angle is 90 degrees) the normalised force is F/sin(A). the direction of force is unchanged.

2. calculate the component that corresponds to torque at the centre of mass of each object

3. calculate the torque by multiplying the force component by the distance of the centre of mass from the pivot.

Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: stgpcm on May 22, 2009, 02:22:56 PM
Not so. As seen from the drawing below, weight (Red) is 28.9009 while torque-generating force (Cyan) is 26.9533.
Unfortunately, the left hand arrow is somehow pushing through the guide onto the slot. How do you manage that?
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: stgpcm on May 22, 2009, 02:54:07 PM
That's a typo, it should have said "right hand arrow" not "left hand arrow" - although the point is the same - one component vector is pushing to one side of the guide, while the other component vector is pushing to the other

ETA:
I was confused by what you had done, you started with the weight above the guide, which is why you resolved red against it to obtain green. the short left green vector is perpendicular to the guide and is absorbed.
You then resolved the long green arrow against the slot, giving you a two cyan vectors. the right hand vector has nothing to react against which means the weight has fallen off the wheel.

In reality, the weight is being pushed up against the guide by the spoke - but your maths can't actually handle that at all -  in that case you should do a simple decomposition against the wheel, but you know that can't be right, because the guide has to be interacting in some way. So you do a bogus decomposition against it first - because you want to do it in two steps, and the last step must be against the wheel to get a torque.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on May 22, 2009, 03:14:49 PM
The Cyan vector is the torque-generating vector, That's the only one that pushes to generate torque.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: i_ron on May 22, 2009, 05:24:02 PM
Someone good for nothing tries to be my biographer for having nothing else to do (incapable, rather, of doing anything creative). Didn't I say there are lackeys-activists who try to divert the discussion from its fruitful direction? Here's one -- @i_ron.

Oh a fizzle... here I was hoping for a block buster,

well, back to directing your list, sorry to have interrupted.

Ron
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on May 22, 2009, 05:34:51 PM
Oh a fizzle... here I was hoping for a block buster,

well, back to directing your list, sorry to have interrupted.

Ron

You think you might not have been wrong in your hope? You have been. As in everything else. At least you saw it in this case.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on May 22, 2009, 06:03:03 PM
For those who are trying to replicate the device. The weights have to be of as greater a mass as possible. For the same length of the arms the net torque increases almost twice by two times greater mass. Of course, there should be some optimum weight because of the increased friction.

Also, as known, the form of the track is crucial. For given slots and weight switching from elliptic to a non-symmetrical track (guide) almost doubles the net torque. The closer the left-hand side of the track to the axle and the more close to a perpendicular tack the better (the higher the net torque). No wonder even Abeling's logo contains that idea.

Now that we know this device can work, we have to turn our attention to friction. First, choice of materials deserves consideration. What comes to mind is teflon. @Dusty's rig is too big for that but maybe @eisenficker2000 can try making the guides out of teflon. Better yet is to find Handbooks with friction data, maybe even carry out special experiments to determine how different materials behave when rubbed against each other. I'm sure there must be published studies on that matter and a literary survey to find prior studies would be advisable. I'll be traveling and won't be able to do it right now but sometime later I'll try to do it.

Some of the above is intuitive but it can be demonstrated numerically and in some more concrete terms which I'll do at some later time.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: mondrasek on May 22, 2009, 07:44:01 PM
Sorry for failing to correctly explain myself. You are correct that the discrepancy between Omnibus's maths and wm2d (and the real world) is down to an angle. I believe you fixed on the angle of the physical slot in relation to direction of gravity, because that made sense visually, and gave results that looked about right

The angle that actually matters (for calculating the torque)  is the angle between the direction of motion* of the weight, and the radius that runs from the pivot.

Where the your slot constrains the weight to a motion that is purely radial this is exactly the same.

This is shown in your diagram More vectors for OB.JPG (http://www.overunity.com/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=7150.0;attach=34135)

The component that formed torque you found in both of the top and middle diagram was 10.

the middle and bottom diagrams both have the slot so the force is at 135 degrees to gravity, but you calculate a different force for the lower diagram - because the angle between the radius and the direction of travel of the weight is now at around 5 degrees. Unfortunately, the diagonal vector you've constructed shows the original error of failing to account for the radial component of that second vector calculation - which is why you show a lower torque than you would if the guide wasn't there

In the middle diagram you also found the force on the slot was 10.root(2) (the diagonal), the lateral component of that force (10 right) was transferred through the fabric of the wheel, as strain, to the hub, and so into the frame. The lateral force on the wheel (10 left), is passed (as the direction of the perpendicular there's no nasty resultants) into the guide, which is bolted to the frame. The frame manfully absorbs 20 units of force as strain.

Basically, vector triangles (or parallelograms) are a great way to work with forces BUT every time you split one force into two, you have to say what happens to both parts. In the normal case, you are splitting the vector into two parts, one direction of which works against the earth and so can be discarded.

*yes, in a static system there is no motion, but if it were to move, you know the direction the weight would move in. It's just another limit case.

Right, I thought this was the intent of your post.  I just wasn't 100% clear.

Yep, the angle that is important is the angle of the guides and the slots relative to the angle of the moment arm.  I never intended to imply that I meant the angle of the slot to the vector of gravity should be the focus.  Sorry if I was unclear.

Also, sorry I have been unable to answer your PM.  The site seems to be messed up.  I cannot respond or send a new PM to you at the moment.  I will do so as soon as it allows.

M.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on May 22, 2009, 09:59:18 PM
@mondrasek,

Quote
the angle that is important is the angle of the guides and the slots relative to the angle of the moment arm.

Finally you understood it but only half way.

Only the angle of the tangent to the guide with respect to the vector of  gravity is important. Because of that angle the torque can never be greater than the product of the arm’s length L and the weight in absence of guides.

The angle of the slot relative to the moment arm is unimportant.

The difference in the behavior of a ball sitting at a given position on a slot is only due to whether or not there is a guide. In the presence of guide that same ball sitting at the same point on the slot will cause lower torque than the same ball at the same point of the slot in absence of a guide (or when the guide is perpendicular).

The above applies when there are no additional constructive obstructions (obstructions due to friction are not treated in this analysis) as is the case with the wheel at hand.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: mondrasek on May 22, 2009, 10:17:04 PM
The angle of the slot relative to the moment arm is unimportant.

The difference in the behavior of a ball sitting at a given position on a slot is only due to whether or not there is a guide. In the presence of guide that same ball sitting at the same point on the slot will cause lower torque than the same ball at the same point of the slot in absence of a guide (or when the guide is perpendicular).

Absolutely not the case.  The only way the ball can achieve the position being analyzed is to ride on the guides and the slots.  BOTH have an angle relative to the angle of the moment arm that need to be taken into consideration.

If you think otherwise, please show a design where the balls can achieve the same locations on slots with the *same* angle as the moment arm and the current guide geometry.

You keep drawing vectors from the weight vector normal to the moment arm.  The balls are NOT resting on a surface that is the same as the moment arm.  They are resting on a surface with the angle of the slots which is different than the angle of the moment arms.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on May 22, 2009, 10:43:12 PM
@mondrasek,

Quote
You keep drawing vectors from the weight vector normal to the moment arm.
 

I'm posting for the second time how I'm drawing weight vector and it is obvious that I'm not drawing vectors from the weight vector normal to the moment arm. You should acknowledge at once that you're wrong. Otherwise it's just an irrational exchange.

Quote
The balls are NOT resting on a surface that is the same as the moment arm.  They are resting on a surface with the angle of the slots which is different than the angle of the moment arms.

The ball and the slot are one. I already explained why the way the ball is attached to the system to be rotated has no impact on the magnitude and sign of the torque. The only thing that has a bearing on the magnitude and the sign of the torque is the distance from the center of mass to the axle and the vector normal to that distance, derived from the weight. As I've said many times already, the product of this distance (arm) and the normal can never be greater than that product in absence of guides.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: mondrasek on May 23, 2009, 12:00:28 AM
@mondrasek,
 

I'm posting for the second time how I'm drawing weight vector and it is obvious that I'm not drawing vectors from the weight vector normal to the moment arm. You should acknowledge at once that you're wrong. Otherwise it's just an irrational exchange.
You are correct.  I did not state that well.  I retract that statement and openly admit I was wrong.
The ball and the slot are one. I already explained why the way the ball is attached to the system to be rotated has no impact on the magnitude and sign of the torque. The only thing that has a bearing on the magnitude and the sign of the torque is the distance from the center of mass to the axle and the vector normal to that distance, derived from the weight. As I've said many times already, the product of this distance (arm) and the normal can never be greater than that product in absence of guides.

And here is where you are completely wrong.

For the case in dispute the weight is supported by two surfaces.  The correct vector math is to resolve the weight vector to the normal of those two surfaces. 

Please read that again.

The method that you hold as correct does NOT resolve the weight vector to the normal of the slot, only to that of the guide.  Instead, you resolve it to the normal to the motion path.  But there is no surface on the wheel that the weight is in contact with that is normal to the same angle as the motion path.

There are two surfaces the weights are in contact to in this case.

1)  The guides, which you are calculating correctly.

2)  The slots.  This angle you are mistakenly replacing with the normal to the angle of the motion path.  There is no surface at that angle.  The correct surface and angle is that of the slots.

M.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: stgpcm on May 23, 2009, 12:00:34 AM
Here is the problem.

The two cyan components. One is pointing below the guide. one is pointing above the guide. How can that be? if they were both to one side of the guide, then there would be no interaction, but one or the other must be interacting.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on May 23, 2009, 12:09:53 AM
@mondrasek,

I've said it many times already, I said it in the last post and I'm saying it now --  the sphere is part of the moving system and it doesn't matter how it is attached to the rest of it, the torque it creates will only depend on whether or not there are guides. It doesn't matter whether the sphere is glued to the arm, has an elaborate way of attachment to the arm with one, two, three or many surfaces -- the torque it will cause will be the same. Contact surfaces, part of the moving system have absolutely no bearing on the torque. Only outside influences (guides), outside of the moving system, which redirect the motion and change it from the circular (without the guides) influence the torque, at that, diminishing it.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: mondrasek on May 23, 2009, 12:15:10 AM
The weights are NOT attached to the wheel on the left hand side.

The weights are leaning against the wheel on the left hand side.

The weights are in slots and are free to slide closer or further from the axle on the left hand side.

M.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on May 23, 2009, 12:19:22 AM
Here is the problem.

The two cyan components. One is pointing below the guide. one is pointing above the guide. How can that be? if they were both to one side of the guide, then there would be no interaction, but one or the other must be interacting.

Cyan vectors are the components of the tangential component of the weight vector and are applied where the center of mass is, lying on the Grey line. Obviously, the Grey line (where the center of mass at all positions of the wheel resides) runs parallel to the physical guide. This is simplified presentation of the wheel we're discussing, focused only on the forces that act at this given position of the wheel.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on May 23, 2009, 12:23:13 AM
The weights are NOT attached to the wheel on the left hand side.

The weights are leaning against the wheel on the left hand side.

The weights are in slots and are free to slide closer or further from the axle on the left hand side.

M.

Doesn't matter. How they reside at that point, as part of the wheel, makes no difference. The torque will be the same at this very position, no matter whether or not we have glued them at this position, attached them to the wheel through multiple surfaces or had them loose as in this case. The torque will be just the same. The only thing that makes a difference is the presence of a guide.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: stgpcm on May 23, 2009, 03:32:25 AM
Cyan vectors are the components of the tangential component of the weight vector and are applied where the center of mass is, lying on the Grey line. Obviously, the Grey line (where the center of mass at all positions of the wheel resides) runs parallel to the physical guide. This is simplified presentation of the wheel we're discussing, focused only on the forces that act at this given position of the wheel.
yes, I know that's not where the guide actually lies, however the simplification shows the problem: one of your vector components acts in a direction that causes the weight to act against it. the actual guide is either above the weight in which case the rightward vector intersects it; or below the weight, in which case the leftward vector intersets it. 
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on May 23, 2009, 03:39:11 AM
yes, I know that's not where the guide actually lies, however the simplification shows the problem: one of your vector components acts in a direction that causes the weight to act against it. the actual guide is either above the weight in which case the rightward vector intersects it; or below the weight, in which case the leftward vector intersets it.

No, guide is sideways. Besides, the rightward or leftward vector isn't under consideration when we talk about torque. Torque is only the product of the normal component (pointing downwards) and the length of the arm.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: hansvonlieven on May 23, 2009, 03:39:26 AM
yes, I know that's not where the guide actually lies, however the simplification shows the problem: one of your vector components acts in a direction that causes the weight to act against it. the actual guide is either above the weight in which case the rightward vector intersects it; or below the weight, in which case the leftward vector intersets it.

And it all adds up to -1  ;D

Hans von Lieven
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on May 23, 2009, 03:56:46 AM
And it all adds up to -1  ;D

Hans von Lieven

That's not perpetuum mobile. That's nonsense. I've spelled out very clearly the criteria for a setup to be perpetuum mobile, go back in the thread and read them.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: hansvonlieven on May 23, 2009, 04:10:14 AM
It is YOUR perpetual motion machine Omnibus if you really look at it. The fetters look different but they act just the same. LOL

Hans von Lieven
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on May 23, 2009, 04:53:31 AM
It is YOUR perpetual motion machine Omnibus if you really look at it. The fetters look different but they act just the same. LOL

Hans von Lieven

No, it isn't. I explained on several occasions that the perpetuum mobile doesn't have specifically that particular obstruction. Wonder what is that desire in you to  reincarnate questions that have already been resolved?
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: stgpcm on May 23, 2009, 04:59:54 AM
No, guide is sideways. Besides, the rightward or leftward vector isn't under consideration when we talk about torque. Torque is only the product of the normal component (pointing downwards) and the length of the arm.

I sorry, I was unclear. The guide is diagonal, but far closer to vertical - so left/right is far more appropriate then the above/below I used.

When I said is the weight above the guide, I meant is the center of mass of the weight above the point of interaction between the physical weight and the physical guide (if it is, it is to the right of the guide)

when I was talking about the leftward vector, I was refering to the left cyan arrow; which, if the weight is to the right of the guide, this vector is acting on the guide as well as the wheel. Far more interesting though, is the right component. This points into space. It accelerating the mass towards the hub, as there is nothing to stop it - your weight has fallen off your wheel, and is not following the path your guide suggests.

If, on the other hand the weight is to the left (and below) the guide why did you resolve against it? at that point the the force due to gravity on the weight isn't acting against the guide (given that you are using reactive methods for calculating the torque)
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on May 23, 2009, 05:17:57 AM
No, as I said, the normal vector is acting on the arm solely, causing the torque. The normal vector is a result of the decomposition of other earlier vectors where the action on the guide has already been taken into account. That normal vector, acting solely to cause torque is an outcome from such previous decomposition of vectors.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on May 26, 2009, 08:40:23 AM
These are the net torque data for the tracks shown. As seen one attractive possibility is the ellipsoid track which is not only the most convenient to analyze but is also the easiest to manufacture. Of course, the obvious advantage some of track forms provide will be mitigated by the hindrances due to the friction forces which will present themselves such that the order of preferable tracks would become different from what is apparent from the figure below. Now, it’s interesting to find a method for the quantitative assessment of these opposing friction forces to have this analysis be of greater help in the manufacturing of the device.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Cloxxki on May 26, 2009, 12:21:07 PM
@Omnibus. A positive contribution, thank you.

Room improvement might have been to also show the 45deg figures, to show how it goes from 40 back to 0, and get a more precise reading?

Could you be so kind to apply to the last and most promising shape, an alternative slot layout?
- shorter hook, to have immediate release.
- wider slot below the hook, tapering towards the axle where it's the usual width
- slot, being aimed offset forward clockwise. Let's say, by roughly 1/4th of the radius on the inner end.

I wonder if a difference would be show, and if so, what kind.

Thanks and regards,

J
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on May 26, 2009, 02:14:58 PM
@Cloxxki,

Thanks. Wonder if you have a dxf of that wheel? It's interesting to see what the effect of different froms of the slots would be alongside the effect of the track shape.

Any construction which would cause a decrease in friction would bring us closer to the goal. Finding ways to decrease friction is, in a sense, a problem similar to achieving superconductivity. One wonders what might the systematic methodology be regarding friction now that we have the methodology to determine systematically whether or not a device is a perpetuum mobile.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Cloxxki on May 26, 2009, 03:14:32 PM
Edit : sketch oploaded. Only the "ahead" and "wide" features reflected, no specifics.

I have Solidworks to my disposal, but not the skills to do as much as draw a line.
Make it like the pulling spoke on a bicyle wheel, the point where it's on the spoke flange is radially ahead of the spoke nipple at the rim. Difference in bicycle wheels is up to 1/4th revolution, in our case much may be better, the weight can gain only so much advantage.

Friction reduction is an "easy" one, and comes after having established the ideal geometry. The weight not touching anything but the lower ramp seems like one way to do away with friction, although not my main point.

So far, I've been missing most forms of discussion regarding how we want the ramp to affect the placement and timing of the weight relative and on the wheel. Slot types have been very shortly considered, but never really argumented.
To optimize slot shape, after having fixed ramp dimensions and placement, we'd want to calculate/plot the positions of the wheel and the weight from the moment disengagement at 5:00 commences.
Do we want the weight to push the wheel shortly, the wheel to push on continiously, or to get a good amount of "absolute free rolling" action before the weight becomes a factor for the wheel again?
My hunch is we need to explore the last option especially, that's something never done before in similar attempts at PMM.
The slot needs to have some width to it, to allow the weight it's freedom of movement. Seems to me any bouncing around between the slot edges would cause considerable drag. You can tell from the video stills that Abeling was working on this as well.
As the weight decellerates upwards and inwards, the wheel should be catching it up it (litterally) with ideally a super soft gradual tap and roll. Actual speed of the wheel upon release at 5:00 may affect slot position relative to its rolling weight.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on May 26, 2009, 07:31:14 PM
@Cloxxki,

This wheel is closer to Abeling's patent and somewhat similar to your wheel with the ellipse+esaymmetric track from the earlier figure, showing the greatest effect. As you can see, the slots don't seem to cause a tangible change in net torque in this case.

Of course, the right-hand side of the track should be drawn further to the right and then the net torque will be higher. Drawing it isn't that straightforward, at least for me, if it is to be smooth. Will have to see what can be done.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: stgpcm on May 26, 2009, 11:34:01 PM
No, as I said, the normal vector is acting on the arm solely,
Yes, you said that, unfortunately, that doesn't make it true,

Look at that component vector.  It is also acting on the guide - it is no longer acting away, or tangentially from it. You need to re-resolve it against the guide. Otherwise your maths is wrong.

Your net torque is a result of your incorrect maths, and is not the source of the free energy in Abeling's wheel.

You have no proof your maths is right. I have reached the same result for my maths with three entirely separate methods of calculation, backed up by real world observations of those that have attempted to replicate the machine.

Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on May 27, 2009, 04:26:47 AM
Yes, you said that, unfortunately, that doesn't make it true,

Look at that component vector.  It is also acting on the guide - it is no longer acting away, or tangentially from it. You need to re-resolve it against the guide. Otherwise your maths is wrong.

Your net torque is a result of your incorrect maths, and is not the source of the free energy in Abeling's wheel.

You have no proof your maths is right. I have reached the same result for my maths with three entirely separate methods of calculation, backed up by real world observations of those that have attempted to replicate the machine.
That's incorrect. I already explained why.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on May 27, 2009, 05:13:40 AM
One puzzling effect in WM2D simulation is the opposite sense of rotation to what it should be as a result of the torques created by the weights. Here is an illustration of a similar inherent problem in AutoCAD.

The first drawing below shows the decomposition of the weight vector (Red) into the components which finally yield to the component (Cyan) normal to the radial segment – the product of that normal component and the radial segment is the torque created by the weight at the illustrated position. The sense of the component (Cyan) is as expected.

The second drawing shows the same decomposition of that same weight vector (Red) made over the slightly modified ellipse line. As seen the sense of the component (Cyan) is opposite to what it should be – ostensibly causing torque in the reverse direction.

This is some inherent problem in AutoCAD on a deeper level of its programming which should be known when assessing specifically the sense of the torque. This problem doesn’t affect the magnitude of the torque. This problem exists in the widely used AutoCAD and it very well may be that the same problem is present in much less popular WM2D.

Since, as I mentioned, the magnitude of that indicidual torque, respectively, the magnitude of the net torque (which is the result of the summing up of the 8 individual torques) is correct what is to be emphasized is the mere fact of the persistent non-zero torque causing infinite rotation rather than the sense of that rotation.

It is unfortunate, of course, to turn this study in a study of the flaws in computer programs which are supposed to be only tool and not the center of research activity. Now that we know that flaw we should go ahead and never bother about the sense of rotation and should only focus on the evident persistent non-zero value of the net torque at any position of the wheel which, together with the persistent center of mass-axle discrepancy, is the definitive proof that perpetuum mobile is real.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: stgpcm on May 27, 2009, 07:51:35 AM
That's incorrect. I already explained why.
no, it's correct, I already explained why.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: stgpcm on May 27, 2009, 08:26:06 AM
Omnibus, You claim my calculation is wrong, because you assert the force developed on the system can't exceed the force due to gravity. I admit, that does seem to be "common sense". That doesn't stop the assertion being false

Using your principle the primitive machine "wedge" doesn't work.

We can no longer split rock with a wedge, because the force developed by the wedge sideways "can't" exceed the force put in by the operator.

Using your principle the primitive machine "screw" no longer works. We can no longer use jack to lift a car, because the force developed by the screw "can't" exceed the force put in by the operator.

By all means continue to do your calculations, they're an interesting mental exercise, but my third, 4 weight wheel, and just about every failed wheel before it "works" according to your constructions.

Your incorrect maths are not what makes Abelings wheel work.

Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on May 27, 2009, 08:39:06 AM
no, it's correct, I already explained why.

No, you didn't. Arrogance is no argument.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on May 27, 2009, 08:40:27 AM
Omnibus, You claim my calculation is wrong, because you assert the force developed on the system can't exceed the force due to gravity. I admit, that does seem to be "common sense". That doesn't stop the assertion being false

Using your principle the primitive machine "wedge" doesn't work.

We can no longer split rock with a wedge, because the force developed by the wedge sideways "can't" exceed the force put in by the operator.

Using your principle the primitive machine "screw" no longer works. We can no longer use jack to lift a car, because the force developed by the screw "can't" exceed the force put in by the operator.

By all means continue to do your calculations, they're an interesting mental exercise, but my third, 4 weight wheel, and just about every failed wheel before it "works" according to your constructions.

Your incorrect maths are not what makes Abelings wheel work.

No, this is not what I explained. Read it again, try to understand it and stop this useless exchange.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: stgpcm on May 27, 2009, 09:47:05 AM
No, you didn't. Arrogance is no argument.
Yes I did, I showed three entirely separate methods for calculating the torque, all of which gave the same result.

you have stated only one way, and state it is correct. YOU are the one using proof by arrogance. Please stop wasting the time of those trying to discover how Abeling's wheel works.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: stgpcm on May 27, 2009, 09:59:04 AM
No, this is not what I explained. Read it again, try to understand it and stop this useless exchange.

@stgpcm,

Any force that is derived from this mass can only be of lower (smaller, lesser) magnitude than its initial one.

[...]

the torque which this mass will create can only be lower (smaller, lesser) than the torque this mass can create without a guide but for the same arm. Guides cannot create more mass than the mass than the mass initially given.



BUSTED. Here you clearly state that the force on the system can't be any more than the input force.

Wedge. Screw. Inclined plane. Lever. None of these work in Omnibus's world.

Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on May 27, 2009, 10:27:59 AM
BUSTED. Here you clearly state that the force on the system can't be any more than the input force.

Wedge. Screw. Inclined plane. Lever. None of these work in Omnibus's world.

The above proves you don't know the essence of this problem. Like I said, useless exchange.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Cloxxki on May 27, 2009, 10:34:06 AM
The above proves you don't know the essence of this problem. Like I said, useless exchange.
You have now each spent ~50 posts quarrelling over calculations. Perhaps you could take it offline, and find a mutually respected scientist to take a stance?
You are both showing symptoms of the somebody-is-wrong-on-the-internet syndrome.

Please divert your excess energy towards creating a PMM. It could have been invented, documented and independently confirmed halfway your quarrel, let alone if you worked together.

Thank you.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on May 27, 2009, 10:39:18 AM
You have now each spent ~50 posts quarrelling over calculations. Perhaps you could take it offline, and find a mutually respected scientist to take a stance?
You are both showing symptoms of the somebody-is-wrong-on-the-internet syndrome.

Please divert your excess energy towards creating a PMM. It could have been invented, documented and independently confirmed halfway your quarrel, let alone if you worked together.

Thank you.

I'm not the initiator of this useless exchange.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Cloxxki on May 27, 2009, 10:50:35 AM
I'm not the initiator of this useless exchange.
But perhaps a driving force?
Where 2 squarrel, 2 are wrong.

Even if every word you write on the technical side is to conform even to science as it will be known a century from now, your attitude is still not up to your own century's standards. In my humble opinion.

If you're so sure it's a PMM, build it. Sufficient excess torque to overcome friction, I would say.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on May 27, 2009, 10:57:30 AM
But perhaps a driving force?
Where 2 squarrel, 2 are wrong.

Even if every word you write on the technical side is to conform even to science as it will be known a century from now, your attitude is still not up to your own century's standards. In my humble opinion.

You should keep you humble opinion to yourself. Any century's standards require rebuttal of nonsense. Truth isn't polite.

Quote
If you're so sure it's a PMM, build it. Sufficient excess torque to overcome friction, I would say.

There's no such requirement if I'm sure it's a PMM. There are strict scientific criteria to judge for that and whether or not someone can manufacture it isn't one of them.

Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on May 27, 2009, 11:09:04 AM
@Cloxxki,

I also said on several occasions that, now that we know that perpetuum mobile is real, we need to discuss what the systematic analysis should be to assess the friction and ways to get it down below values which overcome the perpetuum mobile effect. That's a technical question but that doesn't mean it's non-trivial. It is as non-trivial as for manufacturing of any fine mechanical device.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Cloxxki on May 27, 2009, 07:23:04 PM
I bet if Da Vinci had stubled on a PMM design, he'd just sculpt one out of rock, and it would work.
If PMM requires high-tech low-friction solutions, little free energy can come from it. Maybe that's the stage where Abeling is now himself, getting friction down that last 0.5% to get the wheel to keep turning....
If we can improve on the shape of a wheel, and the interactions with the weights, would the potential gain not be quite substantial? Indeed we need to find the optimal setup, but for some time I see no-one making good suggestions.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on May 28, 2009, 02:45:40 AM
Everything important has been and is so badly manipulated that it would be prudent not to invoke historical hearsay when discussing these matters. It very well may be that Da Vinci or someone else had such machine made but that fact is erased from history deliberately by the powers that be. They didn’t even need brothers Wright to know that bodies heavier than air can fly and yet the lackeys of propaganda were shoving down the throat of society that it’s impossible. It’s just the commercial or military potential of any idea (which perpetuum mobile lacks) that are allowed to find their way in society. Nothing, no matter how innovative, no matter how obvious, which would work against the financial and economic hierarchy of society is allowed. It is viciously suppressed by those in power. 

We are deluding ourselves that now in the era of the internet things might be different but we see what innovative ways these powers have to have it their way. They have billions to waste for nonsense such as the CERN hadron collider experiment and it’s nothing for them to devise Mylow or alsetalokin scams designed to exhaust, punish and discourage the perceived by them wide-eyed enthusiasts through leading them into a dead-end. Claiming democracy, they can’t just start shutting down web sites of people trying to make perpetuum mobile, the way they have shut down access of such to the academia placing fascist bans on certain research equating it unjustifiedly with nonsense. They could do it then. Now, web in existence, it’s a little different and maybe not less efficient with those Mylows and others paid on-duty characters infesting the discussions with their diversion tactics to discourage any effort out of the party line.

Anyway, I’ve mentioned the above more than once but it has to be repeated over and over again because the forces of discouragement are overwhelming, their goal being to chase away talent from this research.

Now, back to our problems. How can we find systematic ways to assess friction, the way there’s already a systematic way to judge definitively for the perpetuum mobile effect and its reality? The laws of mechanics, regarding torque, are set in stone and, in absence of friction, a given construction has its strict characteristics in this respect. Friction, on the other hand, is variable, it can be made high or low, depending on the materials, lubricants and construction. So, here we have construction again. Especially the left-hand side of it. Given the most favorable materials (Teflon comes to mind) and lubricants (even a pivot based on magnetic levitation), it appears that constructions with favorable torque are unfavorable regarding, say, area of surfaces in contact for one full turn. There should be a way to assess that area quantitatively and optimize it for an optimum torque. Those who claim that perpetuum mobile is impossible should prove that friction can never be made less than that counteracting the excess torque. Such a thing is impossible to prove given the variable nature of friction and it’s theoretical zero limit compared to the clear non-zero excess torque.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: stgpcm on May 28, 2009, 02:46:36 AM
The above proves you don't know the essence of this problem. Like I said, useless exchange.
The above proves you have no interest in discovering the true source of Abelings perpetual motion, but are intent on leading people down a blind alley.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on May 28, 2009, 02:49:17 AM
The above proves you have no interest in discovering the true source of Abelings perpetual motion, but are intent on leading people down a blind alley.

You have no grounds to say that because you don't understand the essence of what's being discussed.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: stgpcm on May 28, 2009, 02:57:40 AM

Please divert your excess energy towards creating a PMM. It could have been invented, documented and independently confirmed halfway your quarrel, let alone if you worked together.

Thank you.
Unfortunately, I am not clever enough to devise a system capable of being such (although I have created one that works if you use Omnibus's method).
I am, however, clever enough to spot where Omnibus has made a mistake, and provide three different methods of calculating the same, correct answer - which also matches the experience of those who have attempted to build the machine - namely a counterclockwise acceleration where Omnibus's constructions predictions show a clockwise acceleration.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: stgpcm on May 28, 2009, 03:00:02 AM
You have no grounds to say that because you don't understand the essence of what's being discussed.
you only have grounds to say that because you live in a fantasy world where just because you say something it is true.

Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on May 28, 2009, 03:10:31 AM
Unfortunately, I am not clever enough to devise a system capable of being such (although I have created one that works if you use Omnibus's method).
I am, however, clever enough to spot where Omnibus has made a mistake, and provide three different methods of calculating the same, correct answer - which also matches the experience of those who have attempted to build the machine - namely a counterclockwise acceleration where Omnibus's constructions predictions show a clockwise acceleration.

You are the one who's delusional. @eisenficker2000 spent even time to directly demonstrate where you're wrong. He didn't have to waste time to do that because your confusion is obvious. You don't want to learn but instead are wasting everyone's time with gibberish.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: stgpcm on May 28, 2009, 03:19:26 AM
You are the one who's delusional. @eisenficker2000 spent even time to directly demonstrate where you're wrong. He didn't have to waste time to do that because your confusion is obvious. You don't want to learn but instead are wasting everyone's time with gibberish.
you need to re-read what he said. As I requested, he demonstrated his method of calculation in the simple case, which allowed me to confirm it contained the error I suspected.

He doesn't read this thread, because of you.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on May 28, 2009, 03:29:51 AM
you need to re-read what he said. As I requested, he demonstrated his method of calculation in the simple case, which allowed me to confirm it contained the error I suspected.

He doesn't read this thread, because of you.

Are you his speaker to know why he does or doesn't read this thread?

What error? You are the one who doesn't understand the essence of the problem. There's no error in @eisenficker2000's analysis.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: LarryC on May 28, 2009, 05:19:48 AM
Okay, Omnibus and stgpcm arguments are starting to seem very questionable. Check their recent post timings. They seem to be the same person with different sides of a distracting  arguments.

Check reply 25 at  http://www.overunity.com/index.php?topic=7472.msg183041#msg183041. Does anyone else see the resemblance?

Sorry, but these two seem to be very good at trying to mislead the thread from its goal.

Regards, Larry
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on May 28, 2009, 07:58:46 AM
Okay, Omnibus and stgpcm arguments are starting to seem very questionable. Check their recent post timings. They seem to be the same person with different sides of a distracting  arguments.

Check reply 25 at  http://www.overunity.com/index.php?topic=7472.msg183041#msg183041. Does anyone else see the resemblance?

Sorry, but these two seem to be very good at trying to mislead the thread from its goal.

Regards, Larry


Distracting arguments? Distracting from what, from the role of the centrifugal forces? That has been commented already and your misunderstanding it isn't a basis to consider it the worthy topic of discussion. What you're doing is distracting because it's bringing in nonsense in the discussion.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Cloxxki on May 28, 2009, 08:33:00 AM
One person or two, will you stop it please?

@Omnibus, work on the highest torque shape you can come up with, that it buildable. Friction can be overcome. Abeling likes (fibre)glass, why not look into that? Think big rollers, or multiple rollers. Inline skates are faster with more wheels spreading the load, due to the elasticity of the tires ramping up with load. A cart like weight on 4 wheel might track better than a dumbell, and roll better too. In sports, I know speed/friction a trade-off between weight, size, and count. Here, weight is what we want, and all we need is the lowest friction. We can use many large rollers, if we want. Next thing to consider, do we want the weight in the rollers, or between it on the cart?

@stgpcm, your calculation talents exceed mine to understand them. However, I can with some excersize "visualize" movements in space, and start to understand powers at play. Please enlighten me, on or of-board, on your Abeling related model, and what it is you think Abeling is overseeing (or intensionally omitting from the patent)
On another forum I read about having weight first build up speed to increase their mass, and only then allow them to do work. Do you like my proposal to maximize speed upon release at Abeling's 5-6:00, and get some serious height overcome before the slots carry the weight up the past bit, and sling it back outside?
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on May 28, 2009, 09:02:32 AM
@Cloxxki,

It appears that if ways are found to decrease friction the shape of slots and track isn't of crucial importance for demonstrating a working device which is the goal now. Once it's demonstrated practically there will be further developments to make it more efficient.

I have no data at hand to judge for whether glass or fiberglass would be the best material. I'm mentioning Teflon but there may be other better materials. It would be interesting to hear somebody with more experience in this respect.

Also, I'm not sure that more weights would be better in view of increased friction when more. The heavier weights the better, however.

As for "weight first build up speed to increase their mass, and only then allow them to do work" that was already commented. That buldup would be only at the expense of the gravitational potential energy at the top and there's no gain in that. Observe the functioning of this wheel at very low speed to avoid distractions with centrifugal forces when thinking about this device.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: stgpcm on May 28, 2009, 09:09:31 AM

Check reply 25 at  http://www.overunity.com/index.php?topic=7472.msg183041#msg183041. Does anyone else see the resemblance?

absolutely not - I've read what you said, and done my best to explain the principles involved - the exact opposite of the person you are likening me two.

While talking about skeet throwers is tangential to the topic, discussing whether centrifugal force is real or not is quite important when discussing whether centrifugal force is the cause of the imbalance in the wheel.

But, on that matter, a simple thought experiment.

You are sat in a car, and it accelerates. You feel yourself being "pushed back" into your seat. What is the force pushing you back? The answer is there is no force pushing you back - you are feeling the car push your forwards, and you feel your momentum being changed. You might call the force you perceive inertia, but it isn't a real force.

The car turns left, You feel yourself being pushed against the right side of the car. What is the force pushing you right? Similarly there is no force pushing you right, you are feeling the car push you left (centripetally), and you feel your momentum being changed. You might call the force you perceive centrifugal force, or you might be consistent and call it inertia again, but it still isn't a real force
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on May 28, 2009, 09:14:57 AM
absolutely not - I've read what you said, and done my best to explain the principles involved - the exact opposite of the person you are likening me two.

While talking about skeet throwers is tangential to the topic, discussing whether centrifugal force is real or not is quite important when discussing whether centrifugal force is the cause of the imbalance in the wheel.

But, on that matter, a simple thought experiment.

You are sat in a car, and it accelerates. You feel yourself being "pushed back" into your seat. What is the force pushing you back? The answer is there is no force pushing you back - you are feeling the car push your forwards, and you feel your momentum being changed. You might call the force you perceive inertia, but it isn't a real force.

The car turns left, You feel yourself being pushed against the right side of the car. What is the force pushing you right? Similarly there is no force pushing you right, you are feeling the car push you left (centripetally), and you feel your momentum being changed. You might call the force you perceive centrifugal force, or you might be consistent and call it inertia again, but it still isn't a real force

This observation has nothing to do with the effects we're discussing here. It was explained at length why earlier in the thread and it's a waste of time to get back into that discussion.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: stgpcm on May 28, 2009, 09:19:26 AM
on your Abeling related model, and what it is you think Abeling is overseeing (or intensionally omitting from the patent)
That's the thing, I can't imagine what he is omitting, which is why I'm keen we find out what it is. What I am fairly sure of is it isn't the torque construction Omnibus is using, because that is wrong (as evinced by wheels that turn anticlockwise when he predicts clockwise). His continued insistence that it is down to the torques as he calculated them is distracting people from looking into the real reason.
Quote
On another forum I read about having weight first build up speed to increase their mass, and only then allow them to do work. Do you like my proposal to maximize speed upon release at Abeling's 5-6:00, and get some serious height overcome before the slots carry the weight up the past bit, and sling it back outside?
Unfortunately, I doubt that is the answer - using momentum to lift the waits means that you have to put the momentum in elsewhere, which means the part of the force increasing the weight's momentum isn't available to the system - so it cancels out, unless you can find some way to make sure that it doesn't.

EDIT: to fix broken (quote) (/quote)
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on May 28, 2009, 09:24:05 AM
That's the thing, I can't imagine what he is omitting, which is why I'm keen we find out what it is. What I am fairly sure of is it isn't the torque construction Omnibus is using, because that is wrong (as evinced by wheels that turn anticlockwise when he predicts clockwise). His continued insistence that it is down to the torques as he calculated them is distracting people from looking into the real reason.
[qquote]
On another forum I read about having weight first build up speed to increase their mass, and only then allow them to do work. Do you like my proposal to maximize speed upon release at Abeling's 5-6:00, and get some serious height overcome before the slots carry the weight up the past bit, and sling it back outside?

Unfortunately, I doubt that is the answer - using momentum to lift the waits means that you have to put the momentum in elsewhere, which means the part of the force increasing the weight's momentum isn't available to the system - so it cancels out, unless you can find some way to make sure that it doesn't.
No, nothing prdicts CCW motion. That's a flaw in WM2D and you're trying to adjust to that with obviously flawed arguments. Net torque calculations are the answer. Also, like I said, the role of centrifugal forces is a side issue. 
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: stgpcm on May 28, 2009, 09:56:08 AM
My best guess at the moment is a slight sling-shot effect due to the Earth's rotation.

Such a device would be a call for a visit from the MIB, because converting the Earth's rotation to energy, is the same thing as building a machine to slow the rotation of the Earth, which you might instead call a doomsday device.

But without seeing a working wheel, it is difficult to know exactly what is going on, and as I said, I lack the imagination to think of one myself.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Cloxxki on May 28, 2009, 12:08:06 PM
@stgpcm
I agree with you that @Omnibus' low-speed torque calculation may be sending him off-track to getting what Abeling has discovered. As I see it, even if we only have 1 wheel position from where it will accelerate (like Dusty's first Abeling replication), that would be most agreeable, as long as the thing keeps going. I would even accept a system that has a take-off velocity above which the "trick" is out-weighing the dragging or even directly counter-acting forces at lower speeds.
@Dusty's wheel also turns backwards from given positions. Friction does not turn wheels, unfortunately. The imbalance is not a constant, and it doesn't have to be.

Earth's rotation... Do you mean that a member shot up at an angle would, on earth, show an asymmetrical parabole? That would be significant indeed, but perhaps a small power only? Are measurement anomolies known along such lines?

Staying within conventional science, I think it's worth to try and calculate how high we can get a weight to roll up a ramp before the (near-axole) slot catches up. The amount of energy required to get it all the way over 12:00 and up to rim speed compared to freed while on the wheel towards the next release point below.
And then, see what is preferable: letting the weight gain initial radial advantage on wheel, or putting all energy back into the wheel right at 6:00? My gut is telling me the former. Use the speed, and the great vertical height covered by a vertically moving weight in the early (higher speed) stages versus the later ones. At low speed, making up 1cm vertically costs the same amount of energy/torque/prayers, be it down below or way up (considering gravity a constant through the height of the system that is).

Back to Earth's rotation. To consider this a power to tap into, or as a hint to what we can build ourselves? I've suggested before a horizontally placed "Abeling wheel", at the rim of a centrifuge. More pull, and directed to a point, not parallel. Making up some horizontal ground "on top" (nearer to centre of centrifuge), a possible root to imbalance of a system?
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on May 28, 2009, 01:08:20 PM
Gut feeling won’t resolve this problem. Especially when there’s obviously nothing leading one to think there’s tapping into something such as Earth’s rotation. This is just talk. For a successful outcome efforts should be based on solid scientific ground, an example of which is the torque approach as well as the observation for the sustained stay sideways of the mass center vs. the axle.

As for Abeling’s device, it is based on a well known concept and that he has discovered anything in that connection is out of the question. The most which he has achieved, if at all, is that he has found a way to make a working device. This isn’t a small achievement but isn’t a discovery. Of course, it still remains to be seen whether or not he has really made such device – he hasn’t demonstrated it yet. His bold move should also be noted, similar to the courage Stefan has shown in establishing this forum.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Cloxxki on May 28, 2009, 03:15:53 PM
Gut feeling won’t resolve this problem. Especially when there’s obviously nothing leading one to think there’s tapping into something such as Earth’s rotation. This is just talk. For a successful outcome efforts should be based on solid scientific ground, an example of which is the torque approach as well as the observation for the sustained stay sideways of the mass center vs. the axle.

As for Abeling’s device, it is based on a well known concept and that he has discovered anything in that connection is out of the question. The most which he has achieved, if at all, is that he has found a way to make a working device. This isn’t a small achievement but isn’t a discovery. Of course, it still remains to be seen whether or not he has really made such device – he hasn’t demonstrated it yet. His bold move should also be noted, similar to the courage Stefan has shown in establishing this forum.
Of course, just talk. But at least it's not talk on how to calculate. The pure torque approach I'm sure has been tried by many people smarter than us, or even smarter than Abeling.
If he's found a detail that other missed, where to look for it?

Some ideas how he might be getting the most from a weight that is not part of the rim on it's way up.
A) The weight is allowed some level of freedom of movement in its way up. Either to:
  - advancing or delaying the energy consumption
  - using accelerations/decellerations effiently
  - cashing in on radial advancement between 6:00-9:00? Or slipping back less 9-11:00 to net a gain?
  - smart oscillations of rim speed positive pushing weight "over the edge", higher starting speed up ramp, slow rim speed during ramp, and then great power from counter weight to complete the half cycle?

B) Any other approaches he might be keeping from us?
  - CF harvesting, moving ramps?
  - eccentric axles, weight, slots?
  - springs and/or ratchets in the weights?

If only we had something nicer than WM2D to methodically try some basic concepts against each other...
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: LarryC on May 28, 2009, 03:35:51 PM
absolutely not - I've read what you said, and done my best to explain the principles involved - the exact opposite of the person you are likening me two.

While talking about skeet throwers is tangential to the topic, discussing whether centrifugal force is real or not is quite important when discussing whether centrifugal force is the cause of the imbalance in the wheel.

But, on that matter, a simple thought experiment.

You are sat in a car, and it accelerates. You feel yourself being "pushed back" into your seat. What is the force pushing you back? The answer is there is no force pushing you back - you are feeling the car push your forwards, and you feel your momentum being changed. You might call the force you perceive inertia, but it isn't a real force.

The car turns left, You feel yourself being pushed against the right side of the car. What is the force pushing you right? Similarly there is no force pushing you right, you are feeling the car push you left (centripetally), and you feel your momentum being changed. You might call the force you perceive centrifugal force, or you might be consistent and call it inertia again, but it still isn't a real force

This observation has nothing to do with the effects we're discussing here. It was explained at length why earlier in the thread and it's a waste of time to get back into that discussion.

OB and Anti-OB, stop it, you're cracking me up. OB gave the same example earlier as Anti-OB. But in the future, to save you and your other self some time, just point to   http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/HFrame.html under circular motion then centrifugal force.


Regards, Larry
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on May 28, 2009, 04:41:41 PM
@Cloxxki,

Quote
Of course, just talk. But at least it's not talk on how to calculate. The pure torque approach I'm sure has been tried by many people smarter than us, or even smarter than Abeling.
If he's found a detail that other missed, where to look for it?

I disagree. The torque approach, obvious as it seems, hasn’t been applied before. If you think it has, give a reference or a link. This is the first place such analysis has been made and that’s the basis of a solid scientific approach to find the solution of that problem.

Now, by this
Quote
A) The weight is allowed some level of freedom of movement in its way up. Either to:
  - advancing or delaying the energy consumption
  - using accelerations/decellerations effiently
  - cashing in on radial advancement between 6:00-9:00? Or slipping back less 9-11:00 to net a gain?
  - smart oscillations of rim speed positive pushing weight "over the edge", higher starting speed up ramp, slow rim speed during ramp, and then great power from counter weight to complete the half cycle?

B) Any other approaches he might be keeping from us?
  - CF harvesting, moving ramps?
  - eccentric axles, weight, slots?
  - springs and/or ratchets in the weights?
you are deciding that the device isn’t a self-starter which is contrary to the torque analysis.

 
Quote
If only we had something nicer than WM2D to methodically try some basic concepts against each other...
We have – AutoCAD.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on May 28, 2009, 04:42:45 PM
OB and Anti-OB, stop it, you're cracking me up. OB gave the same example earlier as Anti-OB. But in the future, to save you and your other self some time, just point to   http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/HFrame.html under circular motion then centrifugal force.


Regards, Larry

Not clear what the point is of giving this link.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on May 28, 2009, 04:45:18 PM
We need a real watchmaker to get interested in this. There was someone a year ago or so in one of the magnetic motor threads but I can't even remember what his handle was. Someone in expertise in fine mechanics.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: stgpcm on May 28, 2009, 10:11:28 PM
But in the future, to save you and your other self some time, just point to   http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/HFrame.html under circular motion then centrifugal force.


Regards, Larry
I presume you are referring to {this (http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/corf.html#cent)}

As it says, it is an "effective force" that may be invoked to explain motions perceived if you are in the rotating frame of reference. It goes on to say "A person in a hovering helicopter above the car could describe the movement of the cup and the egg carton as just going straight" and references the centripetal force section.

{Wikipedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Centrifugal_force)} corrects my overbroad assertion that there is no such thing as centrifugal force, and correctly insists that the to rotating observer the  "ficticious" force does exist. however, as we are analysing this from off the wheel (in the helicopter), there is no centrifugal force for us to calculate.

If you want to do the calculations as if the wheel is stationary, and the world is rotating around it, so you can invoke centrifugal force, go ahead - but you might get dizzy  ;) - Also, you will need to account for coriolis forces, which (when you calculate the vector sum with the centrifugal force) ends up giving you a vector which is tangential to the  world that is rotating about you.

Wikipedia also explains the other usage of centrifugal force, which is an engineering usage, and talks about the stresses experienced by the frame as it provides the centripetal acceleration required to cause circular motion.

Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: stgpcm on May 28, 2009, 11:54:06 PM
@stgpcm
As I see it, even if we only have 1 wheel position from where it will accelerate (like Dusty's first Abeling replication), that would be most agreeable, as long as the thing keeps going.
absoIutely - I've said as much myself. The advantage of a system which is always positive is you don't have to work out whether the pluses outweigh the negatives - but as you can always add more radial symmetry, you can usually remove the negative rotation -

A one bucket simplistic water wheel will get it's "trick" from the point the bucket fills at 12:00 to where it empties at 03:00. from 3:00 to 6:00, the bucket will accelerate under it's own weight, and from 6:00 to 12:00, the system will decelerate as it brings the wheel back to 12:00. Despite this having negative torque from 06:00 to 12:00, once started, this system will go indefinitely.

If we say put 5 buckets on the wheel, then at all points the torque will be positive, making it much easier to say it will just keep on. going


Quote
I would even accept a system that has a take-off velocity above which the "trick" is out-weighing the dragging or even directly counter-acting forces at lower speeds.
Me too.
Quote
@Dusty's wheel also turns backwards from given positions. Friction does not turn wheels, unfortunately.
The sad thing is Omnibus's method is so very nearly correct - he simply needs to produce the force due to gravity along the direction of movement, instead of resolving it against it. But his decision that the force due to the interactions can't exceed the force due to gravity has blinded him to that.

Quote
Earth's rotation... Do you mean that a member shot up at an angle would, on earth, show an asymmetrical parabole? That would be significant indeed, but perhaps a small power only? Are measurement anomolies known along such lines?
I would expect the forces to be exceedingly slight, but if Abeling has managed to capture them in a powerful way then energy can be produced, but at the cost of the Earth's rotational inertia. Admittedly, there is a lot of it, but I fear the consequences.
I was more thinking the center of mass of the weight was offset from it's point of interaction with the wheel - i.e. the bar of the dumbell went through the rim rather than the center

Quote
Back to Earth's rotation. To consider this a power to tap into, or as a hint to what we can build ourselves? I've suggested before a horizontally placed "Abeling wheel", at the rim of a centrifuge. More pull, and directed to a point, not parallel. Making up some horizontal ground "on top" (nearer to centre of centrifuge), a possible root to imbalance of a system?
If it was that effect, then yes, you may be able use a centrifuge, except I would expect the centrifuge to be slowed by the energy being captured by the Abeling wheel, and I would expect that energy to match (except for losses) the energy you would need to keep the centrifuge at the same speed. But the "trick" might make this not the case.

(I say may because the direction of gravity converges towards the centre of the Earth, but the direction of pseudo-gravity diverges from the centre of the centrifuge - this may make a difference, but probably not).
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Cloxxki on May 29, 2009, 01:08:11 AM
Good stuff stgpcm, thanks for the elaborate reply.

Another thing to consider in a strong centrifuge setup is to perhaps explore 3-dimensional movement. Simplistically, a 90 degree flipped Abeling wheel mounted to the centrifuge. If any effect on the centrifuge spinning this way, it might even be useful?
Then, the Abeling's wheel might spin in sync, but at 90 degrees with the centrifuge.

My one brain cell is hurting, the other itchy.

I hereby suggest a law to prohibit tapping into earth's rotational energy. People are bound to break it shortly after it's put in place, though. Then, digging a deep hole, pouring water in it and collecting the steam might be a lot easier. Good or bad for global warming?

I drew up some wheels where the weights got outside the rim on one side. All the leverage, none of the actual lifting going on is what I got. It's speed we need. Nothing gets done slowly.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: stgpcm on May 29, 2009, 09:24:08 AM
@Cloxxki,

I disagree. The torque approach, obvious as it seems, hasn’t been applied before. If you think it has, give a reference or a link. This is the first place such analysis has been made and that’s the basis of a solid scientific approach to find the solution of that problem.
This is the first place your incorrect torque analysis has been used, because it gives demonstrably wrong results. The wheels people have invested time in to build, based on your analysis showing they would always rotate forwards, they builders have found when they have built them, in some places they rotate backwards.

Quote
Now, by thisyou are deciding that the device isn’t a self-starter which is contrary to the torque analysis.
the incorrect torque analysis
Quote
We have – AutoCAD.
yes, you do. But you tell AutoCAD which vectors to draw - and you don't account for the centripetal vector.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: beastmastre on May 29, 2009, 11:06:31 AM
Yay! I finally made it through all the posts.

Hi, everyone. My name is Dar. I’ve been trying to catch up on this thread for days. I’ve been to the site before checking out various things like HHO engines and such. But I just joined recently because I feel that I have something to contribute to this particular discussion. I actually saw the Bob Kostoff video first and then Dusty’s videos, then PESwiki, and found my way back to the OU forum and this thread.

Now, like I said, I have some ideas to contribute. But, before I get to them I feel the need some of my own opinions out in the open. I’m not here to start a fight or get into that of anyone else. I just may wish to express something from a point of view that hadn’t been considered. And if you don’t agree. I’m perfectly willing to ‘agree to disagree’. I just don’t want to get caught up in space & time wasting debates. I can get wordy enough, as it is.

First, I think that everyone that has posted, so far, has brought up some good ideas. Okay, so maybe some designs won’t work but I believe that everyone has, at least, touched on something that may be useful in the long run.

I find it sad that so much time has been spent debating things like whether or not Centrifugal Force is an actual force. Or Inertia, etc.. Can’t we just agree that these things are observable and measurable effects and move on?

I believe that wm2d, although useful for some things, is flawed. This just seems obvious to me when you can see that the weights transfer too much kinetic energy to the wheels upon initial impact when the sims are started.

I think that the definition of the over-balanced wheel PPM should be revised, just a little, from the center of mass being offset from the axis of the wheels rotation to the center of mass being offset from the fulcrum of the systems rotation. I think this is why the simple OB wheel designs don’t work. When you get the weights to follow a path to one side, the focal point of their revolutions shifts to the other side of the center of mass from the axis of the wheel and when you combine it all together, the focal points merge at the center of mass, hence a balanced wheel. I don’t know if this effect could ever be overcome in any OB wheel but I would like to hope so. I think it would require a much more complex system. And I think Abeling designed a more complex system than he has let on.

I think that even if a well designed system may eventually grind to a halt that it may be possible that you could get a lot more energy out of it than it took to get it running. What if Bessler had actually built a really, really efficient pendulum clock device that even he couldn’t tell was slowing down? What if all it might take to keep getting lots of energy out of a wheel was a guy walking in once a year to push the pendulum back to the top of it’s swing? Isn’t that still overunity, more work out than in?

What I’ve been working on is trying to figure out Abelings wheel from the clues & questions he left for us in the video. With a bit of detective work, I think we can reverse engineer what’s missing or perhaps even find a better system. I’ll explain more in the next post & include some images.

Thanks  - Dar
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Jubjub on May 29, 2009, 04:38:10 PM
Yes!
No!
Yes!
No!
Yes!
No!
Yes!
No!

 ;D
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: ramset on May 29, 2009, 04:58:14 PM
Welcome Dar

Your input will be greatly appreciated

Chet
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: stgpcm on May 29, 2009, 10:53:40 PM
Yay! I finally made it through all the posts.
congratulations! I'm sorry there are so many of them saying nothing

Quote
I just may wish to express something from a point of view that hadn’t been considered. And if you don’t agree. I’m perfectly willing to ‘agree to disagree’. I just don’t want to get caught up in space & time wasting debates. I can get wordy enough, as it is.
I enjoy looking at things from other viewpoints, and am happy to agree to disagree, Where the other person claims their viewpoint is undeniable proof - they are not agreeing to disagree...

Quote
I find it sad that so much time has been spent debating things like whether or not Centrifugal Force is an actual force. Or Inertia, etc.. Can’t we just agree that these things are observable and measurable effects and move on?
I'm happy to agree that inertia can appear to manifest as the centrifugal, coriolis and euler forces, and if you are working to a rotating frame of reference using this polite fiction in some cases can simplify the maths involved - I just find in most cases it makes the maths much more difficult than just dealing with inertia.
My objection really comes when people wish to try to harvest energy from centrifugal force, whilst ignoring the coriolis and euler forces that allow you to map inertia into the rotating frame. - there the polite fiction has led them into a mistake.

The broken string experiment allows you to observe and measure that the forces don't exist in themselves - unless there is an explanation of why cutting the string makes the forces disappear .

Quote
I believe that wm2d, although useful for some things, is flawed. This just seems obvious to me when you can see that the weights transfer too much kinetic energy to the wheels upon initial impact when the sims are started.
I don't have wm2d, so I don't know what you are referring to, but my guess from your description is that the simulation is probably right, but the model made by the designer is incorrect - the most likely candidate is the wheel has been created with a very low mass - alternately, the coefficient of restitution is too high. The other source of real world difference is that I assume wm2d objects are perfectly inelastic.
Quote
I think that the definition of the over-balanced wheel PPM should be revised, [...] to the center of mass being offset from the fulcrum of the systems rotation.
Those are not definitions of, but are hypotheses  as to how to achieve an overunity device.
Quote
And I think Abeling designed a more complex system than he has let on.
I do too - the only other option is he was lying

Quote
What if all it might take to keep getting lots of energy out of a wheel was a guy walking in once a year to push the pendulum back to the top of it’s swing? Isn’t that still overunity, more work out than in?
Yes it is. but if you are getting much more energy out than you are putting in, you could use just some of that energy to push the pendulum, without having to have a guy come to do it, and make it explicitly overunity, instead of just implicitly.

Quote
What I’ve been working on is trying to figure out Abelings wheel from the clues & questions he left for us in the video. With a bit of detective work, I think we can reverse engineer what’s missing or perhaps even find a better system. I’ll explain more in the next post & include some images.


I'm confident if we can intuit the missing bit, we can improve on the design. Furthermore, as the missing bit isn't in the patent, it isn't protected. (caveat: there are periods where the patent can be refined, I'm not sure to what degree anything we post here before before Abeling updates the patent can be considered to be independant. I would argue that anything we come up with does not come under the "can be easily inferred" clause)
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: hansvonlieven on May 29, 2009, 11:57:47 PM

 The other source of real world difference is that I assume wm2d objects are perfectly inelastic.

That is not correct. In fact the elasticity of an object is adjustable if you don't want to go along with the pre-sets for steel, rock, plastic, wood, rubber etc.

Hans von Lieven
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: stgpcm on May 30, 2009, 12:20:53 AM
Thank you for your correction,  what does it default to?

As I said, I have never used it,  I was guessing causes from the descriptions of the problem.

Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: hansvonlieven on May 30, 2009, 12:39:46 AM
In WM2d you have for each component that has mass a choice of materials. For instance, below are the pre-sets for steel. There are a number of materials to choose from as well as a custom setting where you can enter your own values.

Hans von Lieven
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: beastmastre on May 30, 2009, 02:20:13 AM
Welcome Dar

Your input will be greatly appreciated

Chet

Thanks, Chet.

Okay, going back to the video and also Abelings website, a number of questions are raised. But I think there are enough clues to figure out what's hidden or missing. The biggest question is obvious. What do the weights look like? The others are: What is the "dual lift system"? Why does he use 2 wheels? Why are the slots shaped the way they are? What are the holes between the slots for?

I'm going to propose an answer for the last one first. I think the holes between the slots are simply for sliding a narrow board through (like what we'd call a 2X4 here in the states) to keep the wheel from turning while adding & removing weights, etc.. A soft board wouldn't damage the guide rails as it rested against them.

The shape of the slots - Some things seem obvious, like the "toe" of the "boot" catching the weight around the 1:00 position. But what puzzled me right away was why there was a bump between the "toe" and the "heel". I believe someone here called it a "dog catch". I think this was there to lock not one but two roller bearings that travel in along the slot in place. An image below will show what I mean.

Why 2 wheels? - Well, a few reasons. One; you could put a dumbbell through just one wheel but it would probably be more stable across two wheels. Two & three; parts of the weight system need to cross paths with the axle or each other & everything on the dumbbells is done in pairs to allow this while maintaining even weight distribution.

That brings us to the dual lift system. - I think @Dusty hit on a couple of things in his earlier videos that relate to this. (It looks like the vids are gone from youtube now) One was that he built his wheels without the axle going between them. And the other was what someone here called his "skateboard". I'll call it a shuttle. @Dusty had drawn two dumbbell bars with rollers on the ends & a weight extending from the middle. He also had these bars connected to each other with a long connecting rod. So, I think two opposing weight/roller sets pivot on the ends of the rods and combine to form the shuttle. The weights and rods are attached in offset pairs to avoid hitting the other sets in between the wheels. The guide rails would be curved and placed so that both parts of the shuttle lift, and with the rods accelerate together. I thinks Abeling's elliptical track in the patent is intentionally vague. I'm still plotting the path. In one of the images, you'll see some extra teal colored roller bearings that allow for the scissor (cherry pit) action between the guide rails and the slots.

What the weights look like - They could be done in a number of configurations but what I described above and the images included should give some pretty good ideas.

In the image showing the shuttle sets I didn't leave room for the other two sets of offset rods & weights but you should get the idea. You can ignore the flywheel in the first image where the rollers fit in the boot. Just an idea I had. More to come...

Dar
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: LarryC on May 30, 2009, 02:21:52 AM
Dar,

I must admit I was a little curious of your intentions with your handle from the movie  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Beastmaster_(film).

BTW, One of my favorites. But after seeing your last post, you seem to have a very good analytical ability.

Check out my last post at  http://www.overunity.com/index.php?topic=7471.msg183548#msg183548
I have another slant on what you have said and will post more when I have time to test and create the drawings.

Regards, Larry
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: beastmastre on May 30, 2009, 04:20:59 AM
Dar,

I must admit I was a little curious of your intentions with your handle from the movie  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Beastmaster_(film).

BTW, One of my favorites. But after seeing your last post, you seem to have a very good analytical ability.

Check out my last post at  http://www.overunity.com/index.php?topic=7471.msg183548#msg183548
I have another slant on what you have said and will post more when I have time to test and create the drawings.

Regards, Larry

Yeah, Dar is short for Darrell. I swore I would go by Dar when I first saw that movie as a kid & now I do.

Thanks for the compliment.

I just saw your stuff and posted in that thread myself. It looks good. Good idea about letting the weight spin freely too. I happen to think that the 9:00 side of the wheel should face east so the earth's rotation could help induce a counter-rotation in the wheel after watching what happens to freely spinning weights in some of the wm2d sims.

Dar
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: beastmastre on May 30, 2009, 05:00:25 AM
Here's a shot of where I'm at in plotting the weight & guide paths. You can also see that my idea combines two different over-balanced wheel concepts, the shifted weights and the flipping weighted arms. This helps keep the weight shifted as far right as possible at all times and help add more CW torque to the system. It also helps overcome the usual problem of the flipping arm systems (I think) where there are more weights on the wrong side.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on May 30, 2009, 06:50:10 AM
Several conclusions are already emerging.

First, WM2D is internally flawed and should not be used for modeling in the case we're discussing, except for determining the center of mass. The only scientifically sound analysis so far is by using AutoCAD.

In absence of friction:

The form of the slots doesn't seem to be of decisive importance for the established perpetuum mobile effect.

The crucial factor is the form of the track and the magnitude of the weights.

Unfortunately, there's friction and this changes the picture -- the form of the slots in combination with the tracks will now, with friction, have a different impact.

The question now is what is that form of slots  and track which would provide the least surface of contact? This is a question that needs a systematic, quantitative (not gut) analysis.



Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: stgpcm on May 30, 2009, 09:45:14 AM
Several conclusions are already emerging.

First, WM2D is internally flawed and should not be used for modeling in the case we're discussing, except for determining the center of mass.
There is no such conclusion. You are saying this - in part because the wheels in wm2d will from some start position roll backwards. The exact same result is found by people who have built real wheels. should we not use the real world because physics works differently to AutoCad?

Quote
The only scientifically sound analysis so far is by using AutoCAD.
Providing you tell it to construct the correct vectors, you could use it as a poor man's analysis tool. You don't, so it's a case of garbage in, garbage out. After all, your Autocad calculations don't go backwards where real wheels do.

Quote
In absence of friction:

The form of the slots doesn't seem to be of decisive importance for the [purported] perpetuum mobile effect.
agreed, however the shape of the slots are of great significance to the amount of resultant force, between the moving and stationary parts, so slot design is very important to reduce friction.
Quote
This is a question that needs a systematic, quantitative (not gut) analysis.
Indeed. just like calculating the torques shouldn't be done on your gut feeling of which vectors to construct, and shouldn't involve simply ignoring components of vectors that you don't want to account for.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Cloxxki on May 30, 2009, 10:13:35 AM
Dar, I am greatly impressed with your analysis and presentations. It looks very logical, seems exactly like what Abeling might be hiding, and actually comes close to some other setups I proposed.
It's much more extreme though, the weights coming so far inward. I need to consider taking my ideas to the next level as well, I may have been too conservative, because of Abeling's intentionally vague images.
If a device like you propose "works", I have good hope we'l be able to come up with an equal or better system, totally non-infringing Abeling's patent. Which is our ultimate goal, I would say.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: beastmastre on May 30, 2009, 11:47:45 AM
Thanks, @Cloxxki.

@stgpcm, I also think the shape of the slots is important. If you look back a few posts at the wheel image, you can see that I changed the slots from a Hockey stick to a sort of Field Hockey stick. But that's just a rough idea of what I think it should be. I actually think it should follow a sine wave curve, just to the top of it's arc. (I took it further than that in this draft but that would cause a catch in the system.) A sine wave is cyclic, and this is a cyclic system. From what I've seen here, @stgpcm, you know your trigonometry. I haven't done trig in years, so your skills may be invaluable. It looks like the guide path will have some waveform curves also, as well as circular curves.

@All, friction reduction is easy. I had already worked this out but hadn't posted it yet. There's already something common in the real world that reduces friction as much as possible in order to transport massive amounts of weight. A choo-choo train. If you take two train wheels, swap them around and put them together, you get one wheel that can ride on the two edges of one track like the guide rails & slots. See images. The flanges on the sides wouldn't touch anything unless the roller got knocked sideways.

Dar
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Cloxxki on May 30, 2009, 11:59:10 AM
I was thinking along the same lines for the same reasons, yet had the shaped inverted. I had pointy weights, and flanged shots and ramps. If a flange gets damaged, it better be on the weight which is easier replacable. And yes, the rails are easier to fabricate for the wheel, so your design looks better.

Has anyone come up with a better than posted so far explanation why Abeling is looking into glued together (fibre)glass? Friction, durability, moldability, production cost, carbon footprint?
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on May 30, 2009, 12:43:36 PM
Useful information would be to cite Handbook values for materials with least friction. As I've already mentioned Teflon seems like a good candidate for both the wheel and the track. The optimum construction is also still unclear (systematically determined, not by just assuming). THe troque analysis confirms definitively perpetuum mobile effect in absence of friction. Now all the attention should be directed towards optimization the design and materials to decrease friction.

Also, as I've already said, it should not be assumed that Abeling has anything. He hasn't shown a working device and the efforts here to build one are independent of what appears he might or might not have shown in the video and the patent. This type os a device is known in principle for centuries, it's been said that no one has ever made it working but, in view of the latest findings, that's highly questionable. If we can solve the friction problem we'll have a working device too, happily turning despite all the propaganda telling us it can't be done. As for Abeling's role, it's mainly in him being bold and determinate to put demonstrate that someone can be so determined despite all the odds. Stefan has done a similar thing by establishing this forum.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on May 30, 2009, 12:47:16 PM
Here's one site with patents concerning lowering of friction: http://www.freshpatents.com/Solid-anti-friction-devices-materials-therefor-lubricant-or-separant-compositions-for-moving-solid-surfaces-and-miscellaneous-mineral-oil-compositions-dtnewntc508.php
Title: Newsletter May 27, 2009
Post by: AquariuZ on May 30, 2009, 12:53:16 PM
STATEMENT FROM SJACK ABELING:

Beste lezers,

Uit de reakties van vele bezoekers van onze site blijkt dat u zich grote zorgen maakt dat de uitvinding die wij hebben gedaan en alle kennis die inmiddels is vergaard zal verdwijnen door bijvoorbeeld overname, omkoping of machtsmisbruik van de diverse industrieën of landen.

Meer informatie verstrekken?
We krijgen de vraag om meer gedetailleerde informatie te verstrekken, dit als "beveiliging" zodat ook in de meest fantasierijke scenario's de uitvinding behouden blijft. Maar het delen van informatie over een dergelijk revolutionair systeem leidt voor ons uiteindelijk alleen maar tot enorme problemen.

Doelstelling
Wees gerust: niets zal ons er toe kunnen verleiden om het door ons ontwikkelde systeem te laten verdwijnen. We zijn er namelijk van overtuigd dat ons systeem de mogelijkheid heeft om het energie probleem van onze planeet en onze kinderen op verantwoorde wijze op te lossen. Onze doelstelling is daarom duidelijk: uiteindelijk zullen we onze uitvinding inzetten om energie te produceren!

Samenwerking?
We werken er hard aan om binnen drie jaar een commercieel verantwoord systeem of product te produceren. Dat kunnen we niet alleen, maar Mooie Energie zal alléén samenwerken en overeenkomsten aangaan met bedrijven die hetzelfde uitgangspunt hebben!

Sjack Abeling


TRANSLATION:


Newsletter May 27, 2009

Dear readers,

The reactions of many visitors to our site indicates that you are very worried that the invention which we have done and all knowledge that has been collected for example, will disappear over corruption or abuse of the various industries or countries.

We have the demand for more detailed information, as a "security" so that even in the most imaginative scenarios the invention is preserved. But the sharing of information on such a revolutionary system in the end only leads to enormous problems.

Objective
Do not worry: noone will be able to seduce us for the system developed by us to disappear. We are convinced that our system has the possibility of solving the energy problem of our planet and our children in a responsible manner. Our objective is clear: ultimately, we will use our invention to produce energy!

Cooperation?
We work hard to within three years make a commercialy sound system and product to produce.  We cannot do that alone but Mooie energie will only cooperate and enter into agreements with companies that have the same vision!

Sjack Abeling


It looks like our little "campaign" brought a reaction. Still not the one we all hoped (disclosure). Thanks all, you know who you are...

And let me be blunt: WHAT IF SOMEONE DECIDES YOU NEED TO HAVE AN ACCIDENT SJACK? Think about it. You can call all of us crazy but you must take into account the numerous deaths of inventors like Stanley Meyer & Jan Sloot in the last 30 years. Even though this is the Netherlands.

AZ
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Cloxxki on May 30, 2009, 12:53:20 PM
I've only ever considered teflon for my project when sliding friction was a factor, or slapping of a chain. Trains don't roll on teflon wheels for a reason: elasticity and rebound. We want low elasticity and fast rebound here.
I suggest we all look seriously into Dar's conceptual ideas, and of course general building principles which would be easily fabricated and offer low friction.
Dar introduces a revolutionary swing action as well as an extreme weight path. these are bound to offer differences from Abeling's basic presentation, as crafted by @Dusty.
Based on Dar's clear but rough slot shape and weight path, can we estimate to which extent the various energy and potentials are converted through-out the cycle? Where are we possibly getting gains, and where are the (apart from friction) losses?
Let's understand which movement(s) we're trying to use for establishing overunity. Which differences from other attempts are promising?
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on May 30, 2009, 01:09:22 PM
Quote
We work hard to within three years make a commercialy sound system and product to produce.

Oh, now it's within three years. Wasn't it to be in May 2009? Here we go again.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on May 30, 2009, 01:12:33 PM
@Cloxxki,

It isn't at all clear what that revolutionary proposal is. It should be quantified somewhat and not just be expressed as a murky idea.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Cloxxki on May 30, 2009, 01:49:20 PM
@Cloxxki,

It isn't at all clear what that revolutionary proposal is. It should be quantified somewhat and not just be expressed as a murky idea.
Has Abeling closed the loop on a Trebuchet?

In Dar's drawing I'm seeing ramp-triggered counter-rotational movement, bringing the weight to a near stop near the axle while the wheel keeps on spinning. From that dead stop, a trebuchet kind of sling is initated.
The weight settling around the axle location allows the counter-weight to transfer to the wheel, in the form of building momentum. This intentional effect allow allows the bottom weight to lift itself to axle height (mostly or easily) by converting horizontal momentum at 5-6:00 into height, and do so in a very short time, like the weight bounced to a curb at 5:00 and fell into a pocket on the axle.
The counterweight 0-3:00 increases wheel speed, and 3-6:00 acts like the powering weight of the trebuchet. If I'm not mistaken, the trebuchet weight has some excess velocity when the slung weight is let go? Anyway, near the bottom of a wheel, vertical velocity can be given away as long as some horizontal velocity is left, it can always be converted back.

Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on May 30, 2009, 02:05:14 PM
Has Abeling closed the loop on a Trebuchet?

In Dar's drawing I'm seeing ramp-triggered counter-rotational movement, bringing the weight to a near stop near the axle while the wheel keeps on spinning. From that dead stop, a trebuchet kind of sling is initated.
The weight settling around the axle location allows the counter-weight to transfer to the wheel, in the form of building momentum. This intentional effect allow allows the bottom weight to lift itself to axle height (mostly or easily) by converting horizontal momentum at 5-6:00 into height, and do so in a very short time, like the weight bounced to a curb at 5:00 and fell into a pocket on the axle.
The counterweight 0-3:00 increases wheel speed, and 3-6:00 acts like the powering weight of the trebuchet. If I'm not mistaken, the trebuchet weight has some excess velocity when the slung weight is let go? Anyway, near the bottom of a wheel, vertical velocity can be given away as long as some horizontal velocity is left, it can always be converted back.

That isn't convincing at all, just an impression without clear basis.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Cloxxki on May 30, 2009, 03:04:18 PM
That isn't convincing at all, just an impression without clear basis.
I didn't mean to be convincing. I was indeed offering impressions, hoping to spark the minds of quicker thinkers than myself. Once I fully understand something, I can be convincing to the point of bringing grown men to cry. I'm quite a handful when in full understanding of the principles discussed. Rest assured, In science you won't see me that confident for quite some time. I aim to

Your dozens of times repeated claim of perpetual motion has yet to convince even the most open minded and most educated members of this forum. You're welcome to reply in your usual over-convinced flaw indicating manner, but for the sake of the goal at hand, I suggest you don't, but rather add to Dar's and others impressions, working towards something constrive and constructable.
I wish you good luck with the torque analysis of Dar's concept. I'm sure it will show a cruise ship worth of over-torque from a press papier sized wheel. Dar introduced what I understand as a center of rotation, the weight path being offset from the axle never resulted in anything but attempts proving the over-torque approach flawed. An inverted eccentric wheel, if you will.
Getting the center of mass offset from the center of rotation, that's a bit more tricky, and far more promising if someone would manage to show a drawing for it. With slots and offsets involved, the axle is but an enabler of rotation, no longer the one point to calculate from.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: mondrasek on May 30, 2009, 09:19:09 PM
I do hope they fix the PM capabilities of this forum soon.

Very interesting ideas, Dar.  I look forward to seeing how they play out.

M.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: 0c on May 30, 2009, 09:35:38 PM
Getting the center of mass offset from the center of rotation, that's a bit more tricky,

It's only tricky if you intend to oppose gravity. You can offset the center of mass directly below the center of rotation without much difficulty at all. Problem is, it's hard to get gravity to do any work in that position.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: hansvonlieven on May 30, 2009, 10:14:49 PM
Henkel is a German company primarily a manufacturer of washing powder (Persil) and detergents with glue and fibreglass manufacturing companies bought in over the years. Sales €13.07 billion (2007)

I seriously doubt their involvement with a backyard enterprise of this sort and the ramshackle prototypes shown in the video.

The guy's approach is clearly visible, it is an old approach towards a Bessler wheel that has never worked.

Just another scam I'm afraid, I will be most surprised if it is more than that.

Hans von Lieven

This is what I said some 175 pages ago. I am still sticking with it.

Hans von Lieven
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on May 30, 2009, 10:33:39 PM
Hans,

Quote
it is an old approach towards a Bessler wheel that has never worked.

What makes you so sure it has never worked? Propaganda says so, but that's just propaganda. 
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on May 30, 2009, 10:35:39 PM
I do hope they fix the PM capabilities of this forum soon.

Very interesting ideas, Dar.  I look forward to seeing how they play out.

M.

Sounds to me more like call for friendship than something of real use for the advancement of the problem at hand.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Cloxxki on May 31, 2009, 01:08:02 AM
It's only tricky if you intend to oppose gravity. You can offset the center of mass directly below the center of rotation without much difficulty at all. Problem is, it's hard to get gravity to do any work in that position.
You correctly amend to my statement, thank you. I should have specified consistent (at least on average) lateral offset, if not level with, then preferably above centre.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: beastmastre on May 31, 2009, 09:23:34 AM
I do hope they fix the PM capabilities of this forum soon.

Very interesting ideas, Dar.  I look forward to seeing how they play out.

M.

Thank you, M. PM is working, btw. @Dusty and I have exchanged messages.

@Cloxxki, I hadn't thought of it yet but you're right. It is a lot like a trebuchet. In my ideas, that upper left area where the weight flips from down to up will be where, unfortunately,  a lot of torque is drained from the system but it is also where the weight's acceleration is achieved. Fortunately though, the weights near the axle are still applying CW torque until their rollers slot turns parallel to the ground and also the weights being lifted at the bottom help the flipping weight because of the connecting rods.

@Cloxxki is also right about Teflon. Teflon is great in thin coatings, like on frying pans or bullets (hehe). But in bulk form, it's actually a lot like Nylon. It's flexible and compressible, and would probably be a drag on the system. I can't imagine why, or where in the system, Abeling would want to use glass. I think he's going for some kind of laminated glass, since Henkel is providing the glue. Glass can be made with a grain and a high tensile strength in one direction and then laminated in opposing directions, like plywood, for a really strong product. But I still think the stresses in a system like this are too much for glass in the long term. Maybe he wants visibility somewhere. (Use Transparent Aluminum!! ahem Sorry, the Trekkie in me had to say it.)

I think polished steel is fine for the rails and rollers, along with my modified train wheel idea (or something better) AND some really good lubricant. I've already mentioned this to @Dusty in a PM, but a train can't accelerate or brake on a greased track. Even wet leaves on a train track are bad. It's a nightmare for them, but great for us. We want it to slide. We don't have to invent new friction reducing technologies here, although that would be great as well. (And, steel parts can be chrome plated to build them back up after they've worn down. My mother used to do this in a factory we worked in.)

Note: @All, I decided before I started posting that I am not going to get into time wasting arguments here. If someone gives useful ideas (and everyone does) or clear answers as to why something won't work, that's great. Other than that, I'm just going to let useless remarks be and keep moving forward.

Thanks,
Dar
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on May 31, 2009, 09:42:09 AM
Dar,

Quote
Note: @All, I decided before I started posting that I am not going to get into time wasting arguments here. If someone gives useful ideas (and everyone does) or clear answers as to why something won't work, that's great. Other than that, I'm just going to let useless remarks be and keep moving forward.

That's great. I'm all for that, unless someone gets really arrogant with his cluttering the forum.

So, now, as far as I can tell you're discarding Teflon and think polished steel will be fine. That may be so but how did you determine that? Just hunch isn't enough.

Also, what is that optimum combination of slot and track shapes whereby the contact areas will be the least? That's the main question. Everything else is beating around the bush.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Cloxxki on May 31, 2009, 10:48:05 AM
Thanks for your insights, Dar.

As you are a fresh mind to this discussion, and you've come up with a very interesting theory on what Abeling may be doing...do you also have a hunch which kind of source might be used for over-unity?
The way my mind works, if I know where to look for a solution, I find it quicker than when scanning at random. I've been blurred quite a bit due to all the ideas posted and thought up myself.
In the optimal execution of the drawings you proposed, where would the gain be coming from?

I still see a weight taking a short cut, but it's now "paused" to a greater extent than with the basic patent design, allowing the counterweight to store more energy and velocity in the wheel. But then, being slung from standstill at axle height, also seems to cost more energy that for instance in @Dusty's/Eisenficker200's solutions. If any, where would the gain be?

Quoting Abeling from memory: "If the weight would not be caugt by the rim, it would fly past it"? The wider weight path 0-5:00 you propose, then? It does seem like a way to harvest excess horizontal velocity gained from the sling, rather than just bumping into the rim.
I did play with ideas where the horizontal component at 0:00 would not be given up immediately, but (for free) allowed to gain a higher-torque position first.

Your design also perfectly offers the "one weight is pushing, the other pulling" idea via those smart connecting rods. Hard to imagine for me though, that 2 weights would be rising at the same time, while connected. That's how I see the drawing. I suppose it might work, as epicted, with multiple weights on the wheel, some of them in the waiting room, and some doing useful work at 3:00?

Too bad that your (as probably as any) ideas are so incompatible with the builds excuted by Dusty and Eisenficker2000, the matter of the protruding axles getting in the way. Seems like more like a totally new build that a conversion. If you're on the right track with what Abeling is doing, then perhaps his patent is offering his initial design he couldn't get to work?

Thanks,
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Cloxxki on May 31, 2009, 10:58:12 AM
Dar,

That's great. I'm all for that, unless someone gets really arrogant with his cluttering the forum.

So, now, as far as I can tell you're discarding Teflon and think polished steel will be fine. That may be so but how did you determine that? Just hunch isn't enough.

Also, what is that optimum combination of slot and track shapes whereby the contact areas will be the least? That's the main question. Everything else is beating around the bush.
You have centuries of knownledge in railway and industrial engineering to answer your question, why in a rolling situation steel works best, and teflon ends up being used for sliding. I would easily be able to summarize in a few sentences, but your attitude towards other people's (the world's) view of facts makes me reluctant. You can figure this one one. Dar gave you all you need to know.

As for the shape/radius of the track, we could probably borrow from ball bearing technology here. The balls are of a smaller radius than the tracks (grooves) in which they roll. A relative detail, for which I'm quite sure the first page on google for ball bearing groove radius ratio (I did not try) would offer a fair bit of hints.
Friction only needs to be fought where we are sure we have a machine that, without friction, would accelerate continiously. Keeping rate of movement without friction constant, means a lost battle from the start. Good to update our engineering skills, but a disappointment to only then find out the validity of the design persued.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on May 31, 2009, 11:01:37 AM
Thanks for your insights, Dar.

As you are a fresh mind to this discussion, and you've come up with a very interesting theory on what Abeling may be doing...do you also have a hunch which kind of source might be used for over-unity?
The way my mind works, if I know where to look for a solution, I find it quicker than when scanning at random. I've been blurred quite a bit due to all the ideas posted and thought up myself.
In the optimal execution of the drawings you proposed, where would the gain be coming from?

I still see a weight taking a short cut, but it's now "paused" to a greater extent than with the basic patent design, allowing the counterweight to store more energy and velocity in the wheel. But then, being slung from standstill at axle height, also seems to cost more energy that for instance in @Dusty's/Eisenficker200's solutions. If any, where would the gain be?

Quoting Abeling from memory: "If the weight would not be caugt by the rim, it would fly past it"? The wider weight path 0-5:00 you propose, then? It does seem like a way to harvest excess horizontal velocity gained from the sling, rather than just bumping into the rim.
I did play with ideas where the horizontal component at 0:00 would not be given up immediately, but (for free) allowed to gain a higher-torque position first.

Your design also perfectly offers the "one weight is pushing, the other pulling" idea via those smart connecting rods. Hard to imagine for me though, that 2 weights would be rising at the same time, while connected. That's how I see the drawing. I suppose it might work, as epicted, with multiple weights on the wheel, some of them in the waiting room, and some doing useful work at 3:00?

Too bad that your (as probably as any) ideas are so incompatible with the builds excuted by Dusty and Eisenficker2000, the matter of the protruding axles getting in the way. Seems like more like a totally new build that a conversion. If you're on the right track with what Abeling is doing, then perhaps his patent is offering his initial design he couldn't get to work?

Thanks,

This doesn't explain at all where the overunity comes from. No need for this kind of talk.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Cloxxki on May 31, 2009, 11:35:48 AM
This doesn't explain at all where the overunity comes from. No need for this kind of talk.
You may have mssed the question marks in my post, and that they were addressed mainly @Dar. I also don't know, and don't aim to explain which I yet do not comprehend. I will be looking for answers though.
With all due respect, your kind of talk on this topic seems to have contributed positively mainly to your post count. I won't claim to be the most useful poster on here, but I try to be self-critical.

To not let this be a quarrel-only post, some gravity wheel semi-on-topic info.
For people in for a mind cruncher, http://www.besslerwheel.com/murilo/index.html (Avalanchedrive) which was pasted here before, really got me awake just now. Seems to me a simple bicycle chain might do the trick as well. Perhaps every other link welded stuck in almost straight position. Trying to find out why it wouldn't work... Worth its own thread, but doesn't even seem to have one on Besslerwheel yet, or anymore. Can't be too hard to try...
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: beastmastre on May 31, 2009, 11:47:25 AM
Sorry people. I think my sine wave curve idea was a mistake. After thinking about it for a bit, I realized that a quarter of a true ellipse, plus a little extra for the second roller, will allow for more weight rotation (closer to 90 degrees) than the sine curve will.

I'm getting ready to start my wheel design again from scratch with this new slot and so I can optimize weight, roller, and track designs as much possible. But I'll try to sketch the guide track path from the old one for you to have a look at.

Dar
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on May 31, 2009, 11:52:53 AM
You may have mssed the question marks in my post, and that they were addressed mainly @Dar. I also don't know, and don't aim to explain which I yet do not comprehend. I will be looking for answers though.
With all due respect, your kind of talk on this topic seems to have contributed positively mainly to your post count. I won't claim to be the most useful poster on here, but I try to be self-critical.

To not let this be a quarrel-only post, some gravity wheel semi-on-topic info.
For people in for a mind cruncher, http://www.besslerwheel.com/murilo/index.html (Avalanchedrive) which was pasted here before, really got me awake just now. Seems to me a simple bicycle chain might do the trick as well. Perhaps every other link welded stuck in almost straight position. Trying to find out why it wouldn't work... Worth its own thread, but doesn't even seem to have one on Besslerwheel yet, or anymore. Can't be too hard to try...

Don't see how this is overunity either. I wonder if it was you who gave a link to that "cherry pit" idea. That was something interesting to discuss and see how it may be implemented. Since then, except for the torque studies and the mass center-axle discrepancy, I don't see anything useful for this discussion.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Cloxxki on May 31, 2009, 01:02:30 PM
I at one point proposed dual weight being connected by spings, loaded as one weight would sling outward at 6:00, the other remaining on the wheel, and the two then reconveigning near 12:00. No overunity there probably, just an idea to harvest some CF and cenvert it into climbing assistence.
I was not the first to come with the cherry pit idea, and the wording of it was new to me when I read it, although the principle of course wasn't, a fun occurance kids universally know to exist in low-friction, high-pressure environments. It's the wonderful thing about discussion forums. A stupid idea can spark a genious to invent something universally good. I've sat on both ends of the discussion, came up with boldwhich then ideas other turned into wonderful realities, and I've gone from acknowledging a threshold or "resistance" in contemporary design, reverse the logic and end up with a patent for it.
It doesn't matter much at which end of the table we sit, as long as both sides are properly occupied, and negativities across and along the table don't send potential contributors to another table, or isolation.

Individual minds such as Tesla and Bessler, who got things done on their own, are much rarer today despite higher level education and exploded world population. To get results, we'll need to find a way to cooperate, for one man cannot do it. Perhaps Abeling could, but we may not know for the next 300 years unless we act now.
If I'm the fool shooting of bold ideas which a greater minds or greater doer can turn into reality, I'll at least be a somewhat useful fool. You're spreading mostly negativity, what is your role on the path to over unity? Onlooker, opponent, inventor, cooperator?

Again a challenge to offer some on-topic input when trying to not ignore posts addressed to me on an off-topic manner.
I came across a study of the fastest way, in time, for a weight to travel down and forward. The shape of a loose string spanning the distance, being starting near vertically and ending near horizontally, was quicker due to the initial acceleration. I think this effect is nothing new, but may halp towards making the most use of weights and dynamics. If a weight can spend minimal time gaining maximum height, before making it to the "waiting room", the counter weight has more time and angular distance to do uninterfered work on the wheel.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: beastmastre on May 31, 2009, 02:31:04 PM
Thanks for your insights, Dar.

As you are a fresh mind to this discussion, and you've come up with a very interesting theory on what Abeling may be doing...do you also have a hunch which kind of source might be used for over-unity?
The way my mind works, if I know where to look for a solution, I find it quicker than when scanning at random. I've been blurred quite a bit due to all the ideas posted and thought up myself.
In the optimal execution of the drawings you proposed, where would the gain be coming from?

I still see a weight taking a short cut, but it's now "paused" to a greater extent than with the basic patent design, allowing the counterweight to store more energy and velocity in the wheel. But then, being slung from standstill at axle height, also seems to cost more energy that for instance in @Dusty's/Eisenficker200's solutions. If any, where would the gain be?

Quoting Abeling from memory: "If the weight would not be caugt by the rim, it would fly past it"? The wider weight path 0-5:00 you propose, then? It does seem like a way to harvest excess horizontal velocity gained from the sling, rather than just bumping into the rim.
I did play with ideas where the horizontal component at 0:00 would not be given up immediately, but (for free) allowed to gain a higher-torque position first.

Your design also perfectly offers the "one weight is pushing, the other pulling" idea via those smart connecting rods. Hard to imagine for me though, that 2 weights would be rising at the same time, while connected. That's how I see the drawing. I suppose it might work, as epicted, with multiple weights on the wheel, some of them in the waiting room, and some doing useful work at 3:00?

Too bad that your (as probably as any) ideas are so incompatible with the builds excuted by Dusty and Eisenficker2000, the matter of the protruding axles getting in the way. Seems like more like a totally new build that a conversion. If you're on the right track with what Abeling is doing, then perhaps his patent is offering his initial design he couldn't get to work?

Thanks,

Okay, I'll try to reply to as much of that as I can. BTW, that Avalanche Drive is an interesting concept. Thanks for posting that.

I'm really not sure where overunity might come from and, honestly, not sure it's possible. But I like to think it is. I know a PPM is possible. The universe is a PPM. (my opinion) You might be able to build a mag-lev PPM in a vacuum chamber but how would get work out of it? I don't know if there could be a gain out of my system. I'm afraid that that trebuchet action might drain all the torque right back out of the system. But then if you center the weight back on the rollers, you're right back to the offset weight wheel that hasn't been shown to work yet. For all I know, my design might not be overunity at all but may work as a super-efficient water wheel that runs on a trickle of water rather than a torrent. Overunity is still the goal though.

So, how far should the weights be offset from the rollers? And, how close to the axle should the slot go? I'm constantly going over things like that and trying to build this thing in my head (a la Tesla) and doing revisions. I guess it kind of helps that I'm interested in almost everything and have a lot of trivia (like about train wheels) bouncing around in my skull. I'm a big fan of combining ideas to improve on something. That's why I think Abeling may have thought of combining the offset weight concept with the flipping arm idea. It wouldn't hurt my feelings at all if someone wanted to add a Bedini motor or @ABHammer's pendulum ratchet or that Avalanche Drive to my design. Whatever helps...

And I think that flipping arm part is where that excess velocity you mentioned comes in. When that weights trajectory is changed around that curve in the slot and the rollers impact the end of the slot. I think that should be the only impact in the system. That's why I would remove the corner of the hockey stick shape because it's an extra impact point.

Well, part of the reason for the rods is so the weight held in place by the guides at the bottom keeps the weight at the top locked into the end of the slot and prevents it from bouncing from that impact and taking energy out of the system. And, yes, the weight at the bottom, because the slot rollers are offset from the guide rollers would be doing useful work, because it is, in a sense, at 3:00 again and still applying CW torque on the wheel.

I don't think @Dusty's wheel is incompatible. The only real difference is that his new wheel has the semicircular slots. It may work just as well or better with his slots. His axle doesn't run between the wheels. (or didn't on the smaller wheel) And I've thought about this. The two wheels can still be connected at or near the rim with a crossbar. You just have to make sure the weight won't hit the bar as it travels. His may need a slightly different guide path than mine because of the semicircle slots.

Hey, @Dusty! Send me a diagram of your wheel. A scan of a drafting diagram or a dead on center picture of the wheel from the side and I'll try to work out the path. I have to rotate it in increments to plot it and take acceleration into account where the rollers move in the slot.

@Cloxxki, Abeling may have left specifics out of his patent in order to protect his "trade secret", with the hope that the patent would protect it well enough. If anyone here knows how long he might have for any revisions, let us know. I would suggest we look at his patent again, at that time, to see if he's made changes. heh He could end up taking our ideas and throwing them in there. Oh well...

Dar
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Cloxxki on May 31, 2009, 05:50:56 PM
Thanks once more Dar, also for your modest approach.

So far, Abeling has presented a rather basic gravity wheel design. Who now, the patent office may feel it's not really innovative in design, and reject it for a grant.
As I understand (a little) patent law, Abeling may still amend his wording, yet not add new claims or substantial features. Omitting an offset weight flipping for instance, I as an investigator would consider pretty fundamental. If another guy would make the same machine, and found away around any of the innovative part Abeling DID mention, but incorperated his secret tricks, if would be open source, or even patentable.
Us posting significant features yet undisclosed in Abeling's application should, when someone goes to the Patent Office with it, reduce his chances to be granted a patent. You need to play by the rules. The design should be makeable, and working as advertised. If Abeling can't build a machine without the unclaimed features, those features are not for him to claim intellecual property for.

What about an alternative path for an offset weight? It comes down as Dar proposes, yet at 6:00 is manipulated to make a backwards summersault, landing quickly in the waiting room, and then a second sling to complete the circle. Less complicated action perhaps, but the timing of course will need to be right.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Dusty on June 01, 2009, 03:25:29 AM
@beastmastre,  You wanted a diagram of the wheel.  All I really have is just a picture.  Hope this helps.

Dusty
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: beastmastre on June 01, 2009, 06:37:58 AM
@beastmastre,  You wanted a diagram of the wheel.  All I really have is just a picture.  Hope this helps.

Dusty

That looks great. Thanks.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: LarryC on June 01, 2009, 03:20:58 PM
Excuse the off post, but this was too perfect. Remind you of anyone ???

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/19798680?cat=nq&d=090601
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: i_ron on June 01, 2009, 04:59:12 PM
Excuse the off post, but this was too perfect. Remind you of anyone ???

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/19798680?cat=nq&d=090601

Good one Larry!!!  But give me a hint as to who that might
apply to on this list?  Don't bother, I know, LOL

Deserves to be a part of this list's content though so I'll post it

Ron
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: mondrasek on June 01, 2009, 05:05:04 PM
Thank you, M. PM is working, btw. @Dusty and I have exchanged messages.
Still no luck here.  I am running IE at work and at home and can't PM.  Maybe it is only working in other browsers?

LarryC, that is priceless!  Dead on!

M.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: LarryC on June 01, 2009, 11:54:01 PM
I am proposing a stand guide design for the hockey sticks based on information from the first three pics below and a Dusty observation.

The first picture is of the wheel from the movie. The stand guides did not seem of the same shape as in Fig 8. The patent had stated that the hockey stick design was in development so they probably just used the original oval until they could figure it out.

The second picture is at the beginning of the upper left stand. The stand appears to be rising at a 45 degree angle.

The third picture is at the top half of the upper left stand. It appears to be rising at a 70 degree angle with a slight outward bow.

The second and third picture seem to confirm the shape shown in the first picture.

Dusty had a jamming problem in the lower left when he tried the hockey stick with the stand guides from Fig 8. This was probably due to the acute angle with the hockey sticks and the lower guide.

So, based on this information a new design proposal is shown in red in the fourth picture, the lower left stand guide oval was expanded outward. The upper left guide was changed to reflect the 45 degree and then the 70 degree with a slight bow.

Sjack's logic behind these changes may have occurred as follows:

First: the lower left needed to expand outward to reduce the acute angle caused by the straight part of the hockey stick, which didn't occur with the curved radial guides.

Second: The curved radial guides against the stand guides in the upper left caused rapid acceleration. The hockey stick does not create the rapid acceleration against the same stand guides. So the 45 was needed to first move the weight inward, then the 70 could be used to create the rapid acceleration.

Any constructive comments appreciated.

Regards, Larry

 

 
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on June 02, 2009, 07:58:34 AM
I’ve missed @Dusty’s demonstration of his rig. Thought he still works on the details and hasn’t put them together yet. Where can this be seen:

Quote
Dusty had a jamming problem in the lower left when he tried the hockey stick with the stand guides from Fig 8. This was probably due to the acute angle with the hockey sticks and the lower guide.
 

The track you’re proposing is very interesting, probably shortening the steepest sections on the left-hand side. This has to be modeled with the AutoCAD vector decomposition. Could someone post the wheel and your track (as a polyline) post a dxf file of it? Then I’ll do the decomposition analysis.

I’m inclined to forgo the dumbbell approach and have the weights as spheres resting on the slot edges of two wheels. That will reduce the slot-sphere contact surface. The track, placed inbetween the two wheels can also be made with a sharp contact face. Probably I won’t be able to make a wheel larger than one of 30cm diameter at this moment. Exactly how the device should be manufactured an assembled is still not very clear so anyone who might want to comment on that is welcome to share ideas.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Cloxxki on June 02, 2009, 09:08:31 AM
On that patent picture Abeling is clearly showing forward pointing slots, by roughly 30 degree relative to the radial lines, as I've been feeling to be of significance worthy to test. Due to this inner-forward layout, the interaction with the upper guide is actually at roughly 90 degree. FAR from causing any parallel action.
The way I visualize such a setup, the weight will use it's potential to gain advantage on the wheel. Then, a very nearly "waiting room" situation comes into play, where the weights barely make vertical progress 8:00-11:00, and the counterweight 2:00-5:00 gets to make some good velocity. At 5:00, the lower weight transitions to the lower ramp as often discussed, with still good velocity. It is then up to the wheel to transfer energy (at the cost of wheel speed) to the upper weight. The work done 2:00-5:00 should suffice to get the upper weight out of the "waiting room" and slung towards the rim. Immediately, 12:00-2:00, the upper weight will be doing a bit of work while the lower is on the ramp, again, given a good positive input to the wheel.

I see several further improvement on the basic Abeling patent, but we first need to understand what is the preferred setup for that. Something as essential as slot layout cannot be ignored like that. It greatly affects the dynamic of the wheel. It's phases of acceleration, constant speed, and energy release. If yo do that all randomly, the chance of hitting the optimal situation is rather slim.
First, would any of you suggest that any changes in slot layout would only cancel themselves out? If so, I'm done discussing this, I am thoroughly convinced some serious efficiency is to be won there, and it's (and I mean the slot shape, not my post) all mostly ignored.

I've referred to the "open" slots of Abeling before. I believe these offer the weight to roll up the lower ramp without touching the wheel. That's the whole point of the ramp, right? It needs room to do its thing: convert horizontal velocity (at a high wheel speed) into maximum height (the single most scarse component in gravity wheels at the end of a rotation). Nothing is worth retarding or compromizong this velocity-height conversion.

I need a pile of wood and a carpenter's apprectice. ;-)
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: pstroud on June 05, 2009, 03:32:40 AM
Does anyone have a link to a full english conversion of the entire Abeling patent?  I have the partial conversion where 1 1/2 pages of the description were converted to engligh.  However, I need to see all of the text converted.

Thanks!
Preston
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: overtaker on June 05, 2009, 04:09:43 AM
Preston,  Are you going to build?
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: LarryC on June 05, 2009, 04:40:32 AM
Does anyone have a link to a full english conversion of the entire Abeling patent?  I have the partial conversion where 1 1/2 pages of the description were converted to engligh.  However, I need to see all of the text converted.

Thanks!
Preston

http://freenrg.info/Sjack_Abeling/Patent/Html/

Regards, Larry
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: LarryC on June 05, 2009, 05:18:27 AM
I need a pile of wood and a carpenter's apprectice. ;-)

No, All you need is this and a jig saw: Below is a print out example from the Posteriza software which is free software from download.cnet.com.

I took this image from the Fig 7-8 photo in  http://freenrg.info/Sjack_Abeling/Patent/Html/ and cropped it with Posteriza down to just Fig 8. A good paper trimmer is very handy with cutting the print out.

Of course Fig 4 is best if you wish to use the curved radial guides.

Seems very accurate.

Regards, Larry
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: X00013 on June 05, 2009, 10:57:13 AM
IMHO it runs the other way (( cc to all ur pics )) power stroke is shortest path to gravity)  ;D  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lmWe36jK5r4
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: pstroud on June 05, 2009, 02:09:31 PM
I want to mention an idea I voiced to Ralph a couple months ago regarding Abeling's wheel.  Dusty has had trouble with his replication attempts and some binding.

After looking at some recent pictures taken from the video of the wheel, I now believe even stronger that there is a rod within the wheel connecting each opposing weight.  Ralph, I know you said that could not be because of the "oval" flow of the weights.  However, I think that the rod has a gap at the ends where it is attached to the weight's bar.  This gap give it some play to accommodate the oval shape.

Now, for the evidence.  The PDF patent info FIG 1 shows a bar in the middle of the (two wheels) on the picture.  This is referred to as the carriage which guides the weights in the wording.

Now, scroll down in the PDF to FIG 5A - D.  Look closely at the flow of each and imagine a bar connecting each opposing weight.  Note that when the weight starts to ride on the external stand around 5 oclock, this short horizontal motion causes a "shot put" quick acceleration and jump upwards in its upper opposing weight.  Once the upper weigh gets near the top, it hits the upper stand and then flips into the hockey stick end.

Look at the bit maps of the shape of the upper ramp in the pictures.  Notice how it slops inward in the middle.  This is to relieve all pressure from the weight touching the ramp.  It allows the bottom ramp to easily do most of the lifting during the turn.

I still don't know what the round holes are for.  The PDF attached is someone's translation of the description of the machine.  I think there would be more clues in a full translation of the patent / claims text.  I also wonder if there were some springs to help with the movement.  Either way, the FIG 5A-D shows how the weight on the borrom of the ramp causes a shot-put of the upper opposing weight.

Preston Stroud
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: AB Hammer on June 05, 2009, 04:16:55 PM
To all but mainly Dusty

 Here is an alternative ramp set up. Larry was close but IMO he missed 2 main aspects. At the top it would be flat or dipped as shown in my lines. At the bottom the lower weights will not be a lifting problem until the 7:00 mark eliminating the lifting from 4:30 on and all the downward weight on the ramps but the angular momentum in place. This means that 2 weights will be much less negative effect out of the equation until the 7:00 mark were hopefully has enough speed to kick the lift. Or as Preston said shot put it upwards, from our phone conversation.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Cloxxki on June 05, 2009, 05:22:01 PM
To all but mainly Dusty

 Here is an alternative ramp set up. Larry was close but IMO he missed 2 main aspects. At the top it would be flat or dipped as shown in my lines. At the bottom the lower weights will not be a lifting problem until the 7:00 mark eliminating the lifting from 4:30 on and all the downward weight on the ramps but the angular momentum in place. This means that 2 weights will be much less negative effect out of the equation until the 7:00 mark were hopefully has enough speed to kick the lift. Or as Preston said shot put it upwards, from our phone conversation.
@AB:
Your reasoning implies that lifting forces are directed to the 5:00 weight as it goes on the ramp. fromt hat point of view, a delayed ramp transition seems a good proposal to get phasing better aligned.
However, if a weight by 5:00 or so is really "on its own" to transfer horizontal volecity in to vertical trajectory closely past or even through the wheel's axle, the weight is litterally "off the wheel". The wheel will during this freewheeling action of the lower ramp us it's inertia to nudge the top weight over the top, with a slot geometry enforced shot put acceleration.
Once the top weight is past 12:00, and strats to do useful work on the wheel, the lower weight is done transferring speed into height, and has little speed, albeit all vertically, left, and is picked back up by the slots. Now, the 1:00 weight doesn't yet have the angle to fully drive the wheel, it's mostly leaning on the axle still, not transfering much energy yet. But, as the lower weight, around 8-9:00 is near to the axle, this is not yet an issue, they forces eroughly even out, not wheel speed is lost. As the working weights "gets stronger", the lifted one is working its way back to the rim, demanding more help. The working weight has like 4-5 "hours" time to do the work of 3 hours worth of lifting. This might be where the over unity comes from, if anywhere.

If the 2 weights are rod-connected, the lower one doesn't come up as high, but the upper one gets a direct push over the top. Imagine a rod that can be extended as far as needed, but has a stop preventing it to become shorter than a given length, causing the lower weight to "bump" it. After the impact, the lower weight at 6-7:00 or so carries the speed that the upper had before. I think an alternative slot shape might enable the same kind of action, but taking bumping energy from the weheel rather than the bottom weight.
Should the upper weight rod-pull the lower up further, should this energy exchange go through the slots?

Just some ideas.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: pstroud on June 06, 2009, 02:09:23 PM
Cloxxki,

There is more benefit here than just the bumping / shotput rapid acceleration through a connecitng rod.  During the shot-put action caused by the bottom weight rolling across the 5-6:30 horozontal section, we are transferring a significant portion of opposing opposit weight onto the ramp as well.  This removes sinificant weight from the 9-12 section of the wheel, which in turn gives the 1-5 oclock section more torque.

In my opinion, this is may be the secret to this wheel's success.

Dusty, I'm busy with another wheel replication right now so I do not have the free time to re-focus on building a test replica of this.  However, I would suggest you try this with 2 opposing weights and report the findings back to the forum.  the connecting rod will need a gap at the attachment of the weight axle to give flexibility for the oval pattern of the weights flow.  This gap at the connection point will allow the rod to only kick into action during the shot-put lifting and sort of disappear afterwards.

Preston Stroud
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: LarryC on June 06, 2009, 03:29:31 PM
The connecting rod theory is interesting, but I'm not sure it can be done as there are several challenges.

In the first picture all the weights and opposing weights are connected. At the top positions you can see how the rod would have to cross over the center axle. Not a real big problem as the axle could be just connected to each carrier. The other problem is the length of the rod would need to vary as Pos 15 to 7 is 83 MM and Pos 14 to 4 is 67 MM. Varying and pushing?

In the second pic the first set of radial arrows to the left points out bracing bolts in between the slots, the second set of arrows show inner bracing (?), which appear to be behind the inner edge of the slot. The third arrow point out the center axle shaft in the outer support stand. These multiple inner bracing presents further problems with the rods being able to slide across the axle center.

The third pic shows the head of a bolt at the position of the first set of bracing in the second picture.

The fourth pic shows the center plate with the center axle being able to turn as it is not supported by the center plate. It's dull gray color and the bright bolts above is the indicators I used to point it out in the first picture.

This does bring up an interesting point. Why have the bracing so far in when bracing on the outer edge would be better at stopping any wobbling? Adds support to the weight rotating theory.

Regards, Larry   

PS: Cloxxki and pstroud, you may have solves some of these issues. Not sure, but it would help others to understand your ideas, if you could attach some pictures. Thanks.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Cloxxki on June 06, 2009, 04:27:34 PM
@Larry,
Various options come to mind for the axle-rod interferrence issue.
- 4 weight in stead of two., no axle interference
- C-shaped rods! :-)

About the variable length. Do you mean due to the oval shape?
The design could be made such, that right when the shot put action is desired, the 2 weight will be forced to be at minimal distance from each other. Mind you, the upper weigh much have a wider slot to allow to be show out of trajectory. Or, the slot/weight trajectory will need to be meticulously plotted, to make an absolute perfect fit. Clearance seems an easier way about this.
If the rod is made up from male and female ends, they would slide over each otherwith low friction. Allowing for extention as far as needed to round the wheel, but with a stop to initiate shot put right when the weight get close together.

As I am seeing the push rods now:
- push only to create shot put action
- no pull, rods extent freely as needed
- lifting of weights between 6:00 and being shot put, is done by the wheel and perhaps in part due speed->height conversion.

My biggest concern with the pushing rod is the lower weight using all potential, and being dependant on the wheel and the rod push to gain any further height.

Then, what I ten to forget: when during one phase forces all balance out and there is no over unity , the wheel of course still continues to rotate. This is good, as long as we don't get stuck in that phase.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: LarryC on June 06, 2009, 10:44:51 PM
@Cloxxki,
The no pull, only push would help, but it still seems like the rod would intersect with the bracing even with curves. But checking into the rod theory has shown me another important change.

@All,

The first picture shows Fig. 8 with the hockey stick angle changed and my previous guide changes. Now it has a smooth, no pinch lift all the way from 5:00 to 10:30. Almost the same as the curved radial guides in Fig. 4.

The second picture shows the wheel from the movie. Flip it on its side so that the gray center axle is on top (print out is best). Measure the distance from the gray center axle to the top and bottom of the wheel and see that they are equal.

Now, notice the angle of the hockey sticks coming out. They are not offset to the front side of the center and angled to the back side of the center as shown in Fig. 8, but are offset to the back side of the center and come outward almost perpendicular to the wheel tangent.

Regards, Larry

Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: AquariuZ on June 07, 2009, 06:12:40 PM
@all

I agree there is "something" linking two sets of weights as Abeling makes numerous references to the weights working in unison, and te fact that every weight has a fixed and expected path. Now if you look at the patent pictures, it does not seem possible there is a fixed rod between the weights, simply because the distance between the weights varies during the stages a weight goes through.

I still think springs come into play somewhere, somehow.

To anyone interested, here is my translation from Dutch to English of the patent:

HERE THE COMPLETE TEXT AS OF MIDDLE OF PAGE 5

               5

(...)
         The invention is now explained using a number of examples, with reference
20      to the attached drawings, where corresponding parts are marked with reference numbers
      which are raised by 100 at a time and whereby:
         Fig. 1 shows a frontal view of the first type of the conversion unit according to
      the invention,
25         Fig. 2 shows a side view od the carrier of the conversion unit of fig. 1, with eight
      guiding rails for weights,
         Fig. 3 shows a side view of the guidance ring and the axle ring of the conversion
      unit of fig. 1,
30         Fig. 4 shows a schematic side view of the path which a weight follows during a
      complete rotation of the carrier,


               6

         Fig. 5A to 5D shows a schematic of a number of positions of an alternative
      implementation of the carrier which is fitted with four weights,
5         Fig. 6 shows a side view of another implementation of the carrier, which
      is fitted with a serrated surface,
         Fig.7 shows a view from behind of another implementation of the conversion
      unit of fig. 7, and
         Fig. 8 ahows a side view of one of the carriers of the conversion unit of
10      fig. 7.

         An installation 1 for the conversion of gravitational energy, consists of two parallel
      movable carriers 2 which rotate around a joint axle line A with each having a number of weights
15      3 attached in the rotational path (fig. 1) These weights 3 are movable in a radial direction in
      relation to axle line A. The conversion unit 1 contains collaborating materials 4 to guide the radial
      displacement of weights 3. These guiding materials 4, which will be discussed in detail hereafter,
20      are incorporated in side plates 5, which are located on the sides of each carrier 2 parallel to the
      plane of the rotational movement.
     
      In the shown example both carriers 2 are fixed against rotation on the pertruding axle 6, which
25      is housed in a baring in the openings 7 in the side plates 5. This axle 6 could be attached to a
      generator, through which the output of unit 1 would be converted to e.g. electrical energy. The
      carriers 2 and the side plates 5 shown in this example are made out of glass, but other materials
30      with minimal friction like metals could be used.

         Every carrier 2 has the appearance of a disc, in which for every weight 3 a radially



                  (7)
      directed guidance track 8 is formed (fig.  2). To facilitate the outward hurling of weights 3 the
      guiding tracks at least have on their end 9 which are furthest from axle 6 a track segment which
 5      is curved. The curvature is pointed towards the rotational direction of carrier 2. In the shown
      example the guiding tracks even have a smooth curvature over their entire lenght.
     

         Each of the weights 3 is movable in a radial direction in an accompanying guiding
10      track 8. Towards that end the weights 3 as shown in the example are installed in pairs. Every
      weight 3 has a joining bar 10 which connects both weight parts 11 and is held by guiding track 8.
15      These joining bars 10 move in a radial direction in guiding track 8.
     
      In an alternative setup of the conversion unit the edges 212 of each guiding track 208 have a
20      serrated surface to minimize friction as the weights make their sliding motion (fig. 6). The joining
      bars 210 of the weights are ovally shaped here to ensure regulated motion over the serrated
      surface 212. It should be noted that this setup shows that the guiding tracks 208 can be
25      distributed non uniformly around axle 206.


         In the example show the guiding materials 4 consist of two installed
      rings 13 which are installed on both sides of carrier 2, along which the weights 3 are movable.
30      These rings 13 in this example have been cut out of side plates 5. The rings 13 run in a horizontal
      direction which is eccentrically in relation to the rotational axle A of carrier 2, and have a slightly
      oval shape, whereby the long axle is aimed vertically. In fact the rings 13 have the shape of


               ( 8 )

      an indented circle. Because of the shape of the rings 13 every weight 3 when it reaches the pinnacle
      of its path around axle A, or slightly before, is accelerated strongly in a radial direction. Because of
5      this a lot of energy is released. The long axle of every ring 13 is slightly tilted in such a way that the   

   weights 3 are forced back inwards even before they reach the lowest point of their path.

         The conversion unit 1 in the example shown is furthermore fitted with secundary
10      bearing means 14, which are fitted around the circumference of carrier 2. These secundary bearing
      means 14 consist of a number of spacers 15 which run from carrier 2 to each of the side plates 5,
15      and a bearing ring 16 which houses the spacers 15.
      Each bearing ring 15 (16?) runs on the outside with a spacing around guiding ring 13 (fig. 3).
           
            The path each of the weights 3 takes during the rotation of carrier 2 around
20      the axle line A is represented in fig. 4. Assuming the position on the top right (indicated as 3°) the
      weight moves down under the influence of gravity, whereby it will attempt to move away from axial
      line A in a radial direction along its guiding path 8 while influenced by the centrifugal force.


25      This radial movement is restricted by guiding rings 13. When the weight almost reaches its lowest
      position 3-5 the radius of guiding ring 13 starts to diminish, which causes weight 3 on its upwards
30      motion to be forced into a radial direction towards axial line A. At around the level of axial line A
      the radius of guiding ring 13 starts to increase again, which causes weight 3 to move outwards
      again starting at position 3-12. This means in essence that weight 3 is being "hurled".


               (9)

      Due to the variation of distance of the weight with respect to the axial line A, a rotational
      momentum   is generated which is translated to axle 6.
         Even though fig. 4 shows the motion of a single weight, it will be evident that
 5      all the weights follow an identical path. This is shown in fig. 5A to 5D, where a setup of the
      conversion unit 101 is shown with four weights 103a-103d and guiding tracks 108. In these
10      views is shown how weights 103(a red.)-103d move from and towards each other.

         In the setup of conversion unit 301 which is currently being prepared for practical
15      application tests there are placed two carriers 302 next to each other with spacing (fig. 7). Each
      weight 303 is shown to have a joining part 310 which protrudes on both sides through the guiding
      track 308 in both carriers 302 and into the rings 313 of the guiding materials 304. The guiding tracks
20      inthis example have the shape of a hockey stick; they are in essence straight and only have a curved
      segment on the radial far end 309 (fig. 8 ) Because of this shape the weights 303 are subjected to
      a short but violent hurling motion. It should be noted that the straight parts of the guiding tracks 308
      are not purely radially aligned but rather are slightly offset with regards to axial line A.

         Even though the invention has been explained through a number of examples it should be
30      obvious that it is not limited to these. There could be more or less carriers and weights than previously
      shown, and the carriers and weights could also have different shapes and dimensions. For example the
      carrier instead of being a disc shape with guiding tracks could also

                  (10)

      be constructed as a wheel with spokes with sliding weights.
         The extent of the invention is therefor solely determined by the following conclusions:
   


                  (11)

Conclusions

         1. Installation for the conversion of gravitational energy into motional energy, containing:
            - at least one rotatable carrier with a horizontal axle with at least one attached
 5      weight which is mainly radially movable relative to the axle, and
            - means collaborating with the carrier to guide the radial movement of the at
      least one weight .
10         2. Conversion unit according to conclusion 1, with the feature, that the guiding
      materials are setup to move the at least one weight near the top of its path around the rotational axis
      away from the axle in an accelerated motion.
15         3. Conversion unit according to conclusion 1 or 2,with the feature, that a number
      of weights is attached to the carrier in a circumferencial way.
         4. Conversion unit according to previous conclusions,with the feature, that the
20      or any weight is radially movable on or housed in the carrier.
         5.  Conversion unit according to conclusion 4,with the feature, that the appearance
      of the carrier is a disc, on which or in which a mainly radially guiding track is formed for the
25      or any weight.
         6. Conversion unit according to conclusion 5,with the feature, that the or all guiding
      tracks at least has a curving segment in the rotational direction on the its far end away from the axle.


                  (12)

         7. Conversion unit according to conclusion 6,with the feature, that the or all guiding
      tracks show a hockey stick pattern.
 5         8. Conversion unit according to conclusion 6,with the feature, that the or all guiding
      tracks show a smooth flowing curvature over its entire lenght.
         9. Conversion unit according to one of conclusions 5 to 8,with the feature, that the
      or all guiding tracks have at least a partially serrated surface.
10         10. Conversion unit according to one of conclusions 5 to 9,with the feature, that the
      or all weights are divided and connected by a pertruding joining part through the guiding track in the
      disc shaped carrier.
15         11. Conversion unit according to one of conclusions 5 to 9,with the feature, that
      two disc shaped carriers with spacing are placed parallel to each other and share one or more weights
      which are installed in the spacing between, and the or all weights show a pertruding joining part on
20      both sides of the disc shaped carriers.
         
         12. Conversion unit according to one of the previous conclusions,with the feature,
25      that the guiding means consist of at least one parallel to its rotational plane covering ring placed next to
      the carrier, along which the or all weights are movable.
         13. Conversion unit according to conclusion 12,with the feature, that the guiding
30      means encompass two on both sides of the carrier placed rings.
         14. Conversion unit according to conclusion 12 or 13,with the feature, that the or
      any ring runs in an eccentrically horizontal direction with regards to the rotational axle of the carrier.

                  (13)

         15. Conversion unit according to one of conclusions 12 to14,with the feature, that
 5      the or any ring shows a mainly vertically aligned oval shape.
         16. Conversion unit according to one of the previous conclusions,featured by the
      installation of secundary housing materials around the circumference of the carrier.
10         17. Conversion unit according to conclusion 16,with the feature, that the secundary
      housing materials contain a number of spacers which run from the carrier towards the guiding materials
      and are housed by a ring which is placed around the guiding materials.
15         18. Conversion unit according to one of the previous conclusions,with the feature,
      that at least the carrier and/or the guiding materials are contructed out of glass.


The first 4.5 pages are not relevant, Word document attached.

AZ
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Cloxxki on June 07, 2009, 09:45:42 PM
If there is to be a spring, I would guess it to be compress during the lower ramp action. This would be a sharp contrast to my personal favorite setup (giving the former merit I suppose), where I wanted the weight to use it's potential and make some vertical ground.
So, when the spring is loaded, it may be ratcheting awaiting release at just the right time. A time where release of the spring would be benificial for both weights. Obviously, the upper weight is shooting for the rim, the fierce rod extention is welcome there. The lower weight linkely being on the rim there, would that be safe for any negative spring release? Meaning: could the spring power release make the wheel go slower or faster?
The upper weight might be splitting the energy from the weight into its own acceleration, and wedging the slot and ramps in such a way that also wheel acceleration is achieved.
With the 3-6: weight on the rim during a shot put spring action, I would expect a 90 degree rod angle would be preferred to cancel out the rotational forces of the action?

Just rambling out loud, sorry. Hope it might trigger someone to take the next step.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: LarryC on June 08, 2009, 01:08:23 AM
@AquariuZ

Thanks for your translation, it is much clearer than the auto-translate by google or other sites. Every clarity helps.

Regards, Larry
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: AB Hammer on June 08, 2009, 03:10:55 AM
@AquariuZ

Thanks
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: AquariuZ on June 08, 2009, 12:54:54 PM
Cloxxi,

How about joining bars which end in springs to accomodate the difference in relative distances to each pair if dumbbells?

My thinking is that the "shot put" action cannot be from friction alone where the path is "compressed" at 7-11 o clock. I keep wondering what he means with "energy being accumulated in the lower left of the setup" and the release at the top.

Accumulation reads "spring" in my mind. Also do not forget the magical "D".

AZ
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Cloxxki on June 08, 2009, 01:21:36 PM
Cloxxi,

How about joining bars which end in springs to accomodate the difference in relative distances to each pair if dumbbells?

My thinking is that the "shot put" action cannot be from friction alone where the path is "compressed" at 7-11 o clock. I keep wondering what he means with "energy being accumulated in the lower left of the setup" and the release at the top.

Accumulation reads "spring" in my mind. Also do not forget the magical "D".

AZ
It could be several things.
- If the ramps on the lower left really disengaged the weight from teh wheel, energy is freed to the wheel otherwise used to bring up said weight. The weight, depending on rim speed upon release, will make it some way or all the way up just by converting horizontal movement into vertical. High rim speeds get the weight all the way to 12:00 on a ramp, but obviously then it needs to be somehow be sped up to rim speed again. Unless...rim speed is quite how at the very moment it re-joins, by design... Back to my idea of faster-slower speed through a wheel turn for that. fast out at bottom, slow back in on top. Weights can then also be in sync with the wheel at 6:00 and 12:00. What happens in between is the real challenge to figure out.
- Sure, if the oval trajectory is shaped such that the rod's length is compressed after the lower passes 6:00, and the weights are well out of balance for that phase for the other weight (stuck to the wheel, let's not forget, so the wheel could offer the input at the cost of speed) to continue rotation, past the point of "shortest rod length", it will automatically (or machanically delayed) boost one or both weights to accelerate. One or both, that part is bothering me now. Should the shot put be at the cost of the lower weight and/or wheel's weight, or will the spring release onto 2 or even 3 bodies all at the same time? The wheel will get the slam from the weight to the rim per Abeling's claim, so perhaps just boosting one or two weight might suffice.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: AquariuZ on June 09, 2009, 12:12:06 PM
I understand what Sjack is saying, but I fail to see how he can overcome the killing force which is ofcourse friction... No matter how well you shape the ramps, friction is going to kill momentum eventually.

Remember he has a part on his site omitted:

"The weight of the bodies together with ... (intentionally omitted) and the rotational velocity determine the amount of energy that can be generated."

This puzzle would drive me crazy if I weren't already...

 8)
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Cloxxki on June 09, 2009, 01:28:26 PM
I understand what Sjack is saying, but I fail to see how he can overcome the killing force which is ofcourse friction... No matter how well you shape the ramps, friction is going to kill momentum eventually.

Remember he has a part on his site omitted:

"The weight of the bodies together with ... (intentionally omitted) and the rotational velocity determine the amount of energy that can be generated."

This puzzle would drive me crazy if I weren't already...

 8)
Springs do seem logical there.

In the quoted sentence he seems to in abstract language be giving the formula for maximum power output per rotation. Seems he's referring to another variable in the design, apart from the weight of the bodies. Could it be spin?

Motocross riders can use the wheels as gyros to ensure a convenient landing angle. Brakes, front and rear, and by throtling (rear, they can tilt the bike, at the cost of a bit of wheel spin.
Perhaps the weights are flywheels, able to give an extra push when needed.

Also, he could be referring to a quantifyable shape difference from the circular wheel. The tightness of the ramps, the curve on the slots. Or, in popular thinking, the strength of magnets which were totally totally omitted.

I don't see friction as an obstacle if the mechanical design offers as little as a single digit percentage of OU. Give me a proven concept with 2% OU, I'll give you the design to make it run with OU to spare.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: AquariuZ on June 09, 2009, 08:35:06 PM
Yes, spin could b, I mentioned I though I found something with regards to spinning bodies and gravity earlier but it turned out to be just a gyroscopical effect caused by inertia.

Unless the weights themselves are gyroscopes that is.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Cloxxki on June 09, 2009, 09:12:46 PM
Yes, spin could b, I mentioned I though I found something with regards to spinning bodies and gravity earlier but it turned out to be just a gyroscopical effect caused by inertia.

Unless the weights themselves are gyroscopes that is.
Oh wow, flywheels on another axis, wobbling...
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: AquariuZ on June 10, 2009, 10:59:04 AM
Oh wow, flywheels on another axis, wobbling...

Jazeker de Hypotheker!

 ;D
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Alexioco on June 10, 2009, 12:33:17 PM
AquariuZ soz i never replied to your PM the page wouldnt load at all to reply...

This wheel to me seems to be taking to long to be revealed, why cant they just have done with it...


Alex
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: mindsweeper on June 10, 2009, 12:49:12 PM
I think this guy Sjack is in the same league as Mylow, low down rotten eikeltje - both of them

But thats MHO..
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: rlortie on June 11, 2009, 07:34:31 AM
Alex wrote;

Quote
This wheel to me seems to be taking to long to be revealed, why cant they just have done with it...

That is because it does not work! It is a design that each generation of seekers must endure. Like so many others, it does not have a driving force to keep it from finding  equilibrium.

The productivity here is that you have been forced to watch 187 pages with multiple advertising randomly placed between posts, now I ask you, who do you think is making money off this??????

By the way Alex I replied to your private post but never heard anything more.

Ralph 
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: rlortie on June 11, 2009, 08:15:27 AM
Alan wrote;

To all but mainly Dusty

 
Quote
Here is an alternative ramp set up. Larry was close but IMO he missed 2 main aspects. At the top it would be flat or dipped as shown in my lines. At the bottom the lower weights will not be a lifting problem until the 7:00 mark eliminating the lifting from 4:30 on and all the downward weight on the ramps but the angular momentum in place. This means that 2 weights will be much less negative effect out of the equation until the 7:00 mark were hopefully has enough speed to kick the lift. Or as Preston said shot put it upwards, from our phone conversation.

Please forgive my absence from private and forum communication, I have been a busy boy lately and I have yet to see the end of the 'Honey do' tunnel. I am under great pressure to have things completed before my 4th of July deadline.
 
look closely Alan, you are trying to lift five with three and the upper one is at an acute pinching angle. Lay  your OB chart on this and you will see that it stands a better chance of running backwards.

As for Preston's connecting lever; I bring your attention to the last drawing on his 'mark up' pdf.  Note that a lever is shown on both sides of the axle, thus this design will require a split axle wheel.

Suggested idea that come to mind; configure the wheel slots so that the lever is resting on the axle (fulcrum) relieving the wheel and the ramp other than to guide the weight up and in, let the axle carry the brunt of the ascending weight. This is the only way I can ever see this thing coming close to being a runner.

I refer you to my version of MT 137 merged with the 'Nautilus'...  When this Abeling thing was first posted I went to my bone yard and pulled out my 'Hockey stick' wheel from 2005... Sent a picture of of it to I_Ron  and told him that I had already been there and done that!

Ralph   
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: AB Hammer on June 11, 2009, 01:55:47 PM
Greetings Ralph

 I didn't say it would work. But it would IMO have a better results. This is the reason I am not building it, but Dusty is and this would be an easy try for him. But these guys want to exhaust all possibilities before they give it up. To just keep saying it won't work, eggs them on more. But we have better avenues to work on.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Alexioco on June 12, 2009, 02:48:33 PM
Ralph can you send me ur email address again, thanks....

This wheel thing of his is just taking far to long, if it turns out to be false then all this work on this particular wheel will be a waste of time... Bessler has left far more information and I think he should be given more attention...

Alex
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: AquariuZ on June 12, 2009, 03:41:26 PM
Ralph can you send me ur email address again, thanks....

This wheel thing of his is just taking far to long, if it turns out to be false then all this work on this particular wheel will be a waste of time... Bessler has left far more information and I think he should be given more attention...

Alex

Alex, we do not know you are right. All this is for now is a gut-feeling and the fact that he has several reputable companies on board.

His patent and site (mooieenergie.com) by itself is indeed not much to go on, but we cannot stop thinking about how he makes his wheel work because, well, at this time he is NOT going open source and if it can be done, we must try and find a way with his patent and the information available as baseline.

Many have already given up, no need to mention who, you know who.

I for one hope that Dusty and Eisen are still on board, and we need Omnibus and Mondrasek too!

We just need to find the missing link, the omitted part from the site & patent to see what he sees.

Is it possible he simply has a concept and he just "thinks" it works. I must leave room for that possibility. But I rather like to think he has had a running prototype as early as 2007, why else all the fuss?

Yeah, I know I got carried away with Mylow, but Abeling is not in the same league.

Mylow is a whole other can of worms with a different agenda all together.

With regards to Bessler, you are right. I did research him as much as I could and came to the conclusion he did have a working setup. Even though this was centuries ago, this does not mean that the men of nobility and honour would give out certificates and testimonials on a wheel that would not work. On the contrary, giving false testimony would result in public execution.

Yes, Bessler has something but with all due respect, he was an idiot for not revealing his secret once it was clear noone would pay his outrageous price. Now he is nothing more than a ridiculed myth and he has noone else but himself to blame for that.

If I were him I would have constructed wheels and sold them to e.g. millers or miners. He was smart enough so why not make an enclosure that could not be opened hence guarding the secret and still providing the work to whomever needed it?

He could have made a fortune selling his wheels and have fulfilled his dream of creating a christian academy. Ah Well.

With regards to my PM, please create a subsection for Abeling, Alex. Thanks.

AZ
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Dusty on June 12, 2009, 06:06:05 PM
I'm still on board.  It just takes time to work on this stuff.  I've been taking note of all the ideas here and trying to figure this out.  Time will tell one way or the other.

Dusty
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: i_ron on June 12, 2009, 11:09:55 PM


Yeah, I know I got carried away with Mylow, but Abeling is not in the same league.

 Thanks.

AZ

I think we just about all were at one point.


Azy,

Here is an interesting little fact.  The tethered pendulum travels further but arrives at the bottom in the same time as a free fall weight.

This means its velocity must be higher in the tethered mode.
If its velocity is higher then its potential energy is higher.

I bet the sims don't reflect this point, lol

Ron

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L2mdAvdPhT4
 


Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: TinselKoala on June 13, 2009, 12:51:58 AM
I think we just about all were at one point.


Azy,

Here is an interesting little fact.  The tethered pendulum travels further but arrives at the bottom in the same time as a free fall weight.

This means its velocity must be higher in the tethered mode.
If its velocity is higher then its potential energy is higher.

I bet the sims don't reflect this point, lol

Ron

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L2mdAvdPhT4

Perhaps you are misinterpreting the video. Actually what is being measured is the velocity, and it is equal for both.
From the video description:
"Using two photogates, we see that the vertical velocity of the dropped ball is identical to the horizontal velocity of the pendulum, measured at the same height. Potential energy has been converted to kinetic energy equally in both cases."
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: noonespecial on June 13, 2009, 02:08:14 AM
...and yet it would seem that the tethered ball is traveling approximately twice the distance (in the arc) as the dropped ball. In order for them both to arrive at the photogate at the exact same time strongly suggests that the pendulum ball would have to travel faster (greater velocity) for this to happen.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: TinselKoala on June 13, 2009, 03:56:34 AM
...and yet it would seem that the tethered ball is traveling approximately twice the distance (in the arc) as the dropped ball. In order for them both to arrive at the photogate at the exact same time strongly suggests that the pendulum ball would have to travel faster (greater velocity) for this to happen.

As I said, it appears that you are misinterpreting the video. The times measured and displayed are the photogate transit times, NOT the time from release. The balls take the identical time to transit the sensing area of the photogates--a distance of a centimeter--hence, their speed at the gates is identical.  You can clearly see (or at least I can) that the ball in the first case takes less time from release to gate--it's travelling a lesser distance, after all.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: X00013 on June 13, 2009, 09:17:10 AM
If and what how its done enjoy or not http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2PEQ7DQA9_g
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: X00013 on June 13, 2009, 09:25:16 AM
if vid link is black screen, sorry, i will repost, yt suks yet again
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: X00013 on June 13, 2009, 09:54:56 AM
2nd try http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QNmDDQ5qhhQ
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: fletcher on June 13, 2009, 11:34:47 AM
So, is it measuring time from release to gate or just gate transit as Tinsel suggests ? I'm not familiar with gates etc.

What I do know is that if any pendulum is dropped from say horizontal at 9 o'cl that at ANY vertical height all the way down to 6 o'cl, it will have the same velocity as an identical mass & volume dropped in free fall at the same vertical height.

It may be a serendipitous coincidence that the pendulum rod is longer than the free fall height & the experiment is 'managed' so that the release angle of the pendulum & gate times are identical, or it could be that it was staged that way for another reason ?
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: eisenficker2000 on June 13, 2009, 05:13:48 PM
I still need that powerplant in the gardenshed  ;D

A "cross-breed" wheel..for the wm2d fanatics (in dxf)

The top ramp might be unnecessary...the lower ramp..to improve the balance.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: ramset on June 13, 2009, 05:23:43 PM
X
when I use your link, this is where it takes me
http://www.youtube.com/browse?ytsession=46lyvRLiRV6KP9dWNGM_cFaF6Z3KzNHVLV316pFvkqI7IQ9Lk_hL2xFn3veXHJnyu6TwshOVapPOKk9OqXRggo3Y40rqynXPUSbehvBS89IRMaMwyxUZzfbpnUTJW_R63d9Q0Vu5aYRQqUkk1_mjqKvQnHVMYtYEy1y318lTXefJgT1cNP519CCUIZRvZUf15lE9EhXUd5XvA8NpG2E1M6fNqN_eGCYCxnn7Hi_-neajB_wItv-zlUER9VM-7rIV9HuHg7Blk-6rpX6NuxUvG0_KTShMOq7X1JT0SFsWp-Y
Chet
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: i_ron on June 13, 2009, 05:28:09 PM
Perhaps you are misinterpreting the video. Actually what is being measured is the velocity, and it is equal for both.
From the video description:
"Using two photogates, we see that the vertical velocity of the dropped ball is identical to the horizontal velocity of the pendulum, measured at the same height. Potential energy has been converted to kinetic energy equally in both cases."

Guess it pays to "read the directions" first

Sorry TK, I jumped to a wrong conclusion,

Ron
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: X00013 on June 14, 2009, 08:52:06 AM
My attempt to waste bandwidth has been long and futile since last nite, this is my try number three the very long way around things ( sorry for the lack of sound, I'm lacking a few things these days), and no, you are not allowed to watch the last vid first, you must watch them in order.  ;D

        p1  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=02UMW8cnXV0
        p2  ( gravity ate part two ) ;D
        p3  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t56Hi2iWZ8I
        p4  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DWLno4KaiDg
        p5  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iBrYyA6INUo
        p6  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fPOBGF9A9cI
        p7  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xYpnDRGN8_w
        p8  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vgHLW6MceRU
        p9  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d3p0RI9Nv00
        px  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3tEYiuVHH1w

       
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: AquariuZ on June 14, 2009, 06:03:15 PM
My attempt to waste bandwidth has been long and futile since last nite, this is my try number three the very long way around things ( sorry for the lack of sound, I'm lacking a few things these days), and no, you are not allowed to watch the last vid first, you must watch them in order.  ;D

        p1  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=02UMW8cnXV0
        p2  ( gravity ate part two ) ;D
        p3  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t56Hi2iWZ8I
        p4  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DWLno4KaiDg
        p5  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iBrYyA6INUo
        p6  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fPOBGF9A9cI
        p7  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xYpnDRGN8_w
        p8  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vgHLW6MceRU
        p9  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d3p0RI9Nv00
        px  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3tEYiuVHH1w

     

You are trying to model the Abeling "D" right?
How do you make those near perfect wm2d ramps?
Can you post the models?
How do you capture these videos?
Why am I asking so many questions?

 8)
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Justalabrat on June 14, 2009, 06:23:40 PM
My attempt to waste bandwidth has been long and futile since last nite, this is my try number three the very long way around things ( sorry for the lack of sound, I'm lacking a few things these days), and no, you are not allowed to watch the last vid first, you must watch them in order.  ;D

        p1  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=02UMW8cnXV0
        p2  ( gravity ate part two ) ;D
        p3  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t56Hi2iWZ8I
        p4  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DWLno4KaiDg
        p5  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iBrYyA6INUo
        p6  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fPOBGF9A9cI
        p7  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xYpnDRGN8_w
        p8  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vgHLW6MceRU
        p9  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d3p0RI9Nv00
        px  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3tEYiuVHH1w

     

P5, 2 balls around the curve, seems to be the same as p7, 2 balls around the curve.  Did 3 balls around the curve (p6) push the scissor ramp all the way closed?
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: X00013 on June 14, 2009, 11:07:07 PM
You are trying to model the Abeling "D" right?
How do you make those near perfect wm2d ramps?
Can you post the models?
How do you capture these videos?
Why am I asking so many questions?

 8)

I have no idea what I'm doing, i cant post models, i will try to learn, i use cam studio free to film http://camstudio.org/
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: X00013 on June 14, 2009, 11:09:23 PM
P5, 2 balls around the curve, seems to be the same as p7, 2 balls around the curve.  Did 3 balls around the curve (p6) push the scissor ramp all the way closed?

funny u should ask, three balls locked up, my laptop cant handle it!!!
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: X00013 on June 16, 2009, 09:52:07 PM
I thot these 2 vids mite b relavent 2 the build of the sizzor ramp, its like reverse engineering the gravity pattern
            http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bRoqHapBRk4&feature=channel_page
            http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SSh1CHpsxog&feature=channel_page
                       
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: X00013 on June 17, 2009, 04:55:04 AM
more fun http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TIiWFWvGyyQ
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: X00013 on June 17, 2009, 08:04:47 AM
more fun, sorry vid is black from 3 out, yt dont like avi, i post an update 8)
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: X00013 on June 17, 2009, 08:05:36 AM
link mite help http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F36CfBKJcXk
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: X00013 on June 18, 2009, 09:08:34 AM
Where did everyone go? I feel so alone.  ;D   Is the Say Jack wheel dead?  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aPcKo10Ay6E
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: LarryC on June 18, 2009, 06:03:18 PM
Where did everyone go? I feel so alone.  ;D   Is the Say Jack wheel dead?  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aPcKo10Ay6E

You're not along, many are still watching. I've exhausted my research into how it could work and haven't found enough to convince me it is a runner. Others idea's are interesting, but still don't seem to make it a runner. So until Sjack releases or soneone else figures it out, many will just be watching.

Regards, Larry 
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: 0c on June 18, 2009, 07:18:32 PM
Where did everyone go? I feel so alone.  ;D   Is the Say Jack wheel dead?  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aPcKo10Ay6E

I'm still lurking. I just haven't contributed much since my idea got dissed. I tried doing a WM2D model but can't seem to get WM2D to do what I need, needs 3D. I still think the idea of having weights on only one side, departing the wheel at the bottom, and rejoining above the hub is worthwhile.

http://www.overunity.com/index.php?topic=7150.msg174032#msg174032

But just keep on keepin on. I'll keep lurking and if I feel the urge to say something, I will.

0c
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: oscar on June 20, 2009, 02:07:40 PM
I think J. J. Abeling has connected the dumbbell weights to a chain using flexible link segments (indicated in green in the attached sketch). These links act like flat springs (leaf springs, Blattfedern).

Imagine the laminated springs on the suspension of old trucks or a bow of a bow and arrow.

The overweight makes the wheel turn and the segments get compressed, when the dumbbells are pressed against the lower barrier.
The larger the diameter of the wheel, the less (over) weight is required to "overpower" the springs.

Each spring decompresses at approx. 11 o' clock, propelling the weight along the hockey stick track towards the perimeter of the wheel.

If that's true Abeling's complete explanation would read (as others have already suggested):
"The weight of the bodies together with the elasticity of the link segments and the rotational velocity determine the amount of energy that can be generated."

It is still an interesting problem to find the best shape for the lower barrier and the upper guide.

I have also attached the dxf-file which I used as the base for the sketch.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: ramset on June 20, 2009, 05:51:24 PM
WHY GLASS???
allways suggests a fluid to me!
Not good with impact!!
Never heard of it being used as the structure of a rotating machine!
Why Glass??
Chet
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: X00013 on June 21, 2009, 03:18:40 AM
WHY GLASS???  less friction
allways suggests a fluid to me!    idk
Not good with impact!!     build it to tite tolerances
Never heard of it being used as the structure of a rotating machine!    glass and ceramics are not for novices
Why Glass??    99.9999 percent efficiency, very low rolling friction
Chet
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: ramset on June 21, 2009, 04:11:48 AM
X
Glass ,MAYBE  10,000 psi?
Not to say its a bowl of jelly
Tight tolerances, impact loads [or not][not someplace you would choose glass]
Big, heavy ,spinning,?  Glass has very low yield to failure .
He described the machine as so powerful it was scary.
So you feel glass was chosen to hinder replication ? Naaah [my first thought oh shit how to replicate]
When I heard Glass, I thought Hollow.
Saw a magnetic nanofluid on utube
Why glass?
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: TinselKoala on June 21, 2009, 03:08:46 PM
I'm still lurking. I just haven't contributed much since my idea got dissed. I tried doing a WM2D model but can't seem to get WM2D to do what I need, needs 3D. I still think the idea of having weights on only one side, departing the wheel at the bottom, and rejoining above the hub is worthwhile.

http://www.overunity.com/index.php?topic=7150.msg174032#msg174032

But just keep on keepin on. I'll keep lurking and if I feel the urge to say something, I will.

0c

Hmm-that's surprising. I thought the main feature of WM2D was its ability to simulate working systems that would never work in the real world.

You mean kind of like this one?
http://www.lhup.edu/~dsimanek/museum/newacqui.htm#voet

Or more like this:
(Don't forget to design in the brake--you wouldn't want it to get going toooo fasssttt, after alllll.......)
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: 0c on June 21, 2009, 05:54:21 PM
TK,

Not like either of those designs. And I don't think a brake will be needed except to turn the damn thing off for maintenance. But if a prototype happened to turn into shrapnel, it would demonstrate the feasibility ;). Did you look at the drawing? Or my earlier animation?

As I have said, it won't self-start. It will need to be spun up to speed before it has a chance of working. At a certain speed the weights at the perimiter will have a great enough speed they can depart the wheel at the bottom and travel far enough and fast enough to resync and rejoin the wheel nearer the hub on the heavy side, and still be travelling faster than the inner portion (the hub) of the wheel, above and to the right of center (if rotating clockwise). The impact of the weight as it strikes the spoke near the hub will impart some additional momentum to the wheel in the desired direction, hopefully enough to overcome frictional losses and keep things spinning. Then the weight will roll back to the perimeter, regaining some speed due to gravity, in preparation for the next cycle.

There is no negative gravitational opposition on the side of the wheel having no weights, so the only negative force is friction. The weight will always be traveling faster than the hub, so will always impact with positive momentum when it rejoins the wheel.

The problem I'm having with WM2D is due to its 2D nature. It does have a feature to allow components to not collide, so it can simulate more than one plane. But it seems to get confused when there are too many objects set to collide or not collide. What I really need is some full 3D physics modeling software where I can more realistically move the weight into a different plane when it departs, travels up the chute, and rejoins the wheel.

Does what I'm saying make any sense? If not, please provide a detailed description of my errors. If my description isn't clear enough, maybe you can help me improve it.

Thanks,
OC
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: X00013 on June 22, 2009, 08:58:04 AM
I cant help myself, i love to waste bandwidth http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2g0ynwpOb1E
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: X00013 on June 22, 2009, 11:10:42 AM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r4EgkKh8MW4
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: TinselKoala on June 22, 2009, 03:55:37 PM
@OC: the main error is the usual one in these cases: Your device is a looping device. That is, there is no difference in states, that would make it run at all. Sure, if you are clever and can reduce all losses to zero, and give it a spin, then it will spin and continue to do so, running on the initial spin. But it won't accelerate, because there is NO DIFFERENCE in states t1, t2, t3....etc.
In for example a water wheel, there is mass flow through the system, so the states t1, t2, etc. are different (less water in the upstream reservoir, etc) , but in all pure gravity wheels or magnet wheels there is no mass flow or energy flow through the system. No reservoir is being depleted; nothing is flowing, once the whole loop is considered.
Gravity does not flow! It's like a road. We casually speak of a road "going" somewhere, just as we casually assume that gravity is some kind of literal flux or force. But it doesn't, and it isn't. Masses "flow" along gravity from regions of high potential to regions of low potential. And it takes work to reverse that mass flow--just as much work as you get from the original "downstream" flow.

So your proposed design is something like this one, but with a ramp off the wheel to raise the weights back up to strike the spokes or chamber walls...?
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Cloxxki on June 22, 2009, 03:59:34 PM
@Oscar: your blade spring drawing is a work of art. it intrigues me. Perhaps the way a spring ramps up its resisance, and how maximum distance between weights is managed can create a "wave" of sorts goign through the weights, between which there is always a positive amount of spring load.

Central question might be : can a weight both load a spring AND turn a wheel at the same time? Or can we "play" with the 2nd and 3rd derivatives of velocity, loading the spring versus unloading it?

Also, should/can we gain advantage from the back weight being pressed back at a non-wheel member as it shot puts the fore weight up and over 12:00?

@0c:
I like the idea of the axle bearing the weight of the rising weight, but fail to see how it could be raised over 12:00 with sufficient speed.
If we'd regard the wheel a certain non-self-starter, with a high starting speed, we'll have to think of it in an entirely different way. Also, centrifugal forces will be a great factor, even in the upper 2 quadrants.
Earlier in this thread of the non-proportional charateristics related to velocity and acceleration. If gain can be harvested by breaking apart or cheating height, speed and distance....
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: 0c on June 22, 2009, 05:18:54 PM
So your proposed design is something like this one, but with a ramp off the wheel to raise the weights back up to strike the spokes or chamber walls...?

Pretty much. I think you'll agree that if there was a continuous supply of weights that would enter the wheel at the hub to one side, and as they reached BDC, they would exit the wheel, there would be continuous rotation as long as the supply of weights was maintained, a waterwheel effect. My concept would simply recycle the weights that leave the wheel at the bottom and continuously feed them back in above the hub, using their own momentum to get them there.

There is a speed difference between the rim of the wheel and the hub. There will be a certain RPM where the speed of a weight departing from the wheel at the bottom will have enough momentum to carry it through a ramp or chute back up to a height above the hub and still be moving faster than the inner part of the wheel. If it rejoins the wheel at that point, impacting one of the rotating spokes, it will transfer momentum back to the wheel. It can then be accelerated downwards and towards the rim by gravity and centrifugal force and will exit at the bottom again to repeat the cycle.

Some questions to ponder:

1) Is there a wheel rotational velocity where a weight at the rim, departing at the bottom, will have sufficient momentum to carry it back up above the axle and still be moving faster than the inner portion of the wheel?
2) If the weight is travelling faster than the inner portion of the wheel and impacts it in the desired direction of rotation, will the wheel gain any momentum from the impact?
3) If there are never any weights on one side of the wheel, what is there to oppose continued rotation (other than friction and air resistance)?

In the animation you linked, imagine there are no weights on the left side, that some invisible mechanism is removing the weights at the 6:00 and inserting them at 12:01. The only problem is getting the weights back up, maintaining enough momentum to give the wheel a push in the right direction. Can this be done?

OC
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Cloxxki on June 22, 2009, 06:32:12 PM
@OC:
Answer to your last question:
When the speed fails to stabilize, or even falls.

Getting a wheel to produce several revolutions as you propose already exist in real life, and is likely part of many a manufacturing process. However, without external force added, speed drops. No big surprise.
Important is that the weight, when doing work to the wheel, gets more done than it loses via the vertical component of its roll up the ramp/shut arrangement. This way it keeps exiting the wheel at increasing speeds, ensuring perpetuum mobile.
As a simple wheel with both sides equally loaded, and perfectly symmetrical and rigidly interconnected weight paths already turn continuosly when friction is taken out of the equasion, I too feel (dream) there should be a way to more efficiently reach the top. Like a shorter route, or one that manages to harvest centrifugal force as added propellents. Positive asymmetry. Speed fluctuations used to our advantage, selective springs which only add to movement, and don'tfeed from it, all has been thought of before, but certainly not been used (proved) to work as intended.

I like the idea that a weight is fed back into the wheel at 12:00 at exactly the speed it's expected to per the typical laws of phisycs, just a bit ahead of time by taking the shortcut closer along the hub. Work done is the same, but more weight are on the work-side as that side takes more time to complete. As weights on the up side aren't on the wheel, their quicker decelleration (same decelleration nominally, in a shorter time) is not noticed by the wheel in the form of drag.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: X00013 on June 25, 2009, 06:01:50 AM
Lost 4 wordz, clip showz last 15 degree getting the better, http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gvHlalYOnlM
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: X00013 on June 26, 2009, 05:05:31 AM
Maimixe the vid, http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0w5aUkKNuks
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Cloxxki on June 26, 2009, 08:15:10 AM
YT says video is "private". Are you being surpressed? :-)
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: X00013 on June 27, 2009, 04:15:32 AM
Sorry bout' that, im havin "black screen avi issues", so i set to private untill processed, i forgot to make public, video is nothing really but more banter from myself except for the last minute or so with the second "slot", it seems to want to work most of the time, ( just fast foward it ) there seems to be an anomally with the second slot, i posted the entire vid to show a controlled experiment with the same build , it's actually one entire clip, 
 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0w5aUkKNuks
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: onthecuttingedge2005 on June 27, 2009, 04:36:24 AM
Does it produce Kw, Mw, Gw, Tw? what does it produce?

have you ever thought of using a powerful coherent Gamma Ray Linac of the sorts? maybe even upgraded. for fusion reaction.

simple standards of energy production are out weighed by Nuclear events of the sorts. 30,000,000 times by average greater in energy that any known standard of production of energy. shouldn't you be looking for the holy grail within Nuclear Energy?

there is a way you know.
Jerry ;)
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: X00013 on June 27, 2009, 05:27:11 AM
@ onthecuttingedge, I cannot endorse a nuke program that cannot dispose of its waste, seems a certain Senator feels the same way, maybe we could put all the used nuke shit in your back yard, which is ofcourse all of are yards.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: X00013 on June 27, 2009, 08:10:26 AM
If ur a wm2d fan, slot 2 iz lookn good, http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DoUO06L1Zvw
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: X00013 on July 03, 2009, 08:08:27 AM
4 the trollz, http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vx4tx3TiRyo
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: X00013 on July 04, 2009, 10:56:45 AM
Ball friction iz ), other than that, it's on like donkry kong  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eVwdrrJuJAE

This shit aint easy people!
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: X00013 on July 04, 2009, 11:27:17 AM
Failure trilogy vids http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HFJPKXRigeE
                        oooo, this failure is in HD  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wqVB8jBK6FE
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Cloxxki on July 04, 2009, 11:50:55 AM
X, you're getting quite competent with that, good work!
Are you are this point experimenting in a specific direction to find OU? I notice you keep the weights in the upper half and use that spinning bar to store energy, acting as the "wheel" perhaps.

With your current similation skills, you could already do what I would like to find out about.
An Abeling like setup, where there is a serious start-up velocity, and weights manage to get back to 12:00 quicker than it took them to to from 12:00 to 6:00. No OU in terms of energy, just a time advantage, always having at least one weight doing (slight) work on the generator turning something connected to the central axle. Never negative work, and at 2 times per revolution 2 weights at work.
Million dollar question would probably be : can the time advantage found by rolling up a short-cut be greater than the amount of work done to the wheel? If so, it seems you'd have an accelerating system.
Imagine, with exaggerated figures : 55% of a weight's "lap time" a weight is going from high to low, always doing a bit (couple % of maximum potential) of work. 45% of the time is spent reaching the top, all on its own momentum. The weight is lapping faster than the wheel, advantage gained only upwards.
I am not sufficiently educated to do the math of this. I have the hunch though, that there much be a way to cheat unity by adjusting time, vertical distance and work outputs to our advantage.
Not slowing down the wheel to reach 12:00 seems logical to me, and offers opputunity to try and beat the wheel to the top. I realize this is not easy as the weight loses speed on the roll up, while the wheel accelerates when under load of the other weight. So, wheel's acceleration should be smaller than the weight's time advantage. Lots of parameters tuned correctly, just MIGHT nett a gain in there somewhere. Not exactly the kind of OU that destroys the device after a few seconds of free operation, but perhaps we should not expect that just yet.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: X00013 on July 04, 2009, 12:17:12 PM
@ cloxxi, you gotta skype me for a real time build. my skype is X00013
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Cloxxki on July 04, 2009, 12:20:11 PM
Failure trilogy vids http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HFJPKXRigeE
                        oooo, this failure is in HD  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wqVB8jBK6FE
This one got me thinking. You could keep everything in the upper half (above bar axle), but in stead of the right-hand weight merely landing vertically, it could when 2/3 down turn inward. Still driving the bar, but displacing back towards the waiting weight. Pass through/past the bar, roll up a ramp at bit just until the bar catches back up with it. From there, you could start measuring rundown times :-)
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: X00013 on July 06, 2009, 04:13:15 AM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=twG6bomYspw
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Oo4eV-RcTOU
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fftj9ny86I4
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YLI-tWT2F4s


wm2d sjack?
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: infringer on July 06, 2009, 04:34:33 AM
nice illustrations but the problem I see is just how does the weight reset itself and get back to positions needed to keep the wheel spinning? I don't see a full revolution and after that how do the weights get back into point number one?

Forgive me for my ignorance but this sjack thing is a might bit confusing is it even in operation yet?
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Cloxxki on July 06, 2009, 08:30:08 AM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=twG6bomYspw
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Oo4eV-RcTOU
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fftj9ny86I4
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YLI-tWT2F4s


wm2d sjack?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YLI-tWT2F4s
Defies my logic. One weight does work, 2 get lifted to the starting level?
Especially as the former weight gets so far off center before it's lifted. Lots of torque, I would guess? A fluke in the program, or would outward horizontal velocity and distance be "something"?
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: X00013 on July 07, 2009, 02:51:15 AM
The point of my vids in wm2d is this, i made a comment way back on page 2 or somthing about the power stroke being the shortest distance.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: 0c on July 07, 2009, 02:57:21 AM
The point of my vids in wm2d is this, i made a comment way back on page 2 or somthing about the power stroke being the shortest distance.

And I also tried to present a way where the weights would only be on 1 side of the wheel (overbalanced) and would rejoin the wheel near the hub (can you say "power stroke" through a "short distance"?). Not many comments, though.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: AquariuZ on July 07, 2009, 10:02:34 AM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=twG6bomYspw
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Oo4eV-RcTOU
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fftj9ny86I4
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YLI-tWT2F4s


wm2d sjack?

You know, that last one...

I think you are onto something right there.... The problem is it is all in reverse of what I was expecting.... Clockwise motion with the weights moving faster outside the "D" than inside....

Still... I think your way of wm2d trial and error has merit and that last model proves it.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Cloxxki on July 07, 2009, 10:15:54 AM
You know, that last one...

I think you are onto something right there.... The problem is it is all in reverse of what I was expecting.... Clockwise motion with the weights moving faster outside the "D" than inside....

Still... I think your way of wm2d trial and error has merit and that last model proves it.
I cannot but fear it's a wm3d error. He lifts 2 weights with one! Should the weight that is horizontally rolling, away fromt he axle, not be extra "heavy" to lift?
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: X00013 on July 07, 2009, 07:59:41 PM
 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K93dL65Q724  , then 44 parts later , lay the numbers over in a  newt program.  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n7KUe_26of4
             http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gFuLKX5WW74

wm2d is easy to trick, I'm done 4 a wile, TTYL
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: X00013 on July 13, 2009, 02:58:29 AM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dzM4SZYEY6E
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: pstroud on July 17, 2009, 01:19:21 AM
Hi Dusty!

I've been traveling lately and busy with projects and I have not had time to explore all of the posts over the last 2 months.

Dusty, I posted a couple of messages about 2 months ago and made a suggestion that Abeling's solution may utilize connecting rods between opposing weights.  This would allow the weight at the bottom to cause a shot-put action and thrust the upper weight upwards.

I have personnaly been holding off on starting my own test model of Abeling's wheel with hopes that you would run a test and post results of using a flexible connecting rod to generate the shot-put action.

Have you tested this yet?
Do yo intend to test it?

If you have not and you do not intend to, then please let me know andI may build my own replication to test this theory that I really belive is the answer.

I appologize if you have already posted the results but I've been too busy lately to follow through on all postings.



Dusty,  Thanks again for posting your test results & pictures.  Greatly appreciated!!!!

Preston Stroud
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Cloxxki on July 17, 2009, 01:27:51 PM
Some random thought that came to me.
Weight on the right side of the wheel, when having a downward trajectory component, are doing work. It's unlikely that the wheel at any moment will accellerate quicker than the weights would be just solely on a rod from the axle.
When on top of this work, they take the inside line at 5:00 or so, they can press down even harder. If this force, via a rod and/or spring is directed to the opposing weight... This has been proposed before as you say, but it sure is interesting. The bottom weight should not come to a halt at deep bottom though, and the rod may come in handy there. Decelleration after the shot put might already be used to get the bottom weight back on schedule.

Supposing this setup would show us wild acceleration, true PMM, what exactly would be the reason for it "working"? Where are we using energy earlier neglected?
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Cloxxki on July 19, 2009, 11:18:16 PM
I did some even rougher sketching just now, won't bother you with it. Couldn't help but coming back to the proposed rod/spring between the 2 weights, also because of Abeling's own cryptic descriptions.

I see it like this now:
Rod of variable length, spring loaded. Neutral length is length than maximum, springs only act at shorter than neutral length.

Now, what's important here:
- As Abeling says, power is accumulated in the 6-9:00 quadrant. The is where the ramp offers the weight its shortcut. It's would have been too easy to tell us that the weight are in the 1st and 3rd quadrants when charging up the system.
- Note the geoemtry of the Abeling D.
  - Right hand side is dead-on a circle. Except after 5:00 or so, we see it edging inside, reducing radius to the wheel's axle (not necessarily the rod's axle, it may well have none.).
  - The left hend side is a bit of a mystery. I'm proposing this a constantly sloping curve. Quite flat at 9:00, and rather pointy at 12:00. 6:00 would NOT be a mirror of 12:00, being more flat.

The action:
0:00+~6:00 Rod is vertical, maximum length, springs not doing anything.
~1:30 Neutral rod length reached and its tightening further. The spring will be increasingly compressed.
3:00+9:00 Minimum rod length and maximum spring load reached. The sloping curves saw the 2-3:00 weight delivering the work for the spring, while the 8-9:00 weight was at the end of its free ramp ride, slowing down naturally, and as suiting the near-axle route.
9:00 Spring will start to unload. Slowly at first due to mind curve difference between the trajectories.
~11:00 Neutral position, and distance between weight is increasing faster than the spring can keep up with at the present radial speed. Upper weight is shot out, for the rim to catch it, and make sure it travels the long way around 1-3:00 again, to compress the spring.

The before-6:00 horizontal move seems to nicely aid the shot put.  It doesn't drop down to the bottom part of the circle, while the top weight does go (nearly?) all the way up.

Abeling writes that the path of the weight is predetermined. Perhaps he didn't only calculate the perfect oval or D shape, but went a step further: the path that offers the most efficient spring loading and release. Obviously asymmetrical on the Y axis, is my gut feeling.

Summarizing.
- Taking the most from the 6-9 free ramp ride
- Finely tuned curves, especially the "striaght" part of the D.
- A connecting rod+spring is fully loaded between 1-3:00, which will may or may not start releasing right after, with an acceleration in the inter-weight distance closy tuned with the rod's load and release.
- The beginnin of the 5:00 ramp is shaped such that the spring lease shot put action on the upper weight does not slow the bottom weight, it may even accellerate both.
- The rod MAY revolve around an axle, but it will then possibly be one in the right hand side of the wheel. As I see it now, possibly on or close to the center of mass of the weights trajectories.

This remains a tough one to crack. I feel a face-to-face brainstorming session might offer great ideas, or better. Any of the Dutchies here up for it? With some cardboard, 2 sizes PVC pipe, elastic bands, and paperclips, we might try various ideas on the spot.

Most of the above have been proposed by greater mind earlier in this thread, but I felt like writing it down. Please take it to the next level of it has any validity?

J
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: X00013 on August 12, 2009, 05:42:17 AM
What's up with the wheel Dudes, http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Fhvep0M4rw0&feature=channel_page
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Cloxxki on August 12, 2009, 08:31:06 AM
OK, you're still getting that from wm2d? Would it be fooled by the initially increased velocity of the ball below the axle height?
It seems like he free rolling weight doesn't load the rotating bar as much, even when it's in a high-torque location, as long as it's rolling fast?

This setup should be easy enough to verify in a build, logic tell me it's unlikely of working.

In everyday life, and playing as a child, I did notice this phenomenon. At least, the combination of a long arm when a weight rolling away on it, as the arm rotates up. The acceleration of the weight seems enhances due to the arm not only coming back up, but at a changing angle. Not sure where I'm getting this association from, but think of a glass marble in a stiff pvc type of sorts.

If this setup truly works, you have beaten unity by applying velocity and angle in a smart relationship. Hurray, and the Nobel Prize for you!

If it doesn't work (grrr, stupid wm2d), place a shute on the right hand side of the bar, for the ball to be lauched upwards when having optimal speed and height (both initially rise together at the cost of the bar's height it seems). The ball shoots up, the bar is forced down as counter action. SHee what happens.

The long bar is 100% balanced in it's axle right? Will it balance itself at any angle?
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Russell Lee on December 22, 2009, 06:19:52 PM
This newest amazing discovery is following the footsteps of all the others that proved to be false.  There is always delays, delays, and more delays.  The inner workings are never published, there are always promises to build one soon.  This might have to be filed with the rest unless somethig substantial happens soon.  At least let us actually SEE the inner workings.  Right now it's just smoke, no fire. -Russ
Greetings.

I was surprised to see a search on Abeling receiving "0" hits.

So, long overdue as he is about to go ballistic. (I think)

In November of 2007, an unknown dutch inventor made the rather outlandish claim he had found a way to rotate and accelerate a large wheel by using twin weights and earths gravity as only propulsion. At the time this was merely ruled a hoax.

See the dutch media (local) coverage here: Noord TV Report on Abeling device (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A_0kYz4LhHw) Edit: added Broli´s version with subs

After that it has been very quiet around Sjack, until a few months back he created a company Abeling Beheer B.V. and started a website which explains his intentions:

"The construction of the first Weight Power Plant is expected in May 2009. The location for the construction of the first Weight Power Plant is probably going to be the province of Groningen, the Netherlands."


and

"The Fall and Lift control system. The invention of the "Fall and Lift control system" was done towards the end of 2006. The system transports, controls and transmits mass/weight to (for instance) a drive shaft. This system was the foundation for a machine that can work on weights/mass only, without adding any form of energy. It's purpose is to drive other objects."


Abeling claims he now partners with reputable businesses like Henkel and has all the approvals needed to go ahead with the project.

Link to the bi-lingual webpage: http://mooieenergie.nl (http://mooieenergie.nl)

He appears to be a cool customer, not at all media hungry, and has quietly filed his patents, raised capital and signed partner agreements.

Time will tell if he is 100% legit, his claim is that he will be able to provide power to the general public with at least a 50% discount against current regular provider rates. I think that still is too high, 95% would be better.

My questions to all in here are:

1) What do you think?
2) Have you heard anything about this?
3) If this is a "scam" why pursue it further now that he has all he needs?

My thoughts are that he truly has found a way to generate acceleration using weights and gravity only, or at least HE is 100% convinced.

I have sent him a message of encouragement, warning and a plea for full publication as soon as possible.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: ResinRat2 on December 22, 2009, 06:40:56 PM
I think you are right.

I went to the website link and read their quote on one page:

"We work hard to bring a commercially viable system or product to the market within three years.".

That was in May of this year (2009). So I guess everyone will have to wait another three years (or longer) to see anything at all.

Yes, looks like the same post, delay, post, delay,...etc. events going on as in the past fakes.

I could literally STRANGLE some people with my bare hands. Instead I would curse them with painful and bleeding hemmoroids if I could.

RR2
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on December 22, 2009, 06:53:11 PM
@Russell Lee,
Quote
This newest amazing discovery is following the footsteps of all the others that proved to be false.  There is always delays, delays, and more delays.  The inner workings are never published, there are always promises to build one soon.  This might have to be filed with the rest unless somethig substantial happens soon.  At least let us actually SEE the inner workings.  Right now it's just smoke, no fire. -Russ

The problem with this amazing discovery (known for several centuries already) is not that it is false but that the technical skills of your average constructor are wanting. It might have been made successfully down in history, and then suppressed, it might have not. We don't know. All we know for sure is that constructively there is a persistent discrepancy between the position of the center of mass vs the axis of rotation. Center of mass is always to the right of the axis of rotation for any angle of rotation of the wheel without exception. This is a given, a characteristic set in stone for this device which insures persistent violation of the lever rule at all angles of rotation of the wheel. That's on the one hand. That's the given. On the other hand there is friction which is not a given. Friction can be greater or lesser, dependein on how skilfully one manufactures the wheel. By increasing friction (say, by introducing sand into the working chamber) one may make a perfectly functional internal combustion engine to stall. In our case, by decreasing friction through skillful mechanical solutions below the level of opposing the, call it, OU effect (dues to the above set-in-stone characteristics) we may have a perfectly functioning Bessler (Abeling) Wheel. Simple as that.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Cloxxki on December 22, 2009, 09:23:17 PM
With all the thinking I've done on gravity wheels, I've come no further than the simple calculation:

A single weight on a centrally spun wheel, will take longer (time, 11% I seem to remember) to make a half revolution from 12 to 6, than it would take to, by non-circular means, back to 12, to the same height. Simply by taking a short cut, logically along the axle. So, in a 2-weight system, we could come down along the rim, at 6 leave the rim and hit a barrier to bounce us right back to 12. One weight could be starting the next half-revolution (with a tiny amount of work done perhaps?), before the other is done putting in work at 6. So we'd have 2 working weights on ons side of the wheel.

What Abeling might have done on a similar theory, is
A- reduce friction obvously
B- create a further velocity imbalance as widely discussed here, to reach a proper startup-velocity which may be required to complete the first full revolution.

Due to work done, irentia is lost in a weight, it may be able to use the spare time to build up some more. Time rather than hight. Don't ask me how. Yet.

My strong hunch is that, if there is OU, it's to be found in the time/vertical distance/speed relationship.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Ken the Great on December 23, 2009, 10:11:03 AM
YAWN!!!

It is quite a simple task to realize that a gravity wheel is possible.

Assumptions based on math not relevant to whats actually happening inside the wheel are irrelevant. Shall we go back to before Newton and use those ideas the main stream called science? It seems to me that's what some people are trying to do.

If someone needs to use algebra to calculate the actual solution to any given problem, but then refuses any type of math except simple addition, the solution will not be forthcoming.

The arrangement of the weights is simple, closer to the axle on the ascending side, furthest from the axle on the descending side.
This isn't really an issue for debate. The question that seems to keep arising is how to shift the weights from the perimeter to the axle without using all of the power generated by the falling weights on the descending side.

The solution is simple, "geometry".  If you try to lift the weight and move the weight to the axle at the same time with any device you can think of, the power output will be zero.

Bessler tells us in a round about way that the lifting of the weight is not a desired design of the apparatus that shifts the weight to the axle. REMOVE the lifting aspect of the apparatus that shifts the weight to the axle.

Geometry!!!

I will give a clue on here. The apparatus that shifts the weights to the axle must constantly be in motion or it will not work. If you discover the actual design, but make the shifting apparatus stationary, your output will be zero.

I have sent a design to AB Hammer to let him look at it, and if he has time to build a prototype. I have no time to build anything at the moment. The earliest I could even try would be the middle of next year.

The constant motion of all of the parts of the interior of the wheel is what causes it to stay in motion, and it has nothing to do with this imaginary force people call centrifugal force.

Take a string tie a weight to the end and spin it, let go of the string and the weight goes in a straight line in the exact direction it was heading when you let go of the string. Objects go in a straight line, unless an outside force acts upon them. The string is acting on the straight line force of the weight, causing the weight to change direction. However it is simple straight line force. I do not believe in the tooth fairy nor this imaginary force they call centrifugal force.

It is a waste of time.

Can you lift a 500 pound barrel that's sitting on its side?  Probably not.
But I bet almost every single one of you could roll it, ( or push it sideways)
(((CLUE)))))

Bessler told the world this. Stop worrying about lifting, worry about shifting.
If you can successfully shift the weight, the lift automatically happens.

So do you shift the weight at the 6 o'clock position? Or would that be lifting?
What about the 7 o'clock position? 8 o'clock? 9 o'clock?

The geometry of the levers determine the position one can start shifting the weight to the axle, whether it is 7, 8 or 9 o'clock. If you shift the weight at 9 o'clock the output will be almost zero.

So the shifting of the weight must occur between 6 and 9 o'clock.
The weight does not need to shift the entire way at 7 o'clock but simply START shifting.  (((CLUE)))

Now take your genius and design the geometry to cause this to happen.
Another clue, geometry includes the Taniyama-Shimura conjecture.
Which if I remember right has been proven to be true in recent years.

If your geometry only includes squares triangles and trapezoids, you will not be successful.

I have no doubt whatsoever that my design will work. It can't help but work.
When you calculate the power needed to shift the weights, combined with the lifting of the weights near the axle, and subtract it from the power generated from the falling weights, you have excess left over.

And the power is actually more than enough to overcome any friction that might be occurring in the bearings and such etc.
Of course the more you reduce the friction the higher the output, but to get the wheel to spin by itself, without a load, friction is not an issue.

The Abeling wheel right now is nothing more than someone's claim.
What is puzzling to me is that this person has made a video of NO DEVICE.
The wheels shown might be leftovers of non-working prototypes.
I hope if it is real, and that the design will be shared with the world.

30,000 RPM from an overbalanced wheel? I am sorry but I doubt that.
1 rpm is plenty if it is an unstoppable 1 rpm.

If someone came up to you and said, " I have discovered the cure for cancer!!!! But when you ask questions, they simply say they cannot discuss it.
Would you blindly believe them?

I WON"T!!


Put your thinking caps on.


Make fun of me if you want to, just don't steal my socks!!! :D


 

Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on December 23, 2009, 10:31:15 AM
@Ken the Great,

I don't know what to make of your post. Can there be anything more important than building a working overbalanced wheel that would require postponing it till the middle of next year?
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Cloxxki on December 23, 2009, 10:41:53 AM
Ken, I'm intrigued by your shifting vs. lifting.

So a simple example, the barrel. It's string at 6:00. I can give it a push, to almost tip over. The center of mass has been lifted, a bit.

Could you perhaps show a piece of geometry here, to demonstrate a relatively low-effrot shift that brings good lift?

I truly believe that if on simple principle is found, proven, and understood, dozens of design categories will in no-time be made to work. Perhaps even a high-rpm one. The way I see rpms in overbalanced wheels : good overbalance, but only a little bit put to work. Low friction then allowing it to spin up. Torque would be pretty low I suppose, but it would look cool for sure.

Please share your ideas, which seem to have good merit, with more than just AB Hammer. If you are into open source like this forum, make use of he many eager brains and hands of a whole forum! Your only real task to humanity it to bring your ideas out so that all the people who can contribute to it, actually understand your vision.

Looking forward to hear more!

Regards,
J
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on December 23, 2009, 11:00:48 AM
@Cloxxki,

@Ken the Great says that friction is not the issue but until he comes up with something clever, similar to the "cherry pit" idea but one that can be applied in an OBW, we are still with the Sjack Abeling one which we know is viable but where the friction is the real issue. I think no group that has offered assistance here and in other forums can compare to what Swiss watchmakers can do. In terms of fine mechanics they are unbeatable and that can be seen any time upon inspection of those stores offering Patek Philippe and Vacheron Constantin. What we need to do is get in touch with those fine watchmakers, where the secrets of making fine mechanics are passed from father to son, and try to convince them in the viability and the significance of putting efforts into building OBW having the lowest possible friction.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Cloxxki on December 23, 2009, 11:24:41 AM
@Omnibus
While I respect watch makers as much as you do, my limited knowledge of watch mechanics is that most is simple wheels and gears. For a gravity wheel, it may get more "complicated".

First, before an all-out effort is initiated to make a low-friction Abeling replication as this forum understands it, should we not for ourselves explain HOW it works, where the gain comes from? I can see the action of it, through Batgold's youtube video's expecially, but I don't see the science of the gain. Or, I may have lost it over time. If there is a gain, we should be able to calculate how much there is, before friction.

I think that a serious effort from some builders could do better than watch makers. Vital will be to first have an exact drawing of how it's going to be, then all the parts can be optimized for low friction. Even for air drag. Then, if we're confident, we could ignore air drag and rent a vacume chamber of appropriate size for the ultimate test run, if also air drag needs to be taken out to have some gain left. If it comes that far, needing zero air friction, we better be very sure how much net gain we're trying to tap into here.
Elimination psysical friction (like magnet tracks) and air drag (vacume chamber), how much gain is there? If one understands WHY it will work, getting the math for it should not be much harder? Are we working with millijoules of gain per revolution of a man-sized wheel, or with 20% of all inertia?

I've said this before : a gravity wheel that needs zero friction to have a shot at turning continiously, will never be able to do any useful work. Friction brings heat mostly, and heat is very useful indeed if you live here (worst/best winter, let alone december, since I can remember).
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on December 23, 2009, 11:36:51 AM
@Cloxxki,

It has already been well understood how Abeling's wheel works.

On the one hand, now we know for sure that constructively there is a persistent discrepancy between the position of the center of mass vs the axis of rotation. Center of mass is always to the right of the axis of rotation for any angle of rotation of the wheel without exception. This is a given, a characteristic, set in stone, for this device which ensures persistent violation of the lever rule at all angles of rotation of the wheel. This is the answer as to why it works. That's on the one hand. That's the given.

On the other hand, there is friction which is not a given. Friction can be greater or lesser, depending on how skillfully one manufactures the wheel. By increasing friction (say, by introducing sand into the working chamber) one may make a perfectly functional internal combustion engine to stall. In the case of an overbalanced wheel, by decreasing friction through skillful mechanical solutions below the level of opposing the, call it, OU effect (due to the above set-in-stone characteristics) we may have a perfectly functioning Bessler (Abeling) Wheel. Simple as that.

Unfortunately, I don't think that anyone of those offering services here in this forum or anybody at least I know would be able to successfully solve the pivotal friction problem. This requires very special skills as well as well endowed infrastructure.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on December 23, 2009, 11:39:23 AM
Also, don't worry about the useful work once you have the wheel of non-zero mass turning continuously on its own. That's the useful work. Let's have this and the developments and optimization will follow quickly. That's not an issue at this point.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Cloxxki on December 23, 2009, 12:07:41 PM
Omnibus, IMHO useful work is only there if there's either or both : resistance overcome, or acceleration. A rod spinning on a PM axle in a vacume chamber neither spins down nor does useful work. It just holds momentum.

In Abeling's wheel as we understand it, merely the position of a weight is not sufficient to prove overbalance-I'm afraid, due to the wonderful scissor-action which offers vast speed variances.

If someone could show that the Abeling wheel of a given geometry would offer back 103% of the energy needed to lift a weight from 6 to 12, that would be something to work with. We'd go for great mass, relatively low air drag, and the best low-friction roller/glider setup we can think of. 3% is a challenge I'd go for, in hopes to have 0.5% left to light a tiny LED from a huge wheel continiously spinning like mad.

The way you point out "proven" overbalance brings little new, I've come across dozens of other wheels that had this claim going for them.

Yes, the lower ramp relieves the upper weight from work to be done, but it also robs the upgoing weight from inertia needed to rise back to 12, matching rim speed no less.
I am not convinced that weight's path alone is sufficient in proving overbalance to bring continious motion until friction causes equilibrium speed. When the working lever+weight is longer, the other weight will be lifted, but less high than the other fell.

If someone shows me the math why Abeling's would work, I can devote serious time to a design to produce less friction than there is OU. I have multiple 3D engineers to my disposal in cas I have "something good". They've helped me out before with non-OU inventions, and I have some outstanding favors left.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on December 23, 2009, 12:31:00 PM
@Cloxxki,

Quote
Omnibus, IMHO useful work is only there if there's either or both : resistance overcome, or acceleration. A rod spinning on a PM axle in a vacume chamber neither spins down nor does useful work. It just holds momentum.

A wheel spinning in vacuum only solves the air  drag problem. Contact fiction can never be eliminated fully. The OU effect due to the persistent violation of the lever rule would cause acceleration until it’s countered by the said friction. The problem we have is to reduce that contact friction to levels below the OU effect due to the persistent violation of the lever rule.

Quote
In Abeling's wheel as we understand it, merely the position of a weight is not sufficient to prove overbalance-I'm afraid, due to the wonderful scissor-action which offers vast speed variances.

Scissor action is exactly what that contact friction is. This is where the skills of the maker kick in – to decrease this and other contact friction effect below the OU effect.

Quote
The way you point out "proven" overbalance brings little new, I've come across dozens of other wheels that had this claim going for them.

What I said applies to all these overbalanced wheels. Some are more efficient constructively (the OU effect due to the persistent violation of the lever rule is greater) some are less. Even within a certain design some constructions are more efficient than others. This is where that special constructor has the decisive say.

Quote
Yes, the lower ramp relieves the upper weight from work to be done, but it also robs the upgoing weight from inertia needed to rise back to 12, matching rim speed no less.
I am not convinced that weight's path alone is sufficient in proving overbalance to bring continious motion until friction causes equilibrium speed. When the working lever+weight is longer, the other weight will be lifted, but less high than the other fell.

These are unnecessary worries once you can prove that at every rotation angle, purely constructively, there is always a non-zero (negative) torque, that is, that the lever rule is persistently violated. I’ve proved that conclusively. Find a way to decrease friction below the level of this OU effect and you’ll have a working wheel without a doubt.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Cloxxki on December 23, 2009, 01:10:37 PM
Omnibus, I've read numerous comments at your address regarding the way you chose to decide which system is OU and which isn't. I started with an open mind, but now for me the balance is tipping away from your views. You are starting the thinking process with the understanding that the OU effect is already there, and that just friction is too great to allow it to be noticed.
Scissor action really is a simple mass/velocity/pressure conversion, a friction-sensitive one at that. It's not OU by itself. Yes, when lubed well, a car riding over such a scissor might propel a simple dart past the sound barrier, but that's not OU per se.

Really, fighting friction has been on my mind for most of my life. I won't say I'm an expert, but I can "see" solutions. First a mathmatical explanation of a single-digit percentage of OU, then I'll propose a construction which will beat this number. If silly low friction is required to allow the Abeling whel to make it's second revolution after a good initial nudge, its not worth it. The design needs to be improved, or the time, effort and money should be put towards a cheap mass-produced windmill. Or, more efficient car engine systems that cut fuel consumption in half or better.

I SO WANT the Abeling wheel to work, but now that time has passed, I don't see it anymore. Please remember me why it will work. My naivity is wearing off, I find myself seeing why newly proposed design won't work quicker and quicker.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on December 23, 2009, 01:26:15 PM
@Cloxxki,

Attacks at me were mainly by paid activists or by opportunistic superficial enthusiasts who don’t know what scientific reasoning is. One of the goals of such paid activists is exactly to discourage people like you from considering rational arguments and to sway them out into barren land.

What is seen from my analysis is that in absence of friction, self-starting (not “after a good initial nudge”) of Abeling type wheel will inevitably spin indefinitely. That’s a major conclusion which is the basis of my optimism in these matters. There’s no other fact or, in your words, mathematical solution which can remotely compare to the above conclusive finding. I should say that’s the only reason I have any interest in this kind of device (Abeling’s is just an example of OBW). Any new design must be some modification of an OBW, otherwise it would be hopeless.

As for the practicality of it, I repeat, that’s not an issue now. Let’s see first a wheel running on it’s own, then the improvement and optimization will catch up like wildfire.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Ken the Great on December 23, 2009, 02:48:32 PM
LOL@omnibus

If the Abeling wheel is understood as you say, what could be more important that you building one?

Have you started yet? If not WHAT IN THE WORLD COULD BE MORE IMPORTANT?

LOL@the ignorance of omnibus and his statement.

If I thought it was any business of yours what my situation is currently, I would type, " HEY OMNIBUS GUESS WHAT MY SITUATION IS CURRENTLY"

But notice I didn't type that.
Lets ask ourselves why.

Because it is none of your business.

I tossed out some of the basics of the ideas and what did I receive? Ridicule.
Which is the very reason I REFUSE to post my plans on here.

ABHammer and I talked on the phone and after chatting with him for a short time I emailed him the plans FOR FREE!!! no strings attached.
I made one request, WHEN he builds the working prototype, simply email me and tell me it works.

I told him I don't even care if his group claims the rights to it,
as long as he lets me know it works, then when I get TIME which is what I lack currently. Then I will build my own and use it for my personal use.

AB assured me if it works they would make sure I received the credit, which I thought was a very honorable and just position to take.
I have no desire to keep it a secret from the world, only from accusatory idiots.

So omnibus why are you so LAZY?

See how utterly stupid an erroneous accusation is?
It serves no useful purpose, it merely divides any group into smaller groups along with the division of ideas.

Maybe a short lesson in the Golden Rule is in order?
I will treat you how you treat me, because of course that IS how you want to be treated, correct? LOL

One thing you have done omnibus, you have assured the rest of the people here I will never post any ideas in this forum from this point forward.

GOOD JOB!!!

Was that what you were going for?

How many children do you have?
How many are special needs children?
How many of your parents are incapacitated and need your around the clock attention?
How long have you been without work because of the economy?

Might have been smarter for you to ask these questions BEFORE you ridicule.

But I do not really see you as smart, I actually see you as quite the opposite, I am sorry to say.

Was that what you were going for?

One good thing you did do, you DID make me laugh. HAHAHAHA




Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: ramset on December 23, 2009, 03:11:55 PM
There seems to be an awful lot of ego around here!!

 For a site with an open source theme??

Chet
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Ken the Great on December 23, 2009, 03:44:12 PM
Helloooooooo Cloxxki,

How are you today?

I am going to start by saying the approach omnibus is trying to take by making a wheel that won't do any work first then try to improve it is the exact opposite approach one needs to take.

Once you have a design if the friction of the bearings and other items are causing it to stop, the design is useless.

A true over balanced wheel design that REALLY works will have an ABUNDANCE of free energy to tap. Much more than any friction will counter act. If one starts with the silly notion friction will cause the wheel not to work, then that person doesn't understand the over balanced wheel. PERIOD!

They can make all the claims they want, but their starting premise is flawed.

Unless the wheel is in a terrible bind where you can't turn it manually, or some similar situation. FRICTION IS IRRELEVANT!
If your sole purpose is to overcome friction, to get the wheel to turn, you have MISSED the design entirely.

The design of my wheel will cause the builder to require to block the wheel during construction or once enough parts are installed, before the wheel it complete, it will start turning ON ITS OWN.

Ignore lifting, ignore friction. When you have the correct design, those things will be irrelevant. Concentrate on the geometry and the power of leverage. Length and location of the levers are critical to attain the correct geometry.

Lets do some math shall we? First lets describe the positions of the weights.
weight number one is in lets say the 12:30 position, its counterpart, we will call weight 5 will be in the 6:30 position. The weight in the 6:30 position is about to leave the perimeter and head towards the axle. However before it does weight one and 5 are balanced in this position. No output power.

Now if we evenly space the weights on the perimeter then weight 2 will be at 2:00 and its counterpart weight 6 will be at 8:00, but closer to the axle.
Because of the device used to shift the weight. This will cause the wheel to start to spin.

Now weight 3 of course will be at 3:30 and its countpart weight 7 will be 9:30 and all the way shifted by then to the axle. This will be more output.

Now weight 4 will be in the 5:00 position and its counterpart weight 8 will be at the 11:00 position all the way against the axle also.
This will generate some more power.

Now out of the 4 sets 3 sets are in a position to generate power, while one is neutral. This doesn't even take into account the force from the flywheel effect.

Now you pick a weight size, and then pick the wheel diameter, then lastly pick the distance the weight will swing from the perimeter to the axle. No need to calculate weights 1 and 5. Only the remaining weights need to be calculated.

Do the math and then you will see the output power will be more than sufficient to make friction irrelevant.

If you start to hike from Hawaii to New York you will have a problem, because of the point you started from. Same with the OBW, start with the premise that so much power can be extracted that friction is irrelevant and you will not waste your time building or even contemplating useless ideas and protoypes.

Have you built any wheels?
Do you have time and space to do so?
Where are you located? the US?

Send me an email and we might be able to discuss this further, I won't be revealing anything in this forum except basic principles.

Well I have things in life to tend to, so I shall leave you to your devices and vices as the case may be.

Make fun of me if you want to, just don't steal my toothbrush!









Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on December 23, 2009, 04:11:32 PM
I lost my mother several days ago and I was the only caregiver. That's why I'm in Europe right now. Makes you wonder how insensitive some people are.

Despite what I'm going through now I know full well that pursuing perpetuum mobile is the top priority because it concerns the whole world and not only my little life.

Therefore, I have to tell the likes of @Ken the Great that they have nothing. They are just boastful mediocrities and we've seen plenty of that kind infesting this board. Until he shows some concrete details, as Abeling has done, the fairest conclusion is that he has nothing and shouldn't waste bandwidth here.

On the other hand overbalanced wheel idea (say, in Abeling's rendition) had been proven conclusively to be sound and should be pursued vigorously. I don't think there's anyone or a group in the US capable of making it properly. If there were the likes of Vacheron Constantin would be US made. Most manufacturers are in China now anyway but Chinese made is a synonym of crap. So, what remains are the watchmakers in Switzerland and probably, if there still are such, old mechanical engineers from the beginning of last century in Germany. Unfortunately, that's a long gone time for Germany and what we are left is Switzerland where exceptional craftsmanship is still preserved. Too bad there's no one from Switzerlan here in this thread to fill us in the situation there in this respect.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Ken the Great on December 23, 2009, 04:30:54 PM
lol@omnibus

I doubt everything you post. 
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on December 23, 2009, 04:38:59 PM
Miserable moron.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Ken the Great on December 23, 2009, 04:57:41 PM
@ omnibus

It has occurred to me you are simply playing on the emotions of the other readers.

Lets examine MY POST about being a caregiver. It has nothing to do with YOUR situation.
It was in reference to my situation, yet you try and accuse me once again, this time of being insensitive.

HA you sir are a fool

I had no knowledge of your situation yet you claim I am insensitive because I did not know that your parent passed away.

BULL!!!!

You claim I am insensitive because I REFUTE your accusation WITHOUT assuming what your situation is, which is why they were phrased in the form of a question.

I do not believe ANYTHING you say at all.

I do believe you are a halfwit who is educated beyond his intelligence and tries to manipulate the emotions of others with deception in order to make himself FEEL superior.

That crap doesn't work on me though, it might work on the lemmings who visit here.

It won't work on anyone who has critical thinking skills.

You accusing me of being insensitive is equal to me accusing you of being insensitive because my daughters best friend was raped and murdered.
It is irrelevant that you had no knowledge of it, which is the same criteria you tried to use on me when you accused me.

It is total hogwash.


Your lame attempt to try accuse once again reveals only your shortcomings.

You sir are insensitive and you know it. This is why you accuse me of being insensitive about a subject I am unaware of ( your mother passing away)

You post accusations, which is simply you tattling on yourself.

Lets take it further, everything you accused me of applies directly to you, AND YOU KNOW THIS.


Critical thinking, such a wonderful thing!!!!

Don't worry about the lemmings, they won't follow you if you have an idea!!!

Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on December 23, 2009, 05:02:58 PM
Go away you mean little twerp.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on December 24, 2009, 05:11:24 AM
@Cloxxki,

Analysis of where friction occurs the most is crucial, I think. Indeed, the scissors effect has to be the main forcus of attention other than choosing proper low friction materials. Scissors effect can be minimized, once by an optimized shape of the ramp, second by some additional belt or small rollers ar the point of contact around 7-8 o'clock. Any thoughts?

Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Cloxxki on December 24, 2009, 11:43:21 AM
@Cloxxki,

Analysis of where friction occurs the most is crucial, I think. Indeed, the scissors effect has to be the main forcus of attention other than choosing proper low friction materials. Scissors effect can be minimized, once by an optimized shape of the ramp, second by some additional belt or small rollers ar the point of contact around 7-8 o'clock. Any thoughts?
Reducing friction, IMO is super-easy compared to finding a design that mathemetically produces OU. It cannot do so magically from willpower.
I will not invest serious time in a design unless I know it has merit to be a runner. I put time in my personal ventures, usually sporting goods related, because less friction is a solution to added performance. Who wants a gravity wheel that will spin 2 minutes by itself in stead of one, after an initial outside push?
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on December 24, 2009, 11:53:11 AM
No, no, like I said, no initial push. It's a self-starter. It has already been proven mathematically it must spin indefinitely if friction is decreased below a certain level -- it has been shown conclusively that constructively the torque has a non-zero (negative) value at every angle of rotation of the wheel. So, that part is done. Friction, lowering friction, is the real issue and that may be a really daunting one.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on December 24, 2009, 11:57:25 AM
Have you seen this site: http://www.callowayengines.com/index.htm? Wonder what that fellow has actually done regarding the discussed wheel?
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: AB Hammer on December 24, 2009, 03:21:26 PM
LOL@omnibus

If the Abeling wheel is understood as you say, what could be more important that you building one?

Have you started yet? If not WHAT IN THE WORLD COULD BE MORE IMPORTANT?

LOL@the ignorance of omnibus and his statement.

If I thought it was any business of yours what my situation is currently, I would type, " HEY OMNIBUS GUESS WHAT MY SITUATION IS CURRENTLY"

But notice I didn't type that.
Lets ask ourselves why.

Because it is none of your business.

I tossed out some of the basics of the ideas and what did I receive? Ridicule.
Which is the very reason I REFUSE to post my plans on here.

ABHammer and I talked on the phone and after chatting with him for a short time I emailed him the plans FOR FREE!!! no strings attached.
I made one request, WHEN he builds the working prototype, simply email me and tell me it works.

I told him I don't even care if his group claims the rights to it,
as long as he lets me know it works, then when I get TIME which is what I lack currently. Then I will build my own and use it for my personal use.

AB assured me if it works they would make sure I received the credit, which I thought was a very honorable and just position to take.
I have no desire to keep it a secret from the world, only from accusatory idiots.

So omnibus why are you so LAZY?

See how utterly stupid an erroneous accusation is?
It serves no useful purpose, it merely divides any group into smaller groups along with the division of ideas.

Maybe a short lesson in the Golden Rule is in order?
I will treat you how you treat me, because of course that IS how you want to be treated, correct? LOL

One thing you have done omnibus, you have assured the rest of the people here I will never post any ideas in this forum from this point forward.

GOOD JOB!!!

Was that what you were going for?

How many children do you have?
How many are special needs children?
How many of your parents are incapacitated and need your around the clock attention?
How long have you been without work because of the economy?

Might have been smarter for you to ask these questions BEFORE you ridicule.

But I do not really see you as smart, I actually see you as quite the opposite, I am sorry to say.

Was that what you were going for?

One good thing you did do, you DID make me laugh. HAHAHAHA

Greetings Ken and all.

 I am writing to confirm the conversations with Ken and yes I will be working with Ken on this and building it.

Alan
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on December 25, 2009, 12:35:27 AM
@AB Hammer,

Good luck and hope you'll notify the thread of the outcome.

For now, however, we have to follow what has already been established conclusively and that involves seeking ways to substantially decrease friction, unfortunately.

Merry Christmas to all.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Low-Q on December 25, 2009, 01:28:45 AM
I'll build this machine right away.

4 balls with a hole
1 wheel with 4 spokes
1 path to guide the balls

Put the balls on the spokes, but inside the path and see what happens.

My pre-thoughts: It takes the same time for the balls to rise as it takes to fall. The weight of the balls are equal. The total energy for now is calculated to 0.

However, the torque is greater for the falling balls between 12:30 and 5:30 than the rising balls between 6:30 and 11:30 - or is it so?

The speed of the rising balls are rapidly increasing in the moment they are leaving 6:30 - in a position where there is almost no torque from the opposite ball at 12:30. This speed is slowing down as the ball is approaching 9 o'clock there the torque of the opposite ball 3 o'clokc is at its most. From that point it is again accelerating, simultaneously as the torque of the opposite ball is decreasing, untill it must slow rapidly down right before 12 o'clock.

This accelerating and deaccelerating part is gaining the counter torque that will force the wheel to a stop.

That is MY guess. I will try though. Start with two spokes with equal weights and see what happens.

Maybe I'm lost, but you guys still discuss the initial gravity wheel?

Vidar
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Ken the Great on December 25, 2009, 04:21:11 AM
Hello Vidar,

I hate to be the pessimist, but your idea will not work.


1) you must harness the power of gravity.
2) you must be able to store potential energy to be released at the precise time.
3) you must be able to take full advantage of the kinetic energy that is created once the wheel is in motion

If you eliminate any one of these, you will end up building a paper weight.

Merry Christmas
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: AB Hammer on December 25, 2009, 05:11:25 AM
@AB Hammer,

Good luck and hope you'll notify the thread of the outcome.

For now, however, we have to follow what has already been established conclusively and that involves seeking ways to substantially decrease friction, unfortunately.

Merry Christmas to all.

Don't worry Omnibus, All is in good hands and will be done intelligently and properly.

Ken

 Allot of people here won't fully understand until the running wheel is exposed and explained in detail, at the same time. Then we will here a resounding DOH!! ;)

Alan

Alan
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Ken the Great on December 25, 2009, 06:45:56 AM
Alan is that a Homer Simpson DOH?! hahahaha

I emailed Ralph some more technical aspects that I believe to be important, that I did not include on the drawings themselves. Some notes are there and I told you some of them over the phone.

I will forward you the email I sent him, so if you have any additional input you could share it with Ralph.

I have done some more pondering and I believe we can move the weights off the perimeter starting at the 6:00 to 6:05 position instead of waiting until the 6:45 to 7:00 position, by advancing the timing of the release of the potential energy that's stored. Once released the kinetic energy will remain the same and still do the same amount of work, it will just happen a little sooner.

Advancing the timing will increase the speed, along with the energy output. (regardless of friction)

Also the timing of the transfer of kinetic energy to the weight in the 6:00 position will need to be retarded I believe, I think I was too aggressive in my estimate in the notes on the top left corner of drawing number 1.
I am now thinking 85 to 90 percent.

Of course this can be adjusted rather quickly and several different values can be tried to gain the best performance.

Merry Christmas!!!!!

The Love of Money is the root of all evil.

Send me 20 bucks to hear more...  :D

Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on December 25, 2009, 09:44:54 AM
Timing of release of potential energy is indeed the central issue but that’s what all overbalanced wheels take advantage of. While individual weights would always obey CoE, a construction which ensures that at all angles of rotation (that is, at any given time) an assembly of weights on the right-hand side of the lever is always heavier that the assembly of weights on the left-hand side will continuously violate CoE.

As for kinetic energy, which is the way of expressing the release of potential energy, the only kinetic energy of interest is the rotational kinetic energy which will be the greater the more unbalanced the wheel is. To ensure persistently that maximum unbalancing for a given construction the weights should readjust as fast as possible at their optimum positions on the wheel under the action of the component of their weight tangential to the track. Of course, friction can be impediment to that optimum kinetic energy of the weights tending towards their optimum positions on the wheel (to make wheel sooner maximally overbalanced for a given construction). This kind of friction isn’t a problem, however, and can easily be minimized to the desired extent.

The friction that’s really the culprit is the scissor-type friction in the lower left quadrant of the wheel. Had there been a way to decrease that friction to a desired level we’d had a perpetually spinning overbalanced wheel. That’s a purely engineering issue and this is where we need experise at the level of Swiss watch making which is apparently lacking elsewhere.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Cloxxki on December 25, 2009, 12:15:55 PM
Most gravity wheels I've seen, including Abeling's, have one weight only dropping X, to supposedly lift the other weight by almost 2X. That sure slows a wheel down, or let it run backwards. Not the friction of the world can turn a truly constantly overbalanced wheel backwards.
In other parts of the wheel, it will be the other way around, way overbalanced indeed, but not lifting the upward weight by much, leaving more work to be done in a lesser overbalanced situation.

I think it was Alan that posted a useful grid with amongst others, horizontal lines to better see what the wheel is doing or verifying what it's supposed to be doing. If one chooses to only look at the overbalanced part of a wheel, it's easy to imagine it spinning out of control.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Low-Q on December 25, 2009, 01:25:34 PM
Hello Vidar,

I hate to be the pessimist, but your idea will not work.


1) you must harness the power of gravity.
2) you must be able to store potential energy to be released at the precise time.
3) you must be able to take full advantage of the kinetic energy that is created once the wheel is in motion

If you eliminate any one of these, you will end up building a paper weight.

Merry Christmas
I agree it will not work. However, no matter how precise you make this, a weight that must be lifted the same distance upwards as it goes downwards will not be able to provide energy...The potential and/or kinetic energy is allways lost somewhere on the way in any gravity powered device. As you cannot create excess mass out of nothing, you cannot store potential or kinetic energy - hence any gravity powered devices cannot work...

I hate to be a pessimist too... :)

Vidar
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Ken the Great on December 25, 2009, 01:41:46 PM
When one deals with reality, it is quite simple to see that kinetic energy within the wheel can be harnessed regardless if the direction or trajectory of the kinetic energy. If a person cannot figure out how to do this, it doesn't become a friction problem, that is merely a distraction, it remains and will always remain a design problem.

Lets imagine that friction is the real enemy for a second. (which it is not)
Lets take it to the extreme in a metal experiment.
The extreme would be NO friction at all (regardless  of the current possibility)
that is in fact the extreme.

If one created a design with no friction, and one's desire was simply to have a wheel that spun by itself but did no work, it is quite simple to come to correct conclusion that a BALANCED wheel would run forever without any friction.

UH OH, what happened to the overbalanced wheel?

Friction is irrelevant and always will be.
Design is critical and always will be.
Failure to understand or devise a concept to deal with these truth's in no way eliminates them.

This stands regardless of the mental wrangling of some.

Besslers wheel lifted a 70 pound weight, are we to believe that there was actually that much friction that was overcome, and the design is not important? Conclusions like this last one remind me of midget wrestling.

Friction is irrelevant.
Design is critical.
These two facts will never change.

Merry Christmas

The Love of Money is the root of all evil.

Send me 20 bucks to hear more..... :D





Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Ken the Great on December 25, 2009, 01:53:52 PM
Vidar,

I hate to be the bearer of bad news, but my design does both.
It harnesses kinetic energy while the wheel is in motion and it stores potential energy from the motion of the wheel.

If the weights are not in the correct positions, one revolution by hand will reset all of the weights and devices internally, and from that point on you can simply let go and the wheel will start turning by itself.

If you build 2 wheels according to my design, and put them together in one unit in opposite directions, the weights and devices inside of the wheel that are turning in the wrong direction simply balance out.

This allows the weights and devices in the side that is turning in the correct direction to be able continue to turn without any ill effects from the side turning in the wrong direction.

If you want to change directions, simply rotate the wheel by hand one revolution in the direction you choose, the weights going the wrong direction reset to a balanced position and the weights going in the correct direction take over. And all you have to do it let go of the wheel.

Design is critical.
Friction is irrelevant.

Merry Christmas


The Love of Money is the root of all evil.


Send me 20 bucks to hear more..... :D


Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Ken the Great on December 25, 2009, 02:04:17 PM
Vidar,

By the way part of the kinetic energy my design harnesses is NON rotational kinetic energy.

Merry Christmas



Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Ken the Great on December 25, 2009, 03:08:53 PM
Vidar,

The rest of the kinetic energy that my design harnesses is non rotational kinetic energy. hahaha

ALL the kinetic energy is non rotational.

Rotational kinetic energy is an imaginary force also known as centrifugal force.

There is no such thing and it is a waste of time to even contemplate its existence.


Merry Christmas

Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: ramset on December 25, 2009, 03:56:48 PM
Ken
Thanks for the positive Vibes!!
I'm already thinking of how to add some friction to your wheel to make some HEAT[Grandma's cold]
Merry Christmas
Chet
Ps
you have a good crew on this,guys that "KNOW",
and thats a very big reason to be positive
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Ken the Great on December 25, 2009, 04:02:51 PM
If you see a fat man ...
Who's jolly and cute,
wearing a beard
and a red flannel suit,
and if he is chuckling
and laughing away,
while flying around
in a miniature sleigh
with eight tiny reindeer
to pull him along,
then lets face it...


Your eggnog's too strong!


MERRY CHRISTMAS!!!!!!!!!
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Ken the Great on December 25, 2009, 04:31:37 PM
Chet I appreciate the post.

Me being positive however has nothing to do with other people.
Just because I started posting here 3 weeks ago, doesn't mean I was born 3 weeks ago. hahahaha

When I go into a new situation with all new people, I tend to be a little abrasive. There is a method to my madness.
I do not like associating with or sharing ideas about any subject with people who are emotionally unstable.

This is why I have said feel free to call me names, and make fun of me if you want to in previous posts. And some people did that very thing.

It instantly reveals who is and isn't emotionally stable. If I, a person you don't know, (maybe I am not even a person you do not know) can type a word on a screen that causes you to change your emotional state, I have no desire to be your associate.

The study of human behavior I believe is a huge benefit, for instance if one has studied human behavior, then one can easily recognize the reason behind Bessler smashing his devices. And it wasn't because he was crazy.

If I am abrasive and someone remains respectful, they would be who I tend to gravitate towards. (notice the pun hahaha) and I immediately stop being abrasive towards them.

I was born at night, but not last night. :D



MERRY CHRISTMAS!!!!!



Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on December 25, 2009, 08:07:35 PM
Quote
Rotational kinetic energy is an imaginary force also known as centrifugal force.

Of course, that's not true. If one really has a working OB wheel knowing physics is not a must. The problem is when you don't have a working wheel, don't know physics, demonstrated by the above statement and try to pontifcate in a forum. Ignoring is the only recourse.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Ken the Great on December 25, 2009, 09:45:19 PM
I first read about Besslers wheel December 8, 2009

I have already given a group of people a set of plans I drew up 12 days after my first exposure to the Bessler wheel.

That group of people seem to think I am on to something.

On the other hand we have people in this forum who have posted over 2950 times. And has been a part of this forum for almost 4 years
and they have???

I will let the people decide. :D

The Love of money is the root of all evil.
Send me 20 bucks to hear more..... :D
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Ken the Great on December 25, 2009, 09:46:22 PM
Is there an ignore feature on this site?



Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Pirate88179 on December 26, 2009, 12:04:32 AM
Yes, it is in your messaging preferences.  Type the user name of the person you don't want pm's from and that's it.  It also blocks all posted messages from that person.

Bill
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on December 26, 2009, 09:47:26 AM
We've seen a lot of bogus claims in this site. Some of these bluffings have been more prudennt not to combiine it with demonstration of blatant lack of understannding of basic physics. Hiding one's head in the sand, not willing to hear that, doesn't solve hiis problem because it's out in the open for others to see. Anyone can take up anybody on his word but that doesn't prove the latter has the goods let alone that he kows physics when he has proven otherwise.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on December 26, 2009, 09:56:45 AM
@Cloxxki,


The role of friction is to stall the rotation, not to cause rotation backwards. As for the sense of rotation, like I said, one has to consider the totality of the balls, not just one ball. When analyzing it correctly there is net torque and it is negative (the spin is clockwise). That counterclockwise spin in the wm2d sim is due to a flaw in the sim program. A detailed analysis of the resultant torque proved that.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Cloxxki on December 26, 2009, 01:35:29 PM
A great build, or even multiple ones, showed backwards rotation during parts of the cycle when let got from stand still. Calculations may need to be revised when this happens.
Show me a design with consistent overbalance, and I'll indicate where it will start backwards. I'll be happy to be wrong if in fact we have a real runner.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: ramset on December 26, 2009, 02:46:23 PM
Quote from Super Ken:

I have already given a group of people a set of plans I drew up 12 days after my first exposure to the Bessler wheel.

That group of people seem to think I am on to something.
end quote

To my knowledge the group Ken is working with have tremendous credibility in "THIS" forum [great members ]


Chet
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on December 26, 2009, 05:17:26 PM
What build do you have in mind? Someone built the wheel, correct? Do you have a link?

As for a wheel not turning backwads (CCW), the one in Sjack Abeling's patent is an example.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on December 26, 2009, 05:19:50 PM
Quote from Super Ken:

I have already given a group of people a set of plans I drew up 12 days after my first exposure to the Bessler wheel.

That group of people seem to think I am on to something.
end quote

To my knowledge the group Ken is working with have tremendous credibility in "THIS" forum [great members ]


Chet

This forum, however, has been abused a lot by such bluffers, so it's prudent not to repeat their bluffs before something positive comes about.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: X00013 on December 27, 2009, 03:53:15 AM
@Omni, you said "totality of the balls",  chuckle chuckle  :)
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: ramset on December 27, 2009, 04:17:49 AM
XOOO13
Nice to see another world class builder on the scene!!
Chet
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Ken the Great on December 27, 2009, 05:58:32 AM
LOL@Super Ken, that made me laugh out loud, thanks for the medicine!!!!

 :D
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Ken the Great on December 27, 2009, 06:00:42 AM
Yes, it is in your messaging preferences.  Type the user name of the person you don't want pm's from and that's it.  It also blocks all posted messages from that person.

Bill

Thanks  Bill!!!!  :D
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: rlortie on December 27, 2009, 08:03:57 AM
This thread now consists of 133 pages, there is no advancement on the Sjack Abeling Gravity wheel since November 7, 2007. There is no runner and Sjack Abeling is no where to be found or heard of.

What is to gain here other than the revenue and royalties off the advertising which compound into the thousands considering the amount of adds per page.

I challenge anyone on this forum including 'Ken The Great' to prove to me that Centrifugal force is of any value to building kinetic force in a radial path. If you can, then that means that the mass/velocity  has exceed the  physical containment of the centripetal force which maintains a given gradient of radial KE.

Ralph
http://arracheenterprise.web.officelive.com/default.aspx     
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on December 27, 2009, 08:22:36 AM
@rlortie,

Aggravating as it is, there are objective reasons for the current state of affairs the basic of which is the lack of proper infrastructure. As for Abeling, he exhibits a typical behavior. That shouldn't be an issue. 
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on December 27, 2009, 08:23:56 AM
Forgot to add -- claims based on centrifugal/centripetal forces are to be ignored out of hand. This was discussed earlier.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: rlortie on December 27, 2009, 08:43:18 AM
@rlortie,

Aggravating as it is, there are objective reasons for the current state of affairs the basic of which is the lack of proper infrastructure. As for Abeling, he exhibits a typical behavior. That shouldn't be an issue.

For constructive criticism, I ask that you clarify for debate the current state of affairs and the basic lack of infrastructure.

What is the typical behavior?  Is it to make a dramatic presentation of something of no value and rake in a percentage of the advertising it hosts?

Did you know that ABHammer and I have proven that the advertising I am looking at on the same page is not the same as what he sees. Via either hacking or cookies the ads you are looking at is aimed to each individual pertaining to their interests.

And yes I am using my own links in my signature, I figure I might as well benefit too. In fair exchange you will find a link to overunity.com on my site map. 

Ralph
http://arracheenterprise.web.officelive.com/default.aspx
http://arrache.org/  Coming soon.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Pirate88179 on December 27, 2009, 10:11:28 AM
Ad? What ads?  I see no ads here at all.  Just use Firefox as your browser and also the ad-on ad block plus and you won't see any ads either.

Bill
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on December 27, 2009, 11:26:13 AM
rlortie,

The current state of affairs is this. Discontinuous production of excess energy (violation of CoE) is proven conclusively using a magnetic propulsor.

Also, analysis of an overbalance wheel such as Sjack Abeling's has shown that constructively it has an inherent property to persistently violate the lever rule at every angle of rotation (that's an inherent OU property). Therefore, the only remaining obstacle to have continuous production of excess energy is friction. Since the OU property is constructively a given while friction is variable there's no theoretical argument which wouldn't allow friction to be reduced below a certain value where the OU property would become dominant. 

Reducing friction to such level is a daunting engineering task. As such it would be up to engineers of fine mechanics with proven track record. I can't think of a better example of such engineers than the Swiss watchmakers. That's the known infrastructure. I'm not discussing the exceptions which would only prove themselves by presenting a working OBW, ready to be replicated by others. There are no such at present.



P.S. Bluffing is typical in this area and those who bluff do it for much bigger goals than just to have a cut in a meager advertising.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Cloxxki on December 27, 2009, 12:20:18 PM


Also, analysis of an overbalance wheel such as Sjack Abeling's has shown that constructively it has an inherent property to persistently violate the lever rule at every angle of rotation (that's an inherent OU property).
Yet, it turns in different directions, depending on the position in which you release it.
What proof do you prefer to believe in, the one you fabricated, or the one shown to you by builders of the actual design you're claiming to be OU?
What part of "it turns counter clockwise" don't you understand, or choose to not understand?

See 1:18 of this video, for instance : http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_pmdExy6xsQ
No springs, just friction and symmetry. There may be more points in the cycle that are counterproductive.
The fast acceleration observed in the last quadrant also comes at a cost. Friction or not.

When calculations accept the counter rotation, the overall (over)unity of the rotation will be more realistic.
I hope you'll have more conclusive proof the next time you enthusiate gullable souls, such as I am too.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on December 27, 2009, 12:46:22 PM
No, like I said, totality of all balls (@X00013 don't chuckle. that's serious) has to be observed. That video is no proof for anything. Besides, aside from the strict calculations proving CCW rotation I have my own build with 7 balls showing CCW tendency. Needs more work to be shown here.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Cloxxki on December 27, 2009, 02:27:46 PM
No, like I said, totality of all balls (@X00013 don't chuckle. that's serious) has to be observed. That video is no proof for anything. Besides, aside from the strict calculations proving CCW rotation I have my own build with 7 balls showing CCW tendency. Needs more work to be shown here.
It probably needs a LOT of work to show CW rotation from standstill, from every starting position. Even 3:2 bias one direction would be awesome, tight now we're at 1.00000:1.00000 as far as I can tell. SHow me a design that is different, and I'll help with all my might and resources to reduce friction to below OU effect.
That's the problem with full rotation. You get back where you started, most of the times. COE is a hard one to trick.

I will repeat until someone explains me why it won't work : if we get the weight back to 12 quicker than it takes for it to reach 6 via typical rotation, we'd have a seriously overbalanced wheel, right?
We can't lift an equal weight higher up, or with less energy that it requires, but we might be able to do it quicker than g seems to dictate. Excess used is nicely fed by via decelleration.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: ramset on December 27, 2009, 03:06:24 PM
Cloxxi
XOOO13 simulated this every way imaginable??
He could explain it quite well I'm sure.
Chet
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Cloxxki on December 27, 2009, 03:40:41 PM
Cloxxi
XOOO13 simulated this every way imaginable??
He could explain it quite well I'm sure.
Chet
I saw same simulations with the oddest responses to sliding weights on pivoting rods also. Shooting higher than it started.
Information is being diffused from the gazillions of posts, including mine. Hard to pick out the good stuff.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on December 27, 2009, 05:45:57 PM
@Cloxxki,

Rate of rise doesn't make one bit of a difference. What matters is the persistent discrepancy between the center of mass and the axis of rotation -- center of mass is always to the right of the axle at all the angles of rotation of the wheel. That's a gicen (called here OU property). The problem is to decrease friction below a level where this fixed OU property can show itself.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: AB Hammer on December 27, 2009, 08:28:13 PM
@Cloxxki,

Rate of rise doesn't make one bit of a difference. What matters is the persistent discrepancy between the center of mass and the axis of rotation -- center of mass is always to the right of the axle at all the angles of rotation of the wheel. That's a gicen (called here OU property). The problem is to decrease friction below a level where this fixed OU property can show itself.

Omnibus

Why do you think so limited? When you have a device/wheel that can easily overcome friction. Then the reduction of friction can be pursued to make it run smoother. If you are only trying to get past the friction by fine adjustments, you will not get what you should.

Alan
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on December 27, 2009, 09:22:06 PM
Omnibus

Why do you think so limited? When you have a device/wheel that can easily overcome friction. Then the reduction of friction can be pursued to make it run smoother. If you are only trying to get past the friction by fine adjustments, you will not get what you should.

Alan

Easier said than done. Reducing friction is a real constructive challenge.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: rlortie on December 27, 2009, 09:40:16 PM
I believe that what Alan is stating is; why are you so intent about finite friction problems. If the wheel is that sensitive to being a runner  what good would it be for utilization of free energy?  Another concept of the drinking bird is not of value. 

Face the facts; To date no one has objectively proven that Sabling's design is viable. No builders have come forward stating 'I have a runner',  yet many have tried.

Ralph

http://arracheenterprise.web.officelive.com/default.aspx

 

Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: ramset on December 27, 2009, 09:53:31 PM
Alan said
Quote:
"When you have a device/wheel that can easily overcome friction."
end quote

That would be nice!! [Very nice]

Chet
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on December 27, 2009, 10:36:45 PM
@rlortie,

Quote
If the wheel is that sensitive to being a runner  what good would it be for utilization of free energy?
Show me a runner as sensitive as you can imagine but turning on its own and leave its utilization to me.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: AB Hammer on December 27, 2009, 11:41:22 PM
@rlortie,
Show me a runner as sensitive as you can imagine but turning on its own and leave its utilization to me.

Omnibus

 You may have already seen one, but never recognized it for what it was. This is just for you to think about. This is not an insinuation either. But you would have to see a strong one to recognize it now days.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: ramset on December 28, 2009, 03:56:54 PM
Hmmmm
The Hammer said;
Omni" would have to see a strong one to recognize it now days."

Omni likes /loves S M O T 's??

Although "now days " implies Old [been around awhile]

Hmmmmm
Chet
PS
Omni please don't take this wrong.
A smidge of humility can go a LOOOOONG way
besides, you might have missed something.
Nothing beats a fresh set of eyes :o :o :o
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: ramset on January 02, 2010, 07:48:09 PM
Omni

Perhaps a comment??

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=us7YB7eiOeQ&feature=related


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aHVBu77jz4w

 A Symphony of ideas to achieve an end result.

Sort of what Super Ken has in mind. [The symphony part, I think]

Enjoy your trip

Chet
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: pstroud on January 04, 2010, 03:30:08 AM
Quote
This thread now consists of 133 pages, there is no advancement on the Sjack Abeling Gravity wheel since November 7, 2007. There is no runner and Sjack Abeling is no where to be found or heard of.

Ralph

Ralph - I'm surprised you made this comment while knowing I've been working for the past few weeks on a replication build.  I'm close friends with Ralph and AB Hammer and we have communicated on this some.

To all - I made suggestions to Dusty around 6 months ago on my concepts to try out but I never received any feedback that they were tested.  Its really bothered me for over 6 months and I have thought about it frequently.  At last, I decided that I would never know if my concept works until I try it out.  I started a build a few weeks ago with getting the flow working as anticipated.  It looked promising so I am expanding it.  Attached is a picture of the wheel just mounted again with 16 slots cut out on both sides.

I usually focus on projects for 6 months to 3 years.  I don't give up easily.  In a few months, I will know if my concept works or not.

Preston Stroud
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: overtaker on January 04, 2010, 04:02:06 AM
Great looking build Preston! 

As Ralph often says " If I don't think it will work and you do.... build it. "

Set your mind free.  Work or not,  we will learn. 

Good luck.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Pirate88179 on January 04, 2010, 04:02:57 AM
Preston:

Very nice craftsmanship there.  Best of luck with it.

Bill
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on January 04, 2010, 04:48:05 AM
Omni

Perhaps a comment??

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=us7YB7eiOeQ&feature=related


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aHVBu77jz4w

 A Symphony of ideas to achieve an end result.

Sort of what Super Ken has in mind. [The symphony part, I think]

Enjoy your trip

Chet
I visited Reidar Finsrud personally and posted two videos http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=553061720631716456&ei=vmJBS6r-CISs2AK0jZ2UBw&q=perpetuum+mobile# from that visit. This was discussed extensively here and in other forums.

The new device in your second link is also interesting but the author should make it possible for independent parties to replicate it. Otherwise it will go down in history as another one of those devices that were claimed but were never shown to work.

As of today, the only conclusive proof for the violation of CoE is due to the magnetic propulsor. Unfortunately, excess energy there is only produced discontinuously. To this day I haven't seen a device producing excess energy continuously.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on January 04, 2010, 04:51:04 AM
@pstroud,

Good luck from me too. Excellent job.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Cloxxki on January 04, 2010, 08:28:23 AM
Looks great, Preston!

I like that you're testing wide slots, to allow advancing/lagging of the weight.
I'd be most interesting to hear your theory behind the details of your build, when you're ready to share.

Good luck!

J
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: ramset on January 04, 2010, 02:13:52 PM
Preston

Sweet,[a word my kids use[means all things good]]

Make some music. ;D ;D ;D

Chet

PS, I wonder how Dusty is? [didn't he work with Butch LaFonte?]

PPS
Omni, if this is real     http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SZjNbjhxgt4

it could be made continuous [might"" look"" ridiculous]
I think there are important lessons in this device [obvious if its not a hoax] 
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on January 04, 2010, 04:33:47 PM
Of course, the device in the video will be "it" if it's not a hoax and it does produce excess energy continuously. Where's the proof that that's not a hoax, that's the real question? Can you count how many times we've had similar claims only to find the claimant disappearing in the void of space?

I wrote this guy asking him if it's possible to pay him a visit or whether he has detailed blueprints to independently reproduce the device. You guessed it -- no reply. What can I say?
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: pstroud on February 13, 2010, 10:28:33 PM
Attached is a Youtube video of my progress.  I have 12 of the 16 weights along wiht 6 cross-bars.  It does not show any real signs of hope but I will eventually get it finished by adding the remaining 4 weights to satisfy my mind.

Here is the link:   http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TPClcSEko4I

Preston Stroud
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on February 13, 2010, 11:22:09 PM
@pstroud,

Thanks for posting your vid. Great job. Hope you'll soon meet with success. All the best.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on February 23, 2010, 11:29:24 AM
Here is an attempt to build a gravity wheel. The greatest problem as far as I can see in this variant is to construct it so that it would maintain the trajectory of the spheres such that the torque would remain negative at every position of the wheel. Such form of the trajectory has already been found theoretically but it poses a major engineering difficulty to build, especially regarding the upper part of the ramp. It very well may be that the wheel would work as shown (with only the lower part of the ramp) but the shape of the ramp has to be carefully optimized. Unfortunately, it is found theoretically that the OU effect with only the lower part of the ramp is quite low and to have the wheel turning at such condition requires extreme technical skills.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on February 23, 2010, 11:38:16 AM
Here's the side view.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on February 24, 2010, 07:44:33 PM
This is one of the most interesting experiments in youtube: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EZF01JCm-sI&NR=1. I'm re-posting it here from another thread because of the immediate relevance to the problem at hand.

Here is another vid: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VhOiXCRQu0A&feature=related

This experiment is another illustration of the production of excess energy (production of energy "from nothing"), already demonstrated by the magnetic propulsor, as a result of the construction of the device allowing for spontaneous displacement under the action of a conservative force.

This important experiment is to be studied well and simulated, as a start, using wm2d or, better, with 3dmax (reactor) for possibly turning it into a self-sustaining device.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on February 24, 2010, 09:55:32 PM
Here's another, even simpler one: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JzZ9AKwZw28&NR=1
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: ramset on February 24, 2010, 10:52:44 PM
Omni,

These vids make my head hurt!
Whats going on??

Chet
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on February 24, 2010, 11:15:22 PM
This simplest apparent violation of CoE I've ever seen should be had in mind when pondering over the form of Abeling wheel slots, say. It appears the hockey stick slots we've been considering are not the best solution, judging from those last videos.

Maybe, even before working on Abeling wheel we should  consider whether or not these little experiments can be made self-sustaining. Amazing, isn't it? Videos hardly anybody has noticed for over two years made by a Turkish school teacher, who obviously also doesn't seem to appreciate himself the significance of the experiment he has proposed, may be the basis of the simplest ever self-sustaining device.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: darkspeed on February 24, 2010, 11:41:41 PM


using gravity to convert stored potential energy to inertial energy..

Both balls start at the same point and end at the same point work done = work done

One expresses more velocity but the end result is the same

Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: ramset on February 24, 2010, 11:41:47 PM
This is causing fights in my office!!

People trying to explain it away as insignificant !

Chet
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Cloxxki on February 24, 2010, 11:50:22 PM
Here's another, even simpler one: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JzZ9AKwZw28&NR=1
I've been reading Evert http://www.evert.de/eft301e.htm on this, but those Youtube videos make is so much apparent! Thanks a lot for posting it.

Brain fart. What if the low road not only had that 2nd little hill, but also a top ramp a la Abeling, to vertically decellerate the ball beyond g, and transfer into forward momentum? I wonder if the ball could meet the target sooner, or a higher top speed, possibly even OU for the height lost.

OT:
The low road principle should be awesome when applied to urban transport. Vacuum tubes, capsules, and trajectories well underground. A passenger would have a pent house boardroom capsule entry in the East of town, shoot down to street level and lower, attain hundreds of miles per hour to make it through the horizontal bit, and be braked by making it up a similarly high tower in the West of town. Trip duration to be expressed in seconds rather than minutes by helicopter, or hours by car.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on February 25, 2010, 12:06:01 AM

using gravity to convert stored potential energy to inertial energy..

Both balls start at the same point and end at the same point work done = work done

One expresses more velocity but the end result is the same

Traveling longer distance for a shorter time means greater kinetic energy, doesn't it? And yet, both balls have equal initial-final potential energy. How does this happen?
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Pirate88179 on February 25, 2010, 02:15:20 AM
Omni:

I am glad you are bringing this to all of our attention.  I believe it deserves it.

Thanks,

Bill
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Cloxxki on February 25, 2010, 09:00:58 AM
It's of course not about nominal height, but height difference that brings the greater speed.
The time factor is also in the angle of trajectory. Starting near flat, just takes a long time to get rolling anywhere.
To some degree, you might think that height comes at a cost, but depth can often be gotten for free.
Like in my capsule tube example, getting a machine to dig a deep tunnel is easier than to build  high higher building, and then getting to start high up. The depth is used, you just don't spend your stationary phase there. It's a fuel. Interestingly, with such transportation, it actually pays to have a heavy craft, to overcome air friction easier. Think, long train. Great weight for limited frontal surface.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: onthecuttingedge2005 on February 25, 2010, 09:07:51 AM
Traveling longer distance for a shorter time means greater kinetic energy, doesn't it? And yet, both balls have equal initial-final potential energy. How does this happen?

when a bullet travels down its path it generates it own magnetic field, this magnetic field is very strong.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on February 25, 2010, 09:14:13 AM
when a bullet travels down its path it generates it own magnetic field, this magnetic field is very strong.
No,it doesn't. If it's electrically neutral, as bullets are, it doesn't.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: onthecuttingedge2005 on February 25, 2010, 09:27:35 AM
No,it doesn't. If it's electrically neutral, as bullets are, it doesn't.

well. that is good for your spinning magnetic moment isn't it? every object generates a magnetic field of some sort. all!
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on February 25, 2010, 09:30:01 AM
well. that is good for your spinning magnetic moment isn't it? every object generates a magnetic field of some sort. all!

In this discussion magnetic field has no role whatsoever.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: ramset on February 25, 2010, 02:35:47 PM
Omni

Just past the "apex" of the "humps" the ball would get lighter.[momentarily]

Perhaps this reduction in Friction yields a benefit [of course it would, but this seems a "Big" difference].

Chet
Ps
I think the math for this would be complicated,but doable [explainable].
Ultimately I do "see" your point RE : a wheel ,as I recall "free flight" being a part of Abeling's wheel [this could be a very big piece]
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: fletcher on February 25, 2010, 07:08:34 PM
To understand what is happening research "brachistochrone", perhaps on wikipedia - the explanation is very simple & there is no magic or gain in energy.

It goes like this - two balls rolling down two different shaped ramps will start at the same height [Pe = mgh] & arriving at the same lower height will have the same energy [i.e. mgh + Ke [1/2mv^2]] - N.B. both balls have the SAME velocity, but the one that takes the track that dips lower while traversing arrives in less time [it gets to accelerate faster because of the steepness of the track & the proportionately less resistive force of the track pushing on the ball i.e. the track pushes with a more horizontal component than vertical unlike a constant slope track].

The explanation is this - if you have a vertically mounted disk & attach a weight at the rim say around 1 o'cl - then let it go - assume the disk is massless [no inertia to contend with for this thought experiment] & that the axle bearing is perfect & there is no air drag etc - drop an exact same mass from the same starting height [Pe = mgh] & let it free fall.

Now do a comparison at any vertical height between the two setups e.g. at the 3 o'cl position the mass on the disk will have a certain velocity - that velocity will be identical to the free falling mass at the same height [obviously they get there in quite different times].

This applies to ANY shaped track whether it be riding a wheel rim [concave] or rolling down an undulating track to its target [convex] - if the track dips below the final height at its lowest point the rolling mass will have its greatest velocity which is proportional to its Ke which on the climb up to end height it gives up to Pe as you'd expect.

All is conserved & NO energy was created because the end height velocities were IDENTICAL.

To be of any use the ball would have to arrive with greater velocity & therefore have greater Ke, which it does not - the apparent time factor difference is a red herring if any one is going to suggest this.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on February 25, 2010, 08:17:34 PM
Quote
It goes like this - two balls rolling down two different shaped ramps will start at the same height [Pe = mgh] & arriving at the same lower height will have the same energy [i.e. mgh + Ke [1/2mv^2]]

On the contrary, the experiment itself, not your impression what the experiment might be, demonstrates that one of the balls travels along a longer distance for a shorter time than the other ball. Therefore, although the same potential energy is imparted to each ball the kinetic energy of the balls differs. I already explained that and one should read it before posting attempts for bogus explanations.

Quote
N.B. both balls have the SAME velocity,

No, they obviosly don't. See above, after checking the video again.


Edit to add: Now, I should add this--you are attempting to obfuscate the matter and confuse people by introducing another experiment. Stick to this experiment. Explain this one, not a different one. You obviously cannot explain it but then say so and don't try to finagle.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: fletcher on February 25, 2010, 09:18:53 PM
Supply your data to prove they have different velocities at the same ending height omnibus - in case you don't understand, at the end of the trip, not distance divided by time average velocity - and don't obfuscate.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on February 25, 2010, 09:28:08 PM
Supply your data to prove they have different velocities at the same ending height omnibus - in case you don't understand, at the end of the trip, not distance divided by time average velocity - and don't obfuscate.

No, don't you obfuscate. One of the balls is obviously traveling along a longer path and reaches the final point for a lesser time. What data shall I supply? Don't you have eyes to see? Why would that ball arrive faster traveling a longer distance if it didn't have higher velocity?

Answer this question. Don't muddle the point by emphasizing only the end of the trip. Observe the whole trip.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Cloxxki on February 25, 2010, 09:46:55 PM
You're both right with what you're meaning to say.

Traveling a horizontal path in a quick manner is great, but the distance doesn't buy us anything. Height does. Unless we can find a weight to extract DISTANCE from a weight wheel. A whole new ball game then.
If there is anything OU about a horizontal path as the product from a drop, the terminal velocity or extractable energy will need to show excess over potential energy at the high starting point. Thsi would, as I now see it, still equal being able to bring the weight to above its starting position, being rock hard over unity.

From early in this thread, I've hitting walls in the direction my thoughts are sending me:
- Time gain to be cashed in on the upwards side vs. the working side. The shorter path along the axle DOES facilitate this. A high start-up speed seems required to get the time gain to surface. And of course, immaculate geometry and building.
- SOMEthing to do with the 2nd or even third derivative of speed or even angular momentum. There's gotta be something there, but I can't quick visualize what I'm almost tasting. Should have paid better attention in high school, learn to get through boring scientific books. At the time I thought I'd spend plenty more time learning.

If we could guess what Abeling invented, the type of gain, we could more easily come up with the trick itself.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: fletcher on February 25, 2010, 10:38:34 PM
No data supplied omnibus ? - how about starting height, finishing height & end velocity - I think I can deduce that if the ball that takes less time to get there it has a greater average velocity.

This is a kinetic world we live in - that means that kinetic energy is the currency for capacity to do work [force x distance] - so we're interested in the final velocity because that will tell us how much work can be done via impact or impulse - average velocity is useless to us because there must be an exchange of energy to be useful to do work & that means a collision at some point - it's at that point that we need to know the velocity to calculate the available energy to do work.

However omnibus, if you can show us that the balls have different Kinetic Energy's but the same energy's of height then you will have indeed brought to the worlds attention a means to create OU & break CoE & you can point out again what a bunch of morons the guys who made the vids are for not recognising the potential - all you have to do is have a variable pitch track to follow instead of a straight line decline - get your hot wheels car set & video out to prove your point.

The scientific community says that the path a weight takes does not matter, that we only need to know mgh = 1/2mv^2 - they say this precisely because of this sort of experiment i.e. the brachistochrone - same heights no change in Ke regardless of the path taken [wish it were different then this problem would have been solved eons ago & we'd have FE from gravity].

Do some homework next time ominbus & engage the brain before the mouth.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: ramset on February 25, 2010, 10:42:00 PM
Fletcher
Just so I understand your point?

You feel that both balls are crossing the "finish line " at the same velocity?

And if they are not [the one traveling the longer path "faster"].

There is something "hokey" here, or I just don't know my physics?

I will not be offended by your response.

Thank you
Chet
PS
I see your response above,you feel all things being equal ,what these vids are showing is "impossible"?
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: itanimuLLi on February 25, 2010, 11:00:13 PM
Omnibus , great observation there is in dead gain in velocity and the trick is to use this to a usable method. if someone can do an experiment starting with same hight and using the velocity to end at a higher point .
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on February 25, 2010, 11:04:42 PM
@Fletcher,

It is obvious you cannot explain where the extra kinetic energy comes from for bringing one of the balls sooner at the end point (while traveling longer distance, to add pain to suffering), despite the fact that the two balls have the same initial (and final) potential energy and that's the reason for resorting to wishy-washy crap that

Quote
so we're interested in the final velocity because that will tell us how much work can be done via impact or impulse - average velocity is useless to us because there must be an exchange of energy to be useful to do work & that means a collision at some point - it's at that point that we need to know the velocity to calculate the available energy to do work.

Quite the contrary. You should read carefully the definition of kinetice energy and should try tounderstand that in that definition there is no mention of echange of energy. What is seen in the elementary formula for kinetic energy (aside from the mass) is only the velocity. Only the velocity. Learn it from now on and don't continue to clog the thread with nonsense. You lack elementary understanding of physics, as seen, and pushing some kind of new Fletcherphysics won't make up for that.

Yours is a classical case of obfuscation in the face of facts inexplicable to you. You can run but you can't hide.


P.S. By the way, don't bother involving scientific community (not to say what its understanding of brachistochrone is), as if it would side with you. You don't know elementary physics to have the nerve to do that.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on February 25, 2010, 11:07:49 PM
Omnibus , great observation there is in dead gain in velocity and the trick is to use this to a usable method. if someone can do an experiment starting with same hight and using the velocity to end at a higher point .

Indeed. What we see in the videos should be studied carefully and that's one of the most important studies in the OU field. Unfortunately, I can't do it right now because I'm in Europe but will start researching it as soon as I get back to the US.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: fletcher on February 26, 2010, 12:27:33 AM
Fletcher
Just so I understand your point?

You feel that both balls are crossing the "finish line " at the same velocity?

And if they are not [the one traveling the longer path "faster"].

There is something "hokey" here, or I just don't know my physics?

I will not be offended by your response.

Thank you Chet

PS I see your response above,you feel all things being equal ,what these vids are showing is "impossible"?

Yes Chet - to be perfectly clear both balls "arrive" with the same velocity - the one that got there earlier by taking the longer track does NOT have a greater velocity - it's average velocity is greater so it gets there more quickly but with NO extra energy from excess velocity.

A simple way to test this is to have both balls run out along a track - video  it & calculate the across the finishing line speeds OR have the balls impact something that stores or measures Kinetic Energy & see if there is a significant difference - you won't find one.

Here's a quick pic to demonstrate the principle - should be self explanatory to all but omnibus.

Omnibus - go back to school.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: overtaker on February 26, 2010, 12:39:04 AM
If at the end of both ramps we replaced the basket with a ramp.  Which ball would climb higher? 

Omnibus,  If there is a great energy gain than the ball should be able to climb higher than it's starting point.  This won't happen.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: ramset on February 26, 2010, 12:49:08 AM
Fletcher
Quote:
Yes Chet - to be perfectly clear both balls "arrive" with the same velocity - the one that got there earlier by taking the longer track does NOT have a greater velocity - it's average velocity is greater so it gets there more quickly but with NO extra energy from excess velocity.
----------------------------------
While my eyes are telling me that one is faster[more KE],I know this can not be true,
Thank you for taking the time to answer!
Somehow I know the"Buss" is not done with this.
although I believe the "audio" on one of the vids did mention the balls coming to "Rest" eventually at the same spot.
Thanks
Chet
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: overtaker on February 26, 2010, 12:49:32 AM
Fletcher,  Do you have to factor in the friction of the ramps?
For instance if both ramps have considerable friction, the ball on a slight incline will be slowed more so than one on a very steep incline.  Am I correct?
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on February 26, 2010, 01:03:24 AM
Quote
Yes Chet - to be perfectly clear both balls "arrive" with the same velocity - the one that got there earlier by taking the longer track does NOT have a greater velocity - it's average velocity is greater so it gets there more quickly but with NO extra energy from excess velocity.

That's nonsense. Whether or not the two balls "arrive" with the same velocity is irrelevant. The important obvious fact remains--"it's average velocity is greater" which means, contrary to your understanding, that its energy is extra due to the excess velocity. Indeed, kinetic energy is only a function of velocity (at a given mass) and of nothing else. One ball exhibits higher velocity and therefore has greater kinetic energy than the other ball.

Quote
A simple way to test this is to have both balls run out along a track - video  it & calculate the across the finishing line speeds OR have the balls impact something that stores or measures Kinetic Energy & see if there is a significant difference - you won't find one.

On the contrary. As seen in the videos, one ball arrives sooner that the oter ball, even though it's traveling along a longer path. Get used to this fact.

Quote
Here's a quick pic to demonstrate the principle - should be self explanatory to all but omnibus.

Omnibus - go back to school.

The discussed fact from the videos is a physical, not mathematical finding. Conservation of energy (CoE) is discussed by physics, not mathematics. Mathematics only helps to find the shape of the trajectory, as here illustrated. Physics, on the other hand, determines violation of CoE because of the obvious appearance of extra kinetic energy in the ball moving along the curved path compared to the energy of the ball moving along the straight path--kinetic energy is only a function of velocity and mass, impact or no impact. Learn this.

Fletcher, go back to school. Learn what kinetic energy really is (it's only a function of v and m and of nothing else, contrary to your misunderstanding expecting impact may have something to do with it) and what the role of mathematics is when discussing physics problems. Don't try to foist on the reader mathematical variational solutions regarding trajectory as if they are self-explanatory solutions of physical problems concerning conservation of energy.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on February 26, 2010, 01:19:06 AM
If at the end of both ramps we replaced the basket with a ramp.  Which ball would climb higher? 

Omnibus,  If there is a great energy gain than the ball should be able to climb higher than it's starting point.  This won't happen.

The ramp experiment has to be carried out and then we'll know the answer. However, even if there is no gain at the end point the fact remains that the kinetic energy of one ball differs from the kinetic energy of the other ball--these balls travel through actual physical paths of differing lengths and one of them covers the longer distance for a shorter time. That's an undeniable fact. Thus, if indeed there's no gain at the end point one should explain what energy that extra kinetic energy has been converted into (if it isn't converted into extra potential energy at the end point).

Further, if there's no potential energy gain at the end point the ball indeed won't be able to climb higher than its starting point. That doesn't mean, however, that there hasn't been energy gain (kinetic energy gain)--we see with our own eyes that one ball despite the longer path, reaches the end point sooner. Whether or not that extra kinetic energy can be used to lift the ball at the end point above the starting point in no way erases the fact that there is an energy gain.

One thing we should establish firmly because it is obvious from the videos--the ball on the curved path has extra kinetic energy independent of how that extra kinetic energy can be used for practical purposes. To deny this is to fly in the face of experimental facts and the basic concepts in physics.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Low-Q on February 26, 2010, 01:19:39 AM
This is one of the most interesting experiments in youtube: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EZF01JCm-sI&NR=1. I'm re-posting it here from another thread because of the immediate relevance to the problem at hand.

Here is another vid: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VhOiXCRQu0A&feature=related

This experiment is another illustration of the production of excess energy (production of energy "from nothing"), already demonstrated by the magnetic propulsor, as a result of the construction of the device allowing for spontaneous displacement under the action of a conservative force.

This important experiment is to be studied well and simulated, as a start, using wm2d or, better, with 3dmax (reactor) for possibly turning it into a self-sustaining device.
Those A are the coolest I have ever seen! Hard to understand why this is happening - I have no clue, but I'll think about it for a while.

I'm thinking friction vs. "steepness" of the track. The ball on the straight track suffer from more friction than the other ball in the steeper part of the track. So that ball can accelerate with less friction and gain more speed even if it is going uphill at the final part of the track. This uphill might also be less friction.

Anyway, I have no good explanations to this. What would happen if the tracks are made of something very hard and polished, and using hard and polished balls? What would the outcome be?

Vidar
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on February 26, 2010, 01:22:28 AM
@ramset,

Quote
While my eyes are telling me that one is faster[more KE],I know this can not be true

On the contrary, it is true that one is faster and therefore has more KE. Your eyes see that correctly and you should believe what you see rather than believe @Fletcher's ramblings.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: ramset on February 26, 2010, 01:39:18 AM
Fletcher
If I may ask another question?

On the graph you posted?
At the 3 O clock position where the 2 "lines" meet [the long road and the short]
It seems this graph implies an arrival time for both paths [simultaneous]

Am I misinterpreting  this graph?

Sorry for my ignorance in this matter but its making my little head hurt!

Thanks
Chet
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on February 26, 2010, 01:53:29 AM
@Low-Q,

Quote
I'm thinking friction vs. "steepness" of the track. The ball on the straight track suffer from more friction than the other ball in the steeper part of the track. So that ball can accelerate with less friction and gain more speed even if it is going uphill at the final part of the track. This uphill might also be less friction.

That's correct and I agree also with @Fletcher's similar explanation:

Quote
the track pushes with a more horizontal component than vertical unlike a constant slope track.

This is what's called constructive opportunity for a conservative force field to induce spontaneous displacement which is tantamount to violation of CoE or production of energy "out of nothing".

How is this obvious violation of CoE to be used in a practical device is yet to be seen.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: ramset on February 26, 2010, 02:08:10 AM
The "Buss "said

How is this obvious violation of CoE to be used in a practical device is yet to be seen.
------------------------
Omni,
Balls have been around a "Long time"
How can this be ??
The proof is in the pudding!!
You posted too soon [should have waited till you got home to test].

Now I will have to play with this.
I like Q's polished ball idea,
I have some "huge" ball bearings off a crane turntable,
I'll throw together a test ramp with incline brake/scale tomorrow.
Chet
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: fletcher on February 26, 2010, 02:39:46 AM
Fletcher,  Do you have to factor in the friction of the ramps?
For instance if both ramps have considerable friction, the ball on a slight incline will be slowed more so than one on a very steep incline.  Am I correct?

Yes, you do - imagine a frictionless ramp for the thought experiment - the same way as we imagined a friction less bearing on a wheel or disk which a weight rode - friction is a force & can be represented by vectors - that means the track is pushing at right angles to the track - this impedes the acceleration of the ball if the track is flattish compared to steep - this is why tracks with initial steepness allow the ball to accelerate up quickly & ultimately arrive at destination quicker, carrying a faster average velocity.

A metaphor might be a parachutist reaching terminal velocity in free fall - two parachutists equal in every way except one weighs twice the other - both will be affected by air drag & will stabilise at terminal velocity but the terminal velocity of the more massive parachutist [all else being equal] will be considerably higher than the light one - proportionately the percentage of air drag is higher for the lighter parachutist [like a feather falls slowly on earth but everything falls the same rate on the moon] - hope that helps.

Chet .. 3 o'cl isn't time but vertical distance - no matter what track the rolling mass takes i.e. around the rim of a disk, down a flat incline, undulating incline, concave, convex, dipping below final height track etc etc as long as the velocity is measured at the same vertical heights [V1;V2:V3;V4;V5] the velocities will be the same [no allowance for small amount of friction on track difference].

As a graphic example  - attach a mass to a frictionless & massless wheel [no inertia] - let it fall from 12 o'cl to 6 o'cl & measure its velocity at 6 o'cl - let an identical mass fall vertically in free fall from 12 o'cl to 6 o'cl & measure its velocity - one will have velocity in the vertical while the other has velocity in the horizontal - but both have the same speed & hence Kinetic Energy - they both took considerably differing amounts of time to get there with different average velocities - no one but omnibus is suggesting that the path a mass takes increases the Ke - as already explained AT ANY HORIZONTAL HEIGHT COMPARISON the velocities/speeds are the same - since physical contact is required in mechanics to turn that Ke into work done then it matters not what the average velocity is but only its contact speed [across the finish line speed].

Omnibus .. try to understand the reasoning underlying physical principles & the math rather than relying on shallow use of numbers & bluff - if that doesn't sink in then go & do some experiments with your hot wheels & come back & tell us how you were able to harness all that extra energy in a useful way - duh!
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: overtaker on February 26, 2010, 02:54:46 AM
Omnibus,    Let's compare a ball on a curved ramp with a ball free falling.  The ball free falling will travel a longer distance in a shorter amount of time.  What do we do with all that energy?     :)
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on February 26, 2010, 07:24:02 AM
@Fletcher,

Quote
since physical contact is required in mechanics to turn that Ke into work done then it matters not what the average velocity is but only its contact speed [across the finish line speed].

Wrong. It is not true that a body traveling in vacuum along a trajectory with no physical contact with other bodies doesn't have kinetic energy. The kinetic energy of a body is only determined by the mass and the velocity of that body and depends on nothing else. Learn physics.

Invoking brachistochrone curve in this discussion only muddles it. That mathematical problem does not overthrow what physics defines as kinetic energy (see above) but only helps to determine the optimum path for a body of a given mass and potential energy to convert it into kinetic energy. Mathematics isn't physics. Mathematics only helps physics to obtain its solutions easier. To understand a physical phenomenon, however, you have to know physics and its basic notions which you obviously don't.



Quote
Omnibus .. try to understand the reasoning underlying physical principles & the math rather than relying on shallow use of numbers & bluff - if that doesn't sink in then go & do some experiments with your hot wheels & come back & tell us how you were able to harness all that extra energy in a useful way - duh!

Don't teach me what to understand. Instead, you try to understand that "all that extra energy" not being harnessed "in a useful way" is not at all an argument against the reality of that extra energy. Your utilitarian approach only shows that you're not comfortable with the elementary notions of physics.

Hear it again because, obviously, it is not getting across to you. Kinetic energy is only a function of velocity and mass. A ball of mass m which travels along a longer distance for a shorter time has a greater velocity and therefore has greater kinetic energy than a ball of the same mass m that travels along a shorter distance for a longer time. This is the only way physics defines kinetic energy. In the definition of kinetic energy physics implies no interaction, no impact, no transfer, no anything else you are imagining. You are inventing Fletcherphysics which isn't an object of discussion here. Educate yourself first about what physics, not Fletcherphysics is and then join this discussion. What you're doing now is only wasting bandwidth.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on February 26, 2010, 07:28:50 AM
Omnibus,    Let's compare a ball on a curved ramp with a ball free falling.  The ball free falling will travel a longer distance in a shorter amount of time.  What do we do with all that energy?     :)

You realize that a ball in free fall experiences no horizontal displacement, don't you? Start from there.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on February 26, 2010, 07:42:50 AM
@ramset,

Quote
You posted too soon [should have waited till you got home to test].

I would've posted too soon if what the videos show is a scam, say, the two balls are of different mass. I don't believe that's the case, do you?

Therefore, it is an established fact that the videos demonstrate two balls of the same m turning the same gravitational potential energy into different amounts of kinetic energy.

Now having established that fact it's a completely different story how we would use that fact for the continuous production of that extra kinetic energy.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on February 26, 2010, 07:49:44 AM
What's really interesting to me is that even under ideal conditions the same quantity of potential energy can be converted into different quantities of kinetic energy. This goes against the "transformation" part of CoE. We already know that the "conservation" part of CoE can be violated, that is, that it is possible to produce "energy out of nothing". However, once available a given amount of energy can be converted only equivalently into other forms of energy. This experiment demonstrates that it isn't so--two balls of the same m turn the same gravitational potential energy into different amounts of kinetic energy.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: mondrasek on February 26, 2010, 03:27:07 PM
The ball on the longer track moves faster.  But at each horizontal location where it is moving faster the ball on the longer track is LOWER than the ball on the straight, gently sloping track.  So it has dropped further, and that additional change in PE resulted in greater KE and thus more velocity.

But at the end of the tracks, both balls are at the same height again.  How did the ball on the longer track get back to this height?  It had to go back UP at some point(s) along the track.  At each point it was going up it was slowing down.

At the end of the tracks, both balls are going the same velocity, if friction is to be ignored.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: ramset on February 26, 2010, 04:01:59 PM
Mondrasek

Seems like all the "ups" should cancel all the "downs ",[on the longer steeper course]
and every one should finish at the same time?

Since this is not the case.
That's the Bit the "Bus" is intrigued by[as it could apply to a "wheel"]

Chet
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: mondrasek on February 26, 2010, 04:32:50 PM
Seems like all the "ups" should cancel all the "downs ",[on the longer steeper course]
and every one should finish at the same time?

Not at all Chet.  The average speed on the longer track can be faster, so that ball will reach the end of it's track quicker.

Think of it like this:

1)  Straight track:  Ball smoothly accelerates from 0 to 10 mph from beginning to end of the track.  Average speed is 5 mph.
2)  Long track:  Ball accelerates from 0 to 20 mph (steep drop), then decelerates to 15 mph (slight rise), then accelerates to 20 mph (slight drop), then decelerates to 10 mph (steep rise) at the end.  The overall average speed is greater than 5 mph, right?  And the ball gets to the end faster, but with the same exact final velocity as track #1.

For the speed of the ball on the longer track to ever drop below the 10 mph maximum of the ball on the straight track, the long track would need to have hills that take the ball higher than the straight track.

M.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: ramset on February 26, 2010, 04:47:14 PM
M

From point A to point B with the same amount of "fuel" [the drop]
The long road ball gets more done "faster"[does more work "quicker" with the same amount of Fuel]
I did not know this was possible ?

And I don't know of anyone that has used this extra "Zip" in a wheel.

I believe that to be Omni's point.

Chet
PS
That being said ,if the above is true and not a scam [the Vids]
No one has come forward to say this is Bogus.
Omni has a "Very" good point. Abeling said his "idea " is nothing New
Just overlooked or forgotten.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: mondrasek on February 26, 2010, 05:02:48 PM

From point A to point B with the same amount of "fuel" [the drop]
The long road ball gets more done "faster"[does more work "quicker" with the same amount of Fuel]
I did not know this was possible ?

And I don't know of anyone that has used this extra "Zip" in a wheel.

I believe that to be Omni's point.


I believe you are correct.  But as Fletcher indicated, in order to use this extra "Zip", you have to tap into it while that extra speed exists.  At the end of the ramp, there is no extra speed.  And if you tap into it anywhere else, you have tapped into it where the ball on the longer track is lower that the ball on the straight track.  Siphon off any of that higher velocity and what happens at the end of the track?  Either the ball will not have enough velocity left to reach the end of the track or it will reach it with less velocity than the ball on the straight track (even if it might still get there faster).

So the extra "Zip" must assist with the rotation of a wheel but not impart any energy to it somehow as far as I see it.  This would seem impossible, or at least counter-intuitive (as John Collins might say).  So it is something at least to contemplate, I'll give you that!
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: ramset on February 26, 2010, 05:13:12 PM
M
perhaps a faster "arrival time" will make a difference in some part of the the wheel?

Chet
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: mondrasek on February 26, 2010, 05:18:21 PM
perhaps a faster "arrival time" will make a difference in some part of the the wheel?
Chet,

That is the part worth contemplating!

M.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on February 26, 2010, 05:41:17 PM
Chet,

That is the part worth contemplating!

M.

Very much so.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on February 26, 2010, 05:44:11 PM
@mondrasek,

Quote
But at the end of the tracks, both balls are at the same height again.  How did the ball on the longer track get back to this height?  It had to go back UP at some point(s) along the track.  At each point it was going up it was slowing down.

It never slowed down to such an extent as to arrive at the same moment as the other ball. Its overall velocity is obviously greater and that's what matters.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on February 26, 2010, 05:48:30 PM
@mondrasek,

Quote
And the ball gets to the end faster, but with the same exact final velocity as track #1.

That also isn't obvious, not that it matters. The ball on track #2 has had greater overall kinetic energy than the ball on track #1, obviously.

It's not about tapping into it. @Fletcher has to recognize first the obvious fact that one of the balls has greater overall kinetic energy than the other despite the fact that their initial gravitational potential energy is identical. Tapping into this difference is a separate discussion.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Robotan on February 26, 2010, 06:03:11 PM
@Omnibus

As far as I can see, friction is an important part of the equation. Static friction is greater than dynamic friction. The ball on the straight, slightly inclined, path experiences almost only static friction as it only rolls. The ball on the other track however, experiences much more free-fall, and thus more dynamic friction. Now to the key part:

Depending on what kind of friction the balls experience, they will begin to rotate. Thus the total energy of a ball at the end of a track will consist of its rotational kinetic energy + its movement kinetic energy.

The ball on the straight path gets more of the potential energy put into its rotation. The ball on the other track will not rotate as much, and will thus "move" faster.

At the end of the day, both balls "contains" exactly the same amount of energy. It is merely divided between rotational+movement.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: mondrasek on February 26, 2010, 06:07:13 PM
That also isn't obvious, not that it matters. The ball on track #2 has had greater overall kinetic energy than the ball on track #1, obviously.

@Omni, no it is not obvious that both balls have the same velocity at the end of their respective tracks.  But it is, in fact, the case.  At least when I performed these experiments as required for college freshman physics labs.  The KE at the end of the tracks is exactly the same.  At certain locations along the path, one ball may have more KE than the other, but this is because it is also lower.

It's not about tapping into it. @Fletcher has to recognize first the obvious fact that one of the balls has greater overall kinetic energy than the other despite the fact that their initial gravitational potential energy is identical. Tapping into this difference is a separate discussion.

The only time the ball on the longer track has greater velocity (KE) than the ball on the straight track (at same horizontal distance from the start) is when it is LOWER than the ball on the straight track.  So it has converted MORE PE into KE at that location. 

The balls start with the same PE.  The ball on the longer track drops lower faster and so converts MORE of the available PE to KE sooner. 

At the end of the tracks, both balls have converted the same amount of PE to KE, albeit over different lengths of time.  Their velocities at the end are the same.

So the only thing we have is a greater average and instantaneous velocities (KE) on the longer track.  But at no time was a reservoir of PE converted to more KE than expected.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on February 26, 2010, 06:26:19 PM
@mondrasek,

There's no doubt that one of the balls has more overall kinetic energy than the other although they start with the same potential energy, correct? There is no doubt therefore that one of the balls has extra kinetic energy if the entire trip is considered. If that extra kinetic energy isn't showing at the end of the trip then it has to have been converted into something else along the way. The fact remains, however, that the ball with the extra kinetic energy arrives sooner than the other ball. Therefore, it hasn't been converted into any other form of energy (hasn't been lost) but is indeed used to bring the ball sooner at the end point even though, in addition, the path is longer. Thus, either your freshman physics experiment has to be re-done more carefully or there is an explanation other than the ball being lower when having higher KE--if the increase in KE were only because the ball gets lower then it would've been exactly compensated when the ball gets back higher and we won't see it arriving earlier than the other ball at the end point.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on February 26, 2010, 06:47:31 PM
@mondrasek,

Quote
But at no time was a reservoir of PE converted to more KE than expected.

To understand that the above statement is incorrect consider the entire journey. Don't focus on the instantaneous velocity. If you do that you'll understand that the video shows exactly the opposite to what you're stating, namely, an initial reservoir of PE is converted to more KE in one of the balls compared to the other. Indeed, although the physical path one of the balls actually travels along is longer the physical time for reaching the end point is shorter. Distance over time is nothing else but velocity and that means that the overall velocity of two balls of identical mass has been different. Two balls of identical mass having different velocity have different KE--same amount of PE has been converted to two different amounts of KE which is contrary to what you're stating. 
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: mondrasek on February 26, 2010, 06:55:35 PM
There's no doubt that one of the balls has more overall kinetic energy than the other although they start with the same potential energy, correct?

One ball can have more KE at any point along the path, but not at the end.  This has been proved experimentally ad nosium.

For example, have the long track begin as a straight slope that drops the entire height difference at half the horizontal length.  It would then run out straight and level the second half of the horizontal length.  A ball rolling down this ramp would gain the entire PE to KE conversion in half the horizontal travel, and be moving faster than the ball on the "short" track at that location.  But it would not gain anymore velocity on the second half of it's level track.  It would get to the end of it's track quicker.  But the ball on the short track would continue accelerating until it reached the end of it's track.  It would be in second place, but when it got to the end, it would have the same exact velocity/KE as the first ball.

This is the whole concept behind the definition of a "Conservative Field of Force".  Easily demonstrated.  If the video experiments did not end with the balls being caught in a basket, but instead allowed them to drop a short distance (or go up a ramp), you could see that both balls travel the same distance horizontally before hitting the ground (or up the ramp).  If you disagree, I recommend you try the experiment.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on February 26, 2010, 07:02:41 PM
@mondrasek,

Before going further you have to agree with the obvious fact that the overall kinetic energy of one of the balls is greater than the kinetic energy of the other ball. Never mind the KE at the end point. We'll discuss that later. First agree that the obvious is indeed obvious.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: mondrasek on February 26, 2010, 07:32:13 PM
@mondrasek,

Before going further you have to agree with the obvious fact that the overall kinetic energy of one of the balls is greater than the kinetic energy of the other ball. Never mind the KE at the end point. We'll discuss that later. First agree that the obvious is indeed obvious.

Sure, when you agree that when this is the case, the ball with the greater overall kinetic energy has moved vertically lower than the other ball by a distance that accounts for that increase in KE.  Please agree to this obvious fact.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on February 26, 2010, 07:43:47 PM
@mondrasek,

That's not the obvious fact that I ask you to agree with. You talk about part of the distance traveled while what is to be considered is the entire distance traveled. Therefore, you have to agree first with the obvious fact that the entire distance has been traversed by the first ball for a shorter time than the time which the second ball needs to traverse its entire, shorter distance.

In other words, you have to agree first that, considering the entire distance traveled, the first ball has higher velocity, that is, has greater KE than the second ball, despite the fact that both ball have the same PE to begin with.

Do you see, you can't escape acknowledging the above obvious fact, no matter how you try to finagle?
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: fletcher on February 26, 2010, 07:56:14 PM
Einstein made a quip about you should be able to explain physics to a bar maid - I guess he never had a pint poured by omnibus.

Keep going mondrasek until he realizes why getting there any quicker without a higher final velocity is of no practical use in a wheel.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on February 26, 2010, 08:13:02 PM
Einstein made a quip about you should be able to explain physics to a bar made - I guess he never had a pint poured by omnibus.

Keep going mondrasek until he realizes why getting there any quicker without a higher final velocity is of no practical use in a wheel.

Before giving irrelevant quotes and talking about practical use which is not the subject of discussion here you should understand first what kinetic energy really means. All your problems stem from misunderstanding of that simple concept.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: mondrasek on February 26, 2010, 08:30:29 PM
@mondrasek,

That's not the obvious fact that I ask you to agree with. You talk about part of the distance traveled while what is to be considered is the entire distance traveled. Therefore, you have to agree first with the obvious fact that the entire distance has been traversed by the first ball for a shorter time than the time which the second ball needs to traverse its entire, shorter distance.

In other words, you have to agree first that, considering the entire distance traveled, the first ball has higher velocity, that is, has greater KE than the second ball, despite the fact that both ball have the same PE to begin with.

Do you see, you can't escape acknowledging the above obvious fact, no matter how you try to finagle?

Omnibus, what you are stating is a partial truth, that results in a false conclusion.

1)  It can be true that, "the entire distance has been traversed by the first ball for a shorter time than the time which the second ball needs to traverse its entire, shorter distance."

2)  It is partially true that, "the first ball has higher velocity, that is, has greater KE than the second ball".  But this is only the case at a point along the horizontal travel where the ball on the first track is now LOWER than the ball on the second track.  Without adding this additional information, I cannot agree to your statement, because it does not completely describe all the necessary conditions for the case you are trying to make.

3)  It is absolutely not true that, "In other words, you have to agree first that, considering the entire distance traveled, the first ball has higher velocity, that is, has greater KE than the second ball, despite the fact that both ball have the same PE to begin with."  That is a conclusion drawn only from cherry picked facts. 

The only point that can be compared using the PE at the beginning, is the KE at the end.  Any point along the track where one ball is allowed to drop LOWER than the other allows for an increase in KE ONLY at that point.  It is also an obvious case where the ball on the lower track has converted more PE into KE sooner.  Your failure to agree that this information is relevant to any conclusion drawn is unfortunate, because it neglects the obvious case where the ball on the lower track must rise up a hill and thus slow down, or the case where the ball on the upper track continues to accelerate until reaching the same speed as that of the lower ball which does not continue to accelerate.  And those two cases are exactly what DOES occur in every possible configuration for the lower track.

The independence of KE gained due to a change in height of a mass relative to the path it travels between the start and end is well understood and supported by simple experiments.  Why don't you try one?  Your attempts at logically disproving these facts are pointless.  The nature of a "Conservative Field of Force" is not disproved by these experiments.  Maybe you can find one that does instead.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: fletcher on February 26, 2010, 09:56:13 PM
Kinetic Energy is energy of motion omnibus - Potential Energy is energy of position.

I think you're short of a chromosome if you can't grasp this & its implications.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on February 26, 2010, 10:02:08 PM
Kinetic Energy is energy of motion omnibus - Potential Energy is energy of position.

I think you're short of a chromosome if you can't grasp this & its implications.

I wish you really understand what you've written. Read your own definition of kinetic energy once again. Do you see in it anything about collision, transfer, turning into work etc. etc., that is, all the crap you were foisting in your previous postings as part of the definition of energy? Learn physics foundations before engaging in discussions such as this one.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: fletcher on February 26, 2010, 10:24:30 PM
Good luck in your very own special alternate reality omnibus - in my reality Ke is a 'slice in time' energy of motion - it can not be accumulated however it can be stored in a flywheel for example as Pe, after losses - if you think it can be accumulated over distance then do some experiments to prove it - while you're at it why don't you show how momentum can be an energy source as well since your theory & the view that momentum can also be accumulated ties in closely.

Keep taking those meds & stay away from chocolate.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on February 26, 2010, 10:26:04 PM
@mondrasek,

Someone deleted my reply to you asking you to immediately correct point 2) and 3). Velocity is physically traveled distance (the entire distance from the beginning to to the end of the journey) over the physical time that distance is traveled for. You must not ignore that elementary definition of velocity when attempting to give arguments. Ignoring basic definitions such as this and inventing your own is nothing but finagling. @Fletcher does the same thing, proposing Fletcherphysics where kinetic energy also involves usefulness, collisions, transfer and what not instead of physics where kinetic energy is simply a quantity function of mass and velocity.

Here's mondrasekphysics:

Quote
The only point that can be compared using the PE at the beginning, is the KE at the end.

That weird kind of physics is obviously incorrect because the initial PE isn't only responsible for the KE at the end but is also responsible for the traversing of the entire distance form the beginning to the end. That is so obvious that need not even be commented.

PE being responsible for the travel of one ball from the beginning to the end of a track of 10m for 5s makes it responsible for that ball having velocity = 10m/5s. Same PE however is responsible for the travel of another ball from the beginning to the end of a track of 7m for 8s, say, and therefore makes it responsible for that ball having velocity = 7m/8s.

Thus, same PE is responsible for two balls of mass m to have two different velocities when traveling from the same beginning to the same end. However, two balls of equal masses traveling from the same beginning to the same end with different velocities have different kinetic energies. Therefore the same PE gives rise to two different kinetic energies.

Like I said, finagling, as you're attempting, won't cut the mustard. Try to be logical and stick to what physics definitions are not the definitions of mondrasekphysics.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on February 26, 2010, 10:30:12 PM
Good luck in your very own special alternate reality omnibus - in my reality Ke is a 'slice in time' energy of motion - it can not be accumulated however it can be stored in a flywheel for example as Pe, after losses - if you think it can be accumulated over distance then do some experiments to prove it - while you're at it why don't you show how momentum can be an energy source as well since your theory & the view that momentum can also be accumulated ties in closely.

Keep taking those meds & stay away from chocolate.

Not at all. KE cannot be accumulated and I never said it could. Your understanding of kinetic energy is wrong and, as I said, that's the basis for your overall confusion about the discussion at hand. Read again what I told you about the definition of kinetic energy, try to understand it and don't invent your own. It makes no sense to repeat what I already told you.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: fletcher on February 26, 2010, 10:49:30 PM
*smile followed by a long yawn*
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: mondrasek on February 26, 2010, 10:51:12 PM
PE being responsible for the travel of one ball from the beginning to the end of a track of 10m for 5s makes it responsible for that ball having velocity = 10m/5s. Same PE however is responsible for the travel of another ball from the beginning to the end of a track of 7m for 8s, say, and therefore makes it responsible for that ball having velocity = 7m/8s.

I'll correct this for you:

PE being responsible for the travel of one ball from the beginning to the end of a track of 10m for 5s makes it responsible for that ball having AVERAGE velocity = 10m/5s. Same PE however is responsible for the travel of another ball from the beginning to the end of a track of 7m for 8s, say, and therefore makes it responsible for that ball having AVERAGE velocity = 7m/8s.

And here is a gross example to show how that average velocity is meanignless with respect to the KE of the balls at the end of the tracks.

I will make my long track very, very long.  It will drop one hundred meters, but then come back up to end at only the same relatively small drop of the short straight track.  So my ball on that track will accelerate to velocities/KE of incredible magnitudes on the drop as compared to that of the ball on the short track.  But who cares?  It will lose the vast majority of that velocity/KE as it rises back up to the final end height.  Now it might get to the end before or after the ball on the short straight track does.  But, again, who cares?  At the end, it is going the exact same speed and has the exact same KE as the ball that simply rolled down the short straight track.  So those average velocities you have in your example are, in effect, meaningless as far as showing any relationship with the KE gained by the balls while traveling the whole distance.

The PE available at the beginning is the difference of only the height at the beginning and the height at the end of the tracks.

You say the ball on my long track gained the super fast speeds at the bottom of the 100 meter drop due to that initial PE?  No.  It gained it from the PE of a 100 meter drop.  That 100 meter PE is NOT the same as the PE due to the difference in the height of the start and end of the tracks.  That 100 meter PE is being confused by Omniphysics.  No finagling needed.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on February 26, 2010, 10:52:52 PM
*smile followed by a long yawn*

Instead of yawning try to learn something.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: fletcher on February 26, 2010, 11:07:17 PM
Not from you, LOL.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on February 26, 2010, 11:24:05 PM
@mondrasek,

In your example you're repeating the same confusion seen in your earlier posts. Besides, you're putting in my mouth your own ideas calling them omniphysics. That's preposterous.

What you don't understand is that a person versed in physics, as opposed to mondrasekphysics, does care what the length of the path traveled from the beginning to the end is and what the time that path had been traveled for. As a matter of fact that's exactly what a person versed in physics would care about when he or she needs to know what the velocity of that ball traversing the entire path had been. You don't care, but you're living in the world of mondrasekphysics and that's not something under consideration in this discussion. 

Only the final velocity by no means characterizes the velocity of the ball when traveling along the path from the beginning to the end. That's what you don't understand. The ball doesn't somehow find itself suddenly at the end of the path without passing along the entire length of that path. If you understand that simple thing you would know that arriving sooner along a longer path means higher velocity which equivalently means greater kinetic energy. In your mondrasekphysics you want to forget that. It makes you uncomfortable because you can't explain it and you pretend it never existed, you pretend the ball never traveled along the entire path but somehow suddenly appeared at the end with a velocity. Until you somehow convince yourself that's wrong any further discussion with you is senseless.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Cloxxki on February 27, 2010, 12:39:45 AM
I think I must disagree with all the above.
IMO, PE st the start is NOT nomimal height (sea level, center of earth, whatever), but the height above the bottom most part of the track. At the bottom most part, all this PE has been converted into KE. The incline will be zero in this place.
Should the (long) track continue after this point of minimal height and maximum KE, then KE is being exchanged for PE. This PE is worth nothing if the journey ends there, but should there be a bump at the end of the long track, the PE would again be converted into KE going back down.
Yes, at the end of the tracks, being the same vertical height under the respective start positions, KE for each track will be the same.

Horizontal displacement has always fascinated me. It's what our lives are all about. We want to go places. We fill up our cars with $$$ gas, all to travel HORIZONTALLY. A very small amount of our traveling is vertical. When we get serious about vertical, we use elevators or ski lifts. Even commercial airplanes, are all about horizontal displacement.
YET, Horizontal DISPLACEMENT is FOR FREE. Efficiency/speed of FREE horizontal travel are set only by our engineering level (think bobsleigh) and, essentially, GRAVITY.
We roll down a ramp, gravity gets a hold. We travel the flat section at speed, and take back the PE by rolling up a ramp, accepting to give back that speed. We made a travel, got where we wanted to go, expended ZERO JOULES of useful work along our frictionless track, and travelled hundreds of miles per hour.

Now, what can we possibly do with horizontal displacement that we have to spare?

The only thing I've been able to come up with, is making it from 4/6:00 to 12:00 faster than it took to get from 12 to 6. We start with the same KE again at 12:00, but do so when the counterweight is still busy doing work. Now 2 weights are exchanging PE for KE. KE is higher. Yet, average weight height, I must now face, is ALSO lower.
I'd love someone to put this principle in WM2D. I lack the skills.
I would expect it to, if at all, work only at higher turning speeds, hence perhaps Abeling's low-friction material quests.

Could horizontal displacement offer a preferential leverage on the wheel, or the other weight, someway? Could it give a JERK, changing it's KE vector while not reducing it?

Regards,
J
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Low-Q on February 27, 2010, 01:41:19 AM
I think that the change of direction in the curved slope is itself a swap between kinetic and potential energy. If the curved slope was going vertical for 90% of the hight, then takes a sudden change into horizontal plain via a small radius turn near the bottom, the ball have already used its potential energy down there, because a moving object in the horizontal plane does not consume, or gain energy (if we do not consider friction) because it has no potential energy left to convert into kinetic energy - no more acceleration. So the kinetic energy will be the same for both balls at the end of the track, but also in average over the total distance because the ball in the horizontal plane do not accelerate anymore.

In a perfect world, imagine a top fuel dragster and a Fiat Uno at the same weight. Say that both shall accelerate from zero to 100km/h. The top fuel dragster will use shorter time from 0 to 100, than the Fiat Uno, and will also cross the finish line much earlier. But nevertheless, both have consumed the same energy to gain that speed. As the top fuel dragster have used 1 second to 100km/h it does not longer require energy to maintain that speed. The Fiat Uno is still accelerating and still gaining kinetic energy. The net energy spent in both cases are equal (said that both cars have 100km/h over the finish line), so (in my head) it is impossible for the dragster to have more average kinetic energy than the Fiat Uno during the whole track. Because: The total kinetic energy is also lasting shorter for the dragster, but it is in average faster. The total kinetic energy in the Fiat Uno is lasting longer, but is in average slower. Both time and average velocity must be taken into consideration - and If my head is good, I would say these factors cancels eachother out into an equal average kinetic energy.

I still have no correct answer or correct explanation to the subject, only thoughts and ideas.

Vidar
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: mscoffman on February 27, 2010, 01:48:15 AM
Just wanted to mention; I suspect that two solid ball bearings would
have much less noticable velocity difference then two hollow metal
spheres...How the object mass is allocated within the object's rotational
radius probably makes a difference in outcomes. The ball bearing has
much more "momentum" to lift and much less rotational mometum energy
stored with which to do it.

Physics really needs to be discussed in terms of differential equations. :)

:S:MarkSCoffman
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: onthecuttingedge2005 on February 27, 2010, 01:54:30 AM
I think that the change of direction in the curved slope is itself a swap between kinetic and potential energy. If the curved slope was going vertical for 90% of the hight, then takes a sudden change into horizontal plain via a small radius turn near the bottom, the ball have already used its potential energy down there, because a moving object in the horizontal plane does not consume, or gain energy (if we do not consider friction) because it has no potential energy left to convert into kinetic energy - no more acceleration. So the kinetic energy will be the same for both balls at the end of the track, but also in average over the total distance because the ball in the horizontal plane do not accelerate anymore.

In a perfect world, imagine a top fuel dragster and a Fiat Uno at the same weight. Say that both shall accelerate from zero to 100km/h. The top fuel dragster will use shorter time from 0 to 100, than the Fiat Uno, and will also cross the finish line much earlier. But nevertheless, both have consumed the same energy to gain that speed. As the top fuel dragster have used 1 second to 100km/h it does not longer require energy to maintain that speed. The Fiat Uno is still accelerating and still gaining kinetic energy. The net energy spent in both cases are equal (said that both cars have 100km/h over the finish line), so (in my head) it is impossible for the dragster to have more average kinetic energy than the Fiat Uno during the whole track. Because: The total kinetic energy is also lasting shorter for the dragster, but it is in average faster. The total kinetic energy in the Fiat Uno is lasting longer, but is in average slower. Both time and average velocity must be taken into consideration - and If my head is good, I would say these factors cancels eachother out into an equal average kinetic energy.

I still have no correct answer or correct explanation to the subject, only thoughts and ideas.

Vidar

Very true, all kinetic energy will decelerate because of the path of resistance, if you have a path with no resistance then it will store that kinetic energy until used up. if constant kinetic energy is not applied then the Kinetic energy will dissipate naturally, just like a bullet that loses kinetic energy to all the forces working against it in flight.

this tells me that Kinetic forms of energy are not the key answer because kinetic energy is only stored energy.

you need direct and constant energy not stored energy. use stored energy when it is in overload.

it is the same with all particles and or even a virtual particles, they always want to decelerate until they come to rest unless the path has no resistance and even then it is only stored until used.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Cloxxki on February 27, 2010, 11:33:03 AM
Perhaps this mental picture will help some of you.

A ball rolling frictionless along a horizontal path, is little different from a satellite in orbit. Distance from the souce of attraction (or target of repulsion, depending on aether/gravity theory in hand) is a constant. As said, when not acceleration occurs, KE is being stored until exchanged to do work of gain/lose height. KE is more like a state, than an energy level. It certianly is not an output of any kind.
Scientifically, nothing interesting happens. All very well documented I'm sure.
Technologically, this is 100% unused on earth. In orbit, our satellites have no forms of friction to come up with, to pick a fight with.
On earth, we barely use KE in traffic. Most go from pedal-to-the-metal to "foot on brake" without real KE phase. We are maximizing the work done for the distance we travel, where the opposite is wanted.

If we can't find a use for horizontal displacement on a wheel, would Abeling somehow have found a way to harvest centrifugal forces? A horizontal component could certainly be made available, the above pages make that apparent. How to extract it without KE loss, though...
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Low-Q on February 27, 2010, 07:47:41 PM
  Cloxxki,
 There might be a way to use KE froma horizontally moving object without changing it's m*v.
 It's technical and relies a little on math to understand the A.


                                                                              Jim
Sorry for answering your post to Cloxxki with a question, but I have to :)

How can you harvest energy from a horizontally moving mass without reducing its velocity? (or did I completely lost your point?)

Vidar
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Cloxxki on February 28, 2010, 02:31:01 PM
Sorry for answering your post to Cloxxki with a question, but I have to :)

How can you harvest energy from a horizontally moving mass without reducing its velocity? (or did I completely lost your point?)

Vidar
The easy (lame) answer would be : by increasing the mass.

If we could really do some work of any kind that is greater with more horizontal displacement, I'd be building OU devices like Mozart wrote symphonies.

In hundreds or even thousands gravity wheels, horizontal offset is used to enhance torque of the weight on the axle. Meant to establish overbalance, bring us a self-running. So far, it has not worked out this way. Torque goes at the cost of speed. Place a weight a mile out from the axle. The torque will be biblical, yet the angular moment will be 1/biblical.
If someone can solve the equasion we're all hoping is there for us to be solved, OU will be as real as daily sunrise.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Low-Q on March 01, 2010, 08:30:20 PM
  Hi Vidar,
 A mass following a llinear path has momentum. This gives the mass a value greater than m*v.
If the kinetic energy of the momentum can be converted, then overunity might be possible.
 One problem with a masss moving in a straight line, sooner or later it will have to stop or change directions.


                                                                                      Jim
Yes, but what hand did place the potential energy in that mass in the first place.

Vidar
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: petersone on March 02, 2010, 01:12:02 AM
Hi All
As I understand it,the shorter the time anything goes from A to B,the more energy it consumes,as both balls start with the same energy,how come the "valley" ball gets to the end before the "straight" ball? I wonder if the balls are identical,I don't think they were shown changed around.
peter
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Cloxxki on March 02, 2010, 08:01:13 AM
Hi All
As I understand it,the shorter the time anything goes from A to B,the more energy it consumes,as both balls start with the same energy,how come the "valley" ball gets to the end before the "straight" ball? I wonder if the balls are identical,I don't think they were shown changed around.
peter
Peter, it's about which ball gets up to speed first (allowed to swap height for speed). The ball that started down a steeper track before going level, will head into the level part with greater speed, and thus easily makes up the lost horizontal time. As nothing is slowing it down, the hor. advantage can be extended, depending on the length of the track.

If there's a really wide valley between 2 mountain peaks of identical height, fastest rail track would not be horizontal, would not follow the mountain faces, but follow the mountain faces and go deep underground for the valley section. More time is made up by going fast for long, than it takes to cover the extra meters of steep track.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: fletcher on March 02, 2010, 08:31:22 PM
Another metaphor to help visualize what happens for those that might care - many would have watched the winter Olympics just finished - there were parallel slalom racing for snowboarders & skiers - two contestants raced twice, swapping left & right downhill tracks & the fastest combined time won the heat.

Commentators often commented that one track was faster than the other - but how many who watched thought about why that would be so ? - all else being equal i.e. windage factor, body mass, snow conditions etc then the track with the most steep parts was the faster track - i.e. more steeper bits & more flat glides translates to arriving at the finish line in less time - they didn't arrive with a faster velocity, just got there quicker [average velocity] - same as the brachistochrome experiments showed.

An additional bit of information as an aside - heavier skiers also tend to get down a track quicker, if it doesn't have sharp turns for example - this is on the same track - the reason in this case is that the gravity force is pulling the skiers downhill - all mass accelerates at the same rate regardless of that mass - but there are losses or forces opposing the acceleration of gravity - these are frictional losses, one of the largest being air drag - a more massive skier accelerates the same as a lighter one but reaches a faster terminal velocity because the percentage of windage losses is less compared to the lighter skier - that's why they wear skin suits to reduce windage & maximise net acceleration - of course this advantage is often engineered out to even the playing field by having lots of sharp turns because more massive skiers have more inertia & have to dig their edges in harder to get around a tight turn which slows them down - lighter skiers don't have the same top velocity but can manoeuvre faster so their average speed is just as fast on a well designed slalom & that makes the contest as fair as possible.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on March 02, 2010, 08:38:12 PM
@fletcher,

Your last text again doesn't help in explaining as to why two balls with equal gravitational potential energy clearly convert it into two different amounts of kinetic energy thus apparently violating the second, "transformation", part of CoE (violation of the first, "conservation", part has already been proven definitively earlier). Just giving examples with slaloms and reconfirming that transformation of a given amount of potential energy into other kinds of energy is construction dependent isn't addressing the main issue.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: fletcher on March 02, 2010, 09:35:26 PM
@fletcher,

Your last text again doesn't help in explaining as to why two balls with equal gravitational potential energy clearly convert it into two different amounts of kinetic energy thus apparently violating the second, "transformation", part of CoE (violation of the first, "conservation", part has already been proven definitively earlier).

Just giving examples with slaloms and reconfirming that transformation of a given amount of potential energy into other kinds of energy is construction dependent isn't addressing the main issue.

But they don't omnibus - at any same height when two identical balls are compared they have the same velocity i.e. kinetic energy [translational & rotational], regardless of the path they follow which only dictates how long they took to get down to that height or datum.

I would suggest that the work-energy equivalence theorem might have some part to play in answering your question - so to compare the relative energies of the two balls you need to treat them as discrete 'snap shots' like a video frame by frame, IMO - then you do the sums & calculate the Pe & the Ke in that frame or instant - like static analysis.

I would ask you a question - can you intergrate the area under the curve [curve representing the path taken] & if not, why not ? - if so, what conclusions can you draw from that ?
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on March 02, 2010, 09:57:16 PM
@fletcher,

Quote
But they don't omnibus - at any same height when two identical balls are compared they have the same velocity i.e. kinetic energy [translational & rotational], regardless of the path they follow which only dictates how long they took to get down to that height or datum.

But they obviously don't have the same velocity because not only one of them travels along a longer path but also gets sooner at the end point. Havening different velocities (their mass being thew same) means that the two balls have different kinetic energies despite having the same initial potential energy. To avoid repeating your confusion, recall, kinetic energy is only a function of mass and velocity and has nothing to do with collision, transfer or whatever else you seem to think it might be connected to.

Quote
I would suggest that the work-energy equivalence theorem might have some part to play in answering your question - so to compare the relative energies of the two balls you need to treat them as discrete 'snap shots' like a video frame by frame, IMO - then you do the sums & calculate the Pe & the Ke in that frame or instant - like static analysis.

Not at all. The comparison must be made between the entire quantities of KE the two balls are obviously displaying and the entire initial PE these two balls obviously have. Also, again, no theorem can obliterate what physics understands under kinetic energy--once again, kinetic energy of a body is only a function of m and v and of nothing else.

Quote
I would ask you a question - can you intergrate the area under the curve [curve representing the path taken] & if not, why not ? - if so, what conclusions can you draw from that ?

You sure can and the integration is the product of the force on the ball and the displacement. That integration will give you work which will be different for the two balls that have started at the same potential energy--clear violation of CoE.

Don't know yet how the above violation of CoE can be used in engineering terms to create a self-sustaining device but the violations itself is clearly there.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: mondrasek on March 02, 2010, 10:25:04 PM
Maybe this can help:

The PE of the entire track is related to the height difference of the beginning and end of the track, shown as PEe.  The only KE that can be related to this PEe is the KE at the end.

The ball shown on the long track will be traveling faster at the point shown.  But that velocity/KE is not the result of PEe.  It is the result of the PEb, the height difference of the beginning and it's current position on the track.

Likewise, the ball shown on the short, straight track will be traveling slower at the point shown.  Again, that velocity/KE is not the result of PEe.  It is the result of the PEa, the height difference of the beginning and it's current position on the track.

At any horizontal point of travel where the ball on one track is moving faster than the other, it is also lower.  It has converted more PE to KE.  But only at the end can you relate the KE at that point to the PE (PEe) at that point.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: fletcher on March 02, 2010, 11:11:36 PM
Work Done = force x distance, measured in Nm's [Joules]

Force = mass x acceleration [a force pushes or pulls something - without mass you wouldn't know a filed of acceleration exhisted because it couldn't interact] - acceleration introduces the time element which is helpful for working out the rate of change or power.

Energy is the capacity to do work also measured in Nm's [Joules] - mechanical energy we might be interested in is either potential energy [i.e. stored or energy of position] or kinetic energy [i.e. energy of motion] - they are in the same units as Work Done therefore are interchangeable [both are a measure of capacity to do work] - Ke is of real interest to us because when applied to a mass it moves it or deforms it & this gives us the objects capacity to perform mechanical work i.e. force x distance i.e. a physical exchange.

You are welcome to explore ways to capture any of that abundance of surplus Ke that you see omnibus & use it to create OU - knock yourself out !
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on March 02, 2010, 11:15:44 PM
@mondrasek,

You already said this and I told you it is incorrect:

Quote
The only KE that can be related to this PEe is the KE at the end.

It is incorrect because in such understanding you are ignoring the physical fact that the ball travels along the entire distance and isn't just appearing suddenly at the end of the track.

Thus, when all said and done, the travel of any of the two balls is only due to the PEe. As I said more than once, the entire travel from the beginning to the end has to be had in mind in this analysis and not only some partial observations which fit this or that preconceived notion.

Thus, the fact remains--the same PEe, corresponding to the entire journey of each one of the balls, transforms into two different kinetic energies, depending on the path taken. That's a clear violation of the "transformation" aspect of CoE.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on March 02, 2010, 11:18:12 PM
@fletcher,

Exploring the observed kinetic energy is beside the point. First, you have to acknowledge that the same potential energy gives rise to two different kinetic energies, depending on the construction of the device.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on March 02, 2010, 11:20:18 PM
Also, it is misleading to keep posting that figure because it is obvious from the experiment that the velocities of the two balls differ, unlike what you're trying to foist on the reader.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: fletcher on March 03, 2010, 12:17:21 AM
One of us needs to do some research omnibus - hmmm, you just came across this recently didn't you !

Some of us did this experiment at school but perhaps didn't realise the full implications way back then, then again maybe they did - what I did know was that I could use the same ball mass on different tracks & measure their impacts against a spring etc - that was the days before video camera's were commonplace - hmmm, perhaps you could try it & report back ?!


Quote from: omnibus
Also, it is misleading to keep posting that figure because it is obvious from the experiment that the velocities of the two balls differ, unlike what you're trying to foist on the reader.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on March 03, 2010, 12:43:56 AM
One of us needs to do some research omnibus - hmmm, you just came across this recently didn't you !

How about you? You can't understand to this moment that the velocities of the two balls differ despite the fact that the videos (the research) clearly demonstrate that fact. Amazing isn't it?

Think physics. Never mind variational calculus and never mind how recent that new fact is for you.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on March 03, 2010, 12:50:31 AM
Quote
Some of us did this experiment at school but perhaps didn't realise the full implications way back then, then again maybe they did - what I did know was that I could use the same ball mass on different tracks & measure their impacts against a spring etc - that was the days before video camera's were commonplace - hmmm, perhaps you could try it & report back ?!

You did that experiment at school and you thought you realized its full implication way back then but, as seen, you were wrong. That isn't just a variational problem, as you were made to believe. There are physical implications to this experiment which you obviously missed and now are unwilling to accept.

And, again, impact has no place in this discussion. Kinetic energy is only a function of m and v and impact, practicality, transfer and what not don't pertain to it. That may be news to you but that's how physics correctly treats kinetic energy.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: fletcher on March 03, 2010, 12:51:39 AM
Strange wasn't it ? - all those interesting video's on U-tube & no one bothered to comment on what they were observing with a commentary - you could put that right omnibus with your own video - remember to measure the kinetic energy [ahem, I mean velocity] across the finish line - maybe just run the ball up an incline & see how high it gets.

Then you can 'foister away' with authority.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on March 03, 2010, 12:58:24 AM
Strange wasn't it ? - all those interesting video's on U-tube & no one bothered to comment on what they were observing with a commentary - you could put that right omnibus with your own video - remember to measure the kinetic energy [ahem, I mean velocity] across the finish line - maybe just run the ball up an incline & see how high it gets.

Then you can 'foister away' with authority.

Not across the finish line. Try to understand that. Velocity of the two balls differs because one of them travels longer distance for a shorter time. Again, observe the entire physical path of the balls, not just the finish line.

Also, the fact that no one but Omnibus has noticed so far the physical implications of that well known variational problem is no argument against the fact that physically it is a clear demonstration of CoE violation (of its "transformation" aspect).
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: fletcher on March 03, 2010, 02:11:05 AM
Not across the finish line. Try to understand that. Velocity of the two balls differs because one of them travels longer distance for a shorter time. Again, observe the entire physical path of the balls, not just the finish line.

Also, the fact that no one but Omnibus has noticed so far the physical implications of that well known variational problem is no argument against the fact that physically it is a clear demonstration of CoE violation (of its "transformation" aspect).

Congratulations on two counts - first proving that a ball rolling down an initial steep track accelerates up to speed quicker than one rolling down a flatter initial incline - that's because if you use vector analysis & plot the x & y coordinates & resultant forces you find that the track inclination is less of a net impediment to the balls rate of acceleration, resulting in .. dadaa - higher average velocity - secondly, for referring to yourself in the third person   ;D

I guess I won't wait for your video - I will await with interest your math paper describing this insight - I don't think myth busters will be interested - just not enough mass street appeal to hold an audience for long [ratings you know], though I'm sure Jamie & Adam would whip up a couple of wire tracks with bolling balls in less than an hour.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on March 03, 2010, 02:17:02 AM
You're saying nothing new, so nothing to congratulate me for. The problem, again, is that you can't understand the physical implications of what you're describing. That's not a small problem, as you may think. Ignoring violation of CoE, especially when it is pointed out to you in no uncertain terms, is a big problem of yours and you have to deal with it somehow (hint: don't await math papers to describe inherently physical problems).
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: fletcher on March 03, 2010, 04:10:45 AM
Well, I guess by now there must be plenty of people astounded by the fact that a ball can roll down a slope & arrive with the same velocity as an identical ball on a completely different shaped track - and that the ball that took the longer track got there quicker with an average velocity that was higher than the shortest direct route from A to B - of course that scenario doesn't apply to balls taking the longer track above the shortest route from A to B so it wasn't the track distance that was important - must have been its initial steepness.

No matter, what you're proposing has no practical application anyway because that's not how energy is accounted for to do work.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on March 03, 2010, 04:31:16 AM
Again, what many people are astounded by now is not the claimed equal velocity at the end point by the two balls on different tracks. What many people are really astounded by, and you try to run away from it, is the fact that one of the balls arrives sooner at the finish along the longer track despite the fact that both balls start with identical potential energies. That's the astounding fact, repeated over and over again. That's a clear violation of the "transformation" aspect of CoE. That's the shocking part never mind its practical implications. Practicality is never a criterion to judge for or against the validity of a scientific fact.

And, don't repeat that accounting of energy to do work. That has nothing to do with the principle of conservation of energy. Of energy, mind you.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: fletcher on March 03, 2010, 06:35:44 AM
Good luck with your epiphany omnibus - now practically apply it.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: fletcher on March 03, 2010, 06:49:05 PM
Good luck with your epiphany omnibus - now practically apply it.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Cloxxki on March 03, 2010, 07:35:33 PM
Omnibus, you are confusing this thread. Misinformation agents are paid very well to do less.

Average velocity says nothing about terminal velocity, and thus not over energy out vs in.

Take 2 U-formed train tracks. Steep down first, then flat, then steep up. Friction is zero. I will tell you that the wide u brings a higher averga velocity. Terminal velocity at lowest most point, is however identical. End velocity at the ends up the u, also. Even in these points is lower than the starting point.

You cannot give an example that defies the aforemention rules. Height dictates velocity along the track path, as unfortunate or unfair as that may seem. Time and horizontal distance are interesting to study, but bring nothing. No energy forms are converted there.
In the real world of positive friction, sure result can differ a bit. Friction however doesn't make a ball roll up higher than it started.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on March 03, 2010, 07:42:38 PM
@fletcher,

[snip]

Like I said, violation of CoE in this case consists in the very fact that one given quantity of gravitational potential energy can be transformed in different quantities of kinetic energy.  The graph you've given is good but it only demonstrates what I just said.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on March 03, 2010, 07:45:53 PM
@Cloxxki,

Terminal velocity is beside the point. Like I said more than once, you cannot ignore the physical traversing of the entire path for a given physical time. When you do that (refuse to ignore that) you'll end up finding out that same quantity of potential energy gives rise to different quantities of kinetic energy. That's a clear violation of CoE. How this is to be used for practical purposes is an entirely different matter.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Cloxxki on March 03, 2010, 08:49:16 PM
Your conclusions stem from incorrect assumptions and understandings, supported by general stubbornness and fanatic faith in OU. I really tried, with examples. As have others.

Please sketch a setup to explain this COE violation. I will take a level ruler to your sketch and show you how high your ball will roll. If you don't use your excess KE or PE for making up height, was are you using it for?
Educate me. I thought I had this all figured out when I was 12.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on March 03, 2010, 08:56:43 PM
No sketches needed. Look at the experiments and you'll convince yourself that the ball on the longer track arrives sooner at the final point which means it has had higher velocity while traversing the path from beginning to end than the other ball. Having higher velocity only means that it had higher kinetic energy overall. Different value of kinetic energy from the same potential energy is a violation of CoE. That's not an assumption but an experimental fact.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: mscoffman on March 03, 2010, 09:24:29 PM
@All

There are two facts;

a) It would have been very easy to use a magic marker
to mark an 'X' and a 'Y' on each ball in order to prove
their fungiability in two experimental runs, where they
would be interchanged on their tracks.

<- experimental protocol was violated here.

b) It would have been very easy to subtlety alter one
of the balls to have constant radial material density,
without changing it's overall weight excessively.

So what I am saying is not that balls don't run the
track at different rates, but that the difference
that we see in the video may have been enhanced
by the balls not really being interchangeable, and
by using slight of hand during the experiment.

...What you see is not necessarily what you get...

Also, it may be possible to demonstrate this effect
using the Phun Physics Simulator.

:S:MarkSCoffman
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on March 03, 2010, 09:54:47 PM
Quote
So what I am saying is not that balls don't run the
track at different rates, but that the difference
that we see in the video may have been enhanced
by the balls not really being interchangeable, and
by using slight of hand during the experiment.

Well, if that were the case then it would be a hoax and we should ignore it. However, it isn't because such variational problem is known for centuries. What's new here is its implication for physics which has been ignored so far.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: X00013 on March 04, 2010, 04:15:55 AM
Food 4 thot, shits n giiggles http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2nGyBMGcQBc
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: ramset on March 04, 2010, 04:30:45 AM
X,
Definitely food for thought!
The tweezers we're a nice touch!

Thanks
Chet
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: X00013 on March 04, 2010, 04:39:41 AM
vid not mine,  ;D
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: JEJEHO on March 04, 2010, 07:49:16 AM
Each domino's has its own PE when they kept straight. By releasing the PE of one small domino its converted KE helps the other domino to change its P.E to KE.So nothing special in this.

If it happens in the otherway like , smallest domino's loss of PE help the next domino to gain its PE , then loss of PE on this domino help the next to gain its PE then its really unbelivable. By doing this all dominos will loss there PE, the final one has a PE.Can it possible. It cannnot.

Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on March 04, 2010, 05:29:25 PM
@Cloxxki,

Wonder if you saw my attempt at building the gravity wheel: http://www.overunity.com/index.php?topic=7150.msg229719#msg229719 and  http://www.overunity.com/index.php?topic=7150.msg229720#msg229720. As you can see, unlike Abeling's the ramp is inbetween the two wheels and the steel ball are only lying on the edges of the slots thus decreasing the friction significantly. There's one difficult constructional problem, though. As you can see, the way it's done this construction only allows for the lower part of the ramp to be easily positioned. The upper part of the ramp, needed to form the entire quasi-elliptic track, is very difficult to hold in place. Any  simple way of attaching it stands in the way of the upcoming or downward going balls. Any ideas how this difficulty can be overcome?
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: matrixman on March 04, 2010, 06:25:23 PM
You can bring math to the man but you can't make him think.

"Different value of kinetic energy from the same potential energy"

 Omni start both balls at the same time. When the ball which is traveling along the curve has reached its horizontal halfway point take a photo. Compare the vertical height of both balls. Is it the same? No, the ball following the curve will be lower down in the gravity well, meaning it's potential at that moment in time was greater. When both balls reach the end they will have transversed the same potential and both will be traveling at the same speed.
 I kept the bus out of your name cause I think you missed it on this on.

Fletcher your a smart guy, I'm glad to see you showing backbone. Wish you would at that other place.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on March 04, 2010, 06:38:39 PM
You can bring math to the man but you can't make him think.

"Different value of kinetic energy from the same potential energy"

 Omni start both balls at the same time. When the ball which is traveling along the curve has reached its horizontal halfway point take a photo. Compare the vertical height of both balls. Is it the same? No, the ball following the curve will be lower down in the gravity well, meaning it's potential at that moment in time was greater. When both balls reach the end they will have transversed the same potential and both will be traveling at the same speed.
 I kept the bus out of your name cause I think you missed it on this on.

Fletcher your a smart guy, I'm glad to see you showing backbone. Wish you would at that other place.

I'd suggest a different, physically more correct comparison. Compare the distance traveled by the two balls (along the curved and the straight path) from beginning to end. Release both balls at the same time from the start.

Now show backbone and state clearly is distance traveled divided by time of travel from beginning to end the same for both balls? If you say it isn't (which you'll do if you have backbone) then one had different velocity from the other which means one had different kinetic energy than the other. And yet they had the same potential energy.

Now, show backbone and acknowledge the truthfulness of the obvious: "Different value of kinetic energy from the same potential energy"
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: mondrasek on March 04, 2010, 08:00:22 PM
Now show backbone and state clearly is distance traveled divided by time of travel from beginning to end the same for both balls? If you say it isn't (which you'll do if you have backbone) then one had different velocity from the other which means one had different kinetic energy than the other. And yet they had the same potential energy.

Now, show backbone and acknowledge the truthfulness of the obvious: "Different value of kinetic energy from the same potential energy"

Omni, you keep leaving out the key word!  Here, I'll correct this for you:

Now show backbone and state clearly is distance traveled divided by time of travel from beginning to end the same for both balls? If you say it isn't (which you'll do if you have backbone) then one had different average velocity from the other which means one had different average kinetic energy than the other. And yet they had the same potential energy.

Now, show backbone and acknowledge the truthfulness of the obvious: "Different value of average kinetic energy from the same potential energy"
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: matrixman on March 04, 2010, 08:20:08 PM
Your quite the ding dong.

"And yet they had the same potential energy"

Only at the end sweetheart, and at that time they are traveling at the same velocity. In between that time they each have a different potential.  

Now that's several buses gone, run forest run.
 :D
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on March 04, 2010, 08:31:59 PM
Your quite the ding dong.

"And yet they had the same potential energy"

Only at the end sweetheart, and at that time they are traveling at the same velocity. In between that time they each have a different potential.  

Now that's several buses gone, run forest run.
 :D

Of course, at the end. Where else? That's the correct physics, not the one you propose.

The physical fact which you run from is that each ball traverses different physical distance while starting at the same level and ending also at the same, although lower, level. That's the first fact you run from like hell. The second fact you run from is that while starting at the same time and at the same level the ball traveling along the longer path arrives sooner at the end, again at the same, although lower, level. At the end, mind you. Not inbetween. Comparing what's happening inbetween in non-physical if one needs to compare what has happened with the same available potential energy.

You can run but you can't hide. You can't hide even behind the "average" velocity. Because a body with a higher average velocity also has greater kinetic energy than a body with a lower average velocity. How's that?
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: mondrasek on March 04, 2010, 08:38:09 PM
You can run but you can't hide. You can't hide even behind the "average" velocity. Because a body with a higher average velocity also has greater kinetic energy than a body with a lower average velocity. How's that?

Omni, please be specific!  You missed the key word again!  Here, I'll fix it for you:

Because a body with a higher average velocity also has greater average kinetic energy than a body with a lower average velocity.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on March 04, 2010, 09:48:28 PM
Omni, please be specific!  You missed the key word again!  Here, I'll fix it for you:

Because a body with a higher average velocity also has greater average kinetic energy than a body with a lower average velocity.

So, what do you think you've achieved by this fixing? CoE is still violated. I already said that.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: mondrasek on March 04, 2010, 10:07:59 PM
So, what do you think you've achieved by this fixing? CoE is still violated. I already said that.

Nope.  You are still wrong.  CoE is not violated.  And now you agree that the proper inclusion of the word "average" in fact fixed your incorrect statement.  That is a start.

Having a greater average KE over one path than another from start to finish is not a violation of CoE.

Thanks for coming around.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on March 05, 2010, 12:08:56 AM
Nope.  You are still wrong.  CoE is not violated.  And now you agree that the proper inclusion of the word "average" in fact fixed your incorrect statement.  That is a start.

Having a greater average KE over one path than another from start to finish is not a violation of CoE.

Thanks for coming around.

Yes it is. Finish the sentence, don't finagle--"Having a greater average KE over one path than another from start to finish" when the two balls expend the same potential energy (starting and ending at the same level) is a violation of CoE.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: matrixman on March 05, 2010, 12:45:39 AM
McFly, HELLOOO!!!!!!

Different potentials along the length of the course-different speeds.  Get some graph paper. (Though you probably wouldn't know what to do with it )
http://www.tubechop.com/watch/50539
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: fletcher on March 05, 2010, 12:51:56 AM
When you work out that vertical distance is the only salient point, then you'll realize that distance horizontally introduces a time factor as a function of slope - potential energy is simply unrealised kinetic energy in waiting therefore we can dispense with it here since they start & finish at the same heights - that means that the yardstick for Ke is velocity from [1/2mv^2] - the velocity at any vertical height regardless of the slope & horizontal displacement is identical.

That is because the ACCELERATION from the gravity field is CONSTANT & always acting vertically i.e. non changing, with NO horizontal component of thrust whatsoever - therefore the vertical height velocity [aka Ke] will be the same at any height regardless of path taken because any side thrust is completely independent of gravity acceleration.

There is no violation of CoE - you have simply failed to account for the frictional forces of the slope providing an upthrust component aswell as a horizontal component which affects the time & distance covered derivatives but not the Kinetic Energy aka velocity.

This has lead you to misinterpret & misrepresent average velocity as a violation of CoE & is meaningless in this context.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on March 05, 2010, 01:00:17 AM
McFly, HELLOOO!!!!!!

Different potentials along the length of the course-different speeds.  Get some graph paper. (Though you probably wouldn't know what to do with it )
http://www.tubechop.com/watch/50539

Not at all. Same potential for the two balls. I already explained that.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on March 05, 2010, 01:03:42 AM
@fletcher, read some standard text and learn what kinetic energy is before repeating over and over again your confused understanding of it.

Also, if friction bothers you observe the problem in absence of friction as variational calculus does.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on March 05, 2010, 01:13:23 AM
When two balls start at the same level and end up also at the same, although lower level, the decrease in their potential energy is one and the same no matter along what path they've reached the end level. What has happened inbetween is immaterial regarding their potential energy loss--it's the same for both balls.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: matrixman on March 05, 2010, 02:06:37 AM
Different potentials along the length of the course = different velocities. Still gonna monkey back no?

KE is mass times velocity squared. This value is the same for both balls at the end of the journey.

So since the kinetic energy is the same for both at the end and since there are different potentials for each before the end, where does this leave you? Still need this spelled out for you?


You make me feel like the guy in the blue, whick makes you...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sn8MkrSO1n0
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on March 05, 2010, 02:18:15 AM
Don't repeat that wrong thing. I already explained why. Besides, aside from everything else untrue, even the assertion that the terminal velocities are the same isn't true at all. These velocities obviously have different directions.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: matrixman on March 05, 2010, 02:35:02 AM
Yawn. Different potentials along the length of the course = different velocities.

You make me feel like the guy in the blue, whick makes you...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sn8MkrSO1n0
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on March 05, 2010, 02:40:31 AM
Yawn. Different potentials along the length of the course = different velocities.

You make me feel like the guy in the blue, whick makes you...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sn8MkrSO1n0

Wrong.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: fletcher on March 05, 2010, 03:43:06 AM
It is common practice for the words velocity & speed to be interchangeable in discussions such as this, though not strictly correct in the true physics sense - everyone knows that omnibus & doesn't take exception.

In the same way omnibus & idiot are interchangeable.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on March 05, 2010, 03:48:12 AM
It is common practice for the words velocity & speed to be interchangeable in discussions such as this, though not strictly correct in the true physics sense - everyone knows that omnibus & doesn't take exception.

In the same way omnibus & idiot are interchangeable.

Wrong again, Omnibus and idiot are not interchangeable the way velocity and speed aren't. I told you earlier and now I'll repeat, learn physics to avoid embarrassing yourself with wrong analogies.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: matrixman on March 05, 2010, 04:00:22 AM
LMAO

 Omni does doing this really do anything for you? Whatcha lookin for down there?
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on March 05, 2010, 04:14:05 AM
I know. For lack of real arguments that's the only thing you can come up with.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: fletcher on March 05, 2010, 06:15:44 AM
Ok omnibus - so let's apply a little logic in a different way so I'll change the 'analogy' to a more common example.

This time let's talk about trajectories, which is very similar to the brachistochrome experiment.

I throw a base ball horizontally from a height of 1.5 meters - it hits the ground some distance away [travelling x horizontal distance & y vertical distance] in time z - I then drop the same base ball from the same height [y vertical distance] & it hits the ground at my feet in the same time z - is that right ?

What was the vertical component of the velocity [in both cases] ? - of course the ball I threw had a horizontal component of velocity/Ke & that came from my initial input of muscle calorie energy to throw it - that made its total Ke slightly larger than the free fall comparison but the vertical component was the same - is that right ?

N.B.1 assume that there was a vacuum to make it easier.

N.B.2. repeat the experiment but this time let the base ball roll down a flat slope to ground level so that no extra energy was added to the system by way of initial impetus i.e. both balls had zero Ke at start - the ramp ball obviously has velocity/speed made up of a vertical [y] & horizontal [x] components giving total Ke - guess what - that's the same Ke total as the free falling ball [with only vertical velocity/Ke] even though it took longer to arrive at the ground - is that right ?

There is no difference because no sideways thrust was externally applied by me - the ramp did exert an up & sideways thrust slowing its speed down but its total Ke was the same even if its velocity [vector i.e. with magnitude & direction] was different - is that right ?

P.S.1 I'll draw a picture tomorrow if you want ?

P.S.2 do any of these scenarios violate CoE as you propose ? - if so, which ones & why ? - if I throw the ball harder & it travels a further distance [say 2x] does that violate CoE in any way ?
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on March 05, 2010, 01:53:17 PM
@fletcher,

As I already told you, what you're trying to do is to divert from the conditions of the experiment to make it suit your preconceived motion. First, only consider spontaneous motion, never mind spending muscle energy. Second, always treat the entire physical travel, from beginning to end. Third, mind the fact that no matter what the inbetween discrepancy of potential energy might be, the overall potential energy change of each ball is the same.

Having in mind the above, you should recognize the obvious fact that, although expending the same potential energy:

1) Terminal velocity of each ball is different--its direction obviously differs for each ball.

2) Velocity (average) of each ball from beginning to end is different and therefore kinetic energy on the average has also been different for each ball.

There are further interesting physical things to be observed but for now the above suffices to conclude CoE has been violated--same potential energy transforms spontaneously into different kinetic energies.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: petersone on March 05, 2010, 02:13:49 PM
Hi Bus
It is hard to go against your facts,start with the same pe,end with a different av. ke.
The only thing I question is if the 2 balls were allowed to travel on,level plain,would they come to rest at the same point at the same time.
peter
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on March 05, 2010, 02:24:56 PM
Hi Bus
It is hard to go against your facts,start with the same pe,end with a different av. ke.
The only thing I question is if the 2 balls were allowed to travel on,level plain,would they come to rest at the same point at the same time.
peter

Yes, they will, provided their mass (and size) are the same. Of course, the "level plain" should have an incline, no matter how small. Otherwise, they will stay at rest where you put them.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: mondrasek on March 05, 2010, 03:00:11 PM
Yes it is. Finish the sentence, don't finagle--"Having a greater average KE over one path than another from start to finish" when the two balls expend the same potential energy (starting and ending at the same level) is a violation of CoE.

Nope.  And here is clear proof:

Let's take a straight level track.  So PE is ZERO.  Now lets send one ball along that track starting with a velocity of 10mph.  It will obviously get to the end of the track with the same velocity of 10mph.  So the AVERAGE velocity was 10mph.  Now send a second ball down the same track starting with a velocity of 20mph.  It will obviously get to the end of the track with the same velocity of 20mph.  So the AVERAGE velocity was 20mph.

So, two different AVERAGE velocities/KE achieved from the same PE (ZERO).  But if the PE was ZERO, then it could in no way be responsible for the different AVERAGE velocities/KE.  SO no violation of CoE.  Because there was no change in energy to even consider.

PE is related to the CHANGE or DIFFERENCE in height.  It is responsible for a CHANGE or DIFFERENCE in KE.

AVERAGE KE is absolutely not related to PE and therefore comparing the two cannot tell you anything about CoE.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on March 05, 2010, 03:10:58 PM
Nope.  And here is clear proof:

Let's take a straight level track.  So PE is ZERO.  Now lets send one ball along that track starting with a velocity of 10mph.  It will obviously get to the end of the track with the same velocity of 10mph.  So the AVERAGE velocity was 10mph.  Now send a second ball down the same track starting with a velocity of 20mph.  It will obviously get to the end of the track with the same velocity of 20mph.  So the AVERAGE velocity was 20mph.

So, two different AVERAGE velocities/KE achieved from the same PE (ZERO).  But if the PE was ZERO, then it could in no way be responsible for the different AVERAGE velocities/KE.  SO no violation of CoE.  Because there was no change in energy to even consider.

PE is related to the CHANGE or DIFFERENCE in height.  It is responsible for a CHANGE or DIFFERENCE in KE.

AVERAGE KE is absolutely not related to PE and therefore comparing the two cannot tell you anything about CoE.

That's wrong and to understand it and not get confused always consider spontaneous motion. In your first example the motion isn't spontaneous. It is due to external energy input and therefore PE has nothing to do with it. In your first example only the spending of external energy is related to the average velocity.
In your first example PE is not related to the average velocity. The kinetic energy in your first example is equivalent to the external energy input. There's no violation of CoE there.

In our case the driving cause isn't external. Motion is spontaneous. It is directly related to PE, PE causes the motion, PE causes the average velocity, PE is related to the average velocity. PE is the only source, it's unique and yet it can transform into two different kinetic energies, depending on the construction, unlike your first example. That has to be understood very well.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on March 05, 2010, 07:50:00 PM
Let us make some further observations:

First, it should be observed that the given gravitational potential energy PE cannot be transformed into indefinite quantities of kinetic energy KE. For a given PE there will always be a maximum kinetic energy KEmax, corresponding to a path between the beginning and the end point in the form of a cycloid. That cycloid path will provide the upper bound of that transformation. The minimum KE will be achieved along a straight path between the beginning and the end.

It would be curious to find out if the KEmax is the exact equivalent amount of energy to the expended PE. If so, then only a motion along a cycloid ensures ensures obeying CoE. Any other path would cause energy (PE) to be lost, "destroyed''. Thus, this would be the first instance of "destroying'' energy. Of course,that will not be the case if obeying of CoE occurs along a straight path. In such a case only the obtainment of excess energy already found in the magnetic propulsor will take place.

The above observations prove violation of CoE independent of whether or not they can be applied to build a practical perpetuum mobile.

Nevertheless, it would be interesting to see, once we have determined that CoE can be violated also as a result of varying the path while transforming a given amount of gravitational potential energy, if there could be practical implications of that violation. So far I do not see any direct way of utilizing it. One may think that somehow the discrepancy in timing while transforming the same PE may somehow be implemented in a construction to cause its continuing over balance. Unfortunately, so far the only plausible way for continuous over balance is not by creating time discrepancies but by constructive solutions ensuring persistent violation of the lever rule at every angle of rotation of the wheel as in: http://www.overunity.com/index.php?topic=7150.msg229720#msg229719 and http://www.overunity.com/index.php?topic=7150.msg229720#msg229720. What remains is to come up with creative constructive solutions and actually implement them and manufacture the device.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: mondrasek on March 05, 2010, 08:27:03 PM
In our case the driving cause isn't external. Motion is spontaneous. It is directly related to PE, PE causes the motion, PE causes the average velocity, PE is related to the average velocity. PE is the only source, it's unique and yet it can transform into two different kinetic energies, depending on the construction, unlike your first example. That has to be understood very well.

Still wrong.  And here is your proof using "spontaneous" motion:

First track is gently sloping.  Ball starts at velocity zero and steadily accelerates to a final velocity of 20mph.  Average speed along the track was 10mph.  Second track is as shown.  The ball starts at velocity zero and accelerates quite rapidly to 20mph at location "A".  From this location to the end of the track it is level so the ball continues at a steady 20mph all the way to the end.  Average velocity is just a bit under 20mph.

So, two different AVERAGE velocities/KE achieved from the same PE (starting from velocity of zero for "spontaneous" motion).  Again no violation of CoE.

Once again, AVERAGE KE is absolutely not related to PE and therefore comparing the two cannot tell you anything about CoE.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: fletcher on March 05, 2010, 08:41:28 PM
The first yellow ball free falls - the second grey one has external impetus horizontally for 0.25 secs - the third red one runs a steep slope - the fourth blue one runs a shallow slope - the fifth green one takes a curved path with some initial steepness.

Conclusions : all balls arrive at their termination height with the same Ke - the exception is the grey ball which has slightly higher Ke [the vertical component is the same as the total Ke for the others] - it has higher Ke because it was falling in a parabola because of introduced energy - the others had no introduced energy & started with potential of position only [in a gravity field].

Thankyou omnibus for showing us the most efficient shape for a ball to get to the bottom - calculus has been able to do that for quite some time - nevertheless at any vertical height on the way down, when a comparison is made, the kinetic energies are identical from the same potential energy, if there is no input of external energy giving a horizontal thrust.

Now, if you could just arrange to have one of the balls arrive with excess Ke over & above the others then you might be onto something.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on March 05, 2010, 08:55:41 PM
Still wrong.  And here is your proof using "spontaneous" motion:

First track is gently sloping.  Ball starts at velocity zero and steadily accelerates to a final velocity of 20mph.  Average speed along the track was 10mph.  Second track is as shown.  The ball starts at velocity zero and accelerates quite rapidly to 20mph at location "A".  From this location to the end of the track it is level so the ball continues at a steady 20mph all the way to the end.  Average velocity is just a bit under 20mph.

So, two different AVERAGE velocities/KE achieved from the same PE (starting from velocity of zero for "spontaneous" motion).  Again no violation of CoE.

Once again, AVERAGE KE is absolutely not related to PE and therefore comparing the two cannot tell you anything about CoE.

Don't you see you're proving my point with this example. Read your own example once again and try to understand it.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on March 05, 2010, 08:58:22 PM
The first yellow ball free falls - the second grey one has external impetus horizontally for 0.25 secs - the third red one runs a steep slope - the fourth blue one runs a shallow slope - the fifth green one takes a curved path with some initial steepness.

Conclusions : all balls arrive at their termination height with the same Ke - the exception is the grey ball which has slightly higher Ke [the vertical component is the same as the total Ke for the others] - it has higher Ke because it was falling in a parabola because of introduced energy - the others had no introduced energy & started with potential of position only [in a gravity field].

Thankyou omnibus for showing us the most efficient shape for a ball to get to the bottom - calculus has been able to do that for quite some time - nevertheless at any vertical height on the way down, when a comparison is made, the kinetic energies are identical from the same potential energy, if there is no input of external energy giving a horizontal thrust.

Now, if you could just arrange to have one of the balls arrive with excess Ke over & above the others then you might be onto something.

Like i said, don't sidetrack, especiall when the examples you give prove nothing of substance. Read what I've explained and try to understand that exact example. Don't try to invent things which are beside the point.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on March 05, 2010, 09:03:39 PM
This twitching in attempt to save face is useless. Violation of CoE is proved even in this case--unnoticed far-reaching consequence for physics from a well known mathematical problem. What we need to focus now on is the constructive, engineering solution which would allow building a working perpetuum mobile.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: mondrasek on March 05, 2010, 09:14:51 PM
Don't you see you're proving my point with this example. Read your own example once again and try to understand it.

Nope.  I proved that a given PE results in the same KE, regardless of the path taken.  This CONFIRMS CoE.

It also shows that a given PE can result in different AVERAGE KE, which proves absolutely nothing about CoE.  You claim that it is a violation of CoE.  Clearly you are wrong.  And no finagling or wiggling can escape this fact.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on March 05, 2010, 09:28:15 PM
Nope.  I proved that a given PE results in the same KE, regardless of the path taken.  This CONFIRMS CoE.

It also shows that a given PE can result in different AVERAGE KE, which proves absolutely nothing about CoE.  You claim that it is a violation of CoE.  Clearly you are wrong.  And no finagling or wiggling can escape this fact.

You don't understand that nothing you can present as proof (and you actually have presented nothing of substance) can invalidate the conclusion from the discussed experiment. Yours are futile efforts to save face and that's just a waste of time.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on March 05, 2010, 09:35:23 PM
Quote
It also shows that a given PE can result in different AVERAGE KE

That's funny. You're presenting something that we already know, as if that's your own finding. Not to say, you find it's a common fact that a given PE can result in different average KE. I got news for you. It's an uncommon fact. It proves violation of CoE. Start living with this fact being what it really is--uncommon.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: mondrasek on March 05, 2010, 09:49:44 PM
That's funny. You're presenting something that we already know, as if that's your own finding. Not to say, you find it's a common fact that a given PE can result in different average KE. I got news for you. It's an uncommon fact. It proves violation of CoE. Start living with this fact being what it really is--uncommon.

Only thing uncommon is that someone would believe that since a given PE can result in different average KE that CoE is violated.  Also a bit sad.  But please go on stating that I am saving face, finagling, afraid of the truth, unwilling to live with facts, or whatever other nonsense you feel somehow discredits me and everyone else who proves you wrong.  I'll gladly give you the last word, if that is what you want.  It will probably be another fallacy, but I think we all expect that of you now.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: matrixman on March 05, 2010, 09:52:42 PM
I can't believe somone is as stupid as you are, but maybe that's the whole point eh omni=idiot?, wink wink, nudge nudge.


 In the off chance you are being sincere, or for anyone you've managed to hoodwink, give some yes and no answers for the following.

1. If a ball is the one following the curve and b ball is the one following the straight but decline track, since a ball finishes first it has greater energy at the end than b ball does. Yes or no?

2. The overall potentials from start to finish are the same since both balls have traveled the same vertical distance. Yes or no?

3. If the total horizontal length was 20 inches for both tracks, you agree that the potential A ball undergoes is greater at 10 inches of horizontal travel than it is for B ball at ten inches of horizontal travel. Yes or no?

Let me bring you to the back of the book for the answers ( though I'd still like to hear what your answers are ).
1. is no, 2. is yes, and 3. is yes.

Let me give you a similar example posed with a question. You have two decline tracks, both exactly the same, both like the track for B ball in the previous example. You let the A ball go first, and when it's reached the first ten inches of horizontal travel you let B ball go. Both tracks are the same but A ball has reached its end point first. After both balls have reached the end can it be said that a ball has more energy, yes or no?

You seem to be confused at what is going on. Let's go back to the first example. We release both balls at the 
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on March 05, 2010, 09:55:44 PM
Only thing uncommon is that someone would believe that since a given PE can result in different average KE that CoE is violated.  Also a bit sad.  But please go on stating that I am saving face, finagling, afraid of the truth, unwilling to live with facts, or whatever other nonsense you feel somehow discredits me and everyone else who proves you wrong.  I'll gladly give you the last word, if that is what you want.  It will probably be another fallacy, but I think we all expect that of you now.

That only thing uncommon is a dramatic uncommon. CoE mandates that a given amount of energy is only transformed equivalently into other forms of energy. Not so in this case. That's a violation of CoE and anybody denying it is "finagling, afraid of the truth, unwilling to live with facts" etc., etc. Choose the infamous qualification you may find suitable for such behavior.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: matrixman on March 05, 2010, 10:00:12 PM
Cont.

... We release both balls at the exact same time. When A ball reaches the 10 inch mark B ball will be far behind. At this point can it be said that A ball has more kinetic energy than B ball? YES!!! :o  because it has used more of its vertical potential than B ball has at THIS POINT IN TIME. When both have finished they will both have used the same vertical potential and both will be traveling at the same velocity, and since kinetic energy is mass times velocity squared, both will have the same kinetic energy at this point in time. Still don't understand? Still think A ball has greater energy at this point in time? Go back and look at example 2.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on March 05, 2010, 10:00:19 PM
@matrixman, you're confused. Don't try to beat around the bush but read carefully and try to understand what I already explained more than once.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on March 05, 2010, 10:02:08 PM
No, no, don't continue with your examples, @matrixman, I don't have the time to sort out your confusion based on your examples. Read carefully what I explained and try to understand it if you can. If you can't understand it I can't help you. That's that.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on March 05, 2010, 10:04:30 PM
Example--that's not the relevant question to be asked if you need to understand as to why CoE is violated and I explained why:

Quote
1. If a ball is the one following the curve and b ball is the one following the straight but decline track, since a ball finishes first it has greater energy at the end than b ball does. Yes or no?
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: matrixman on March 05, 2010, 10:04:48 PM
Lol, I sense a fear of answering the questions. You are either very stupid or love playing games. In any case your reputation precedes you, I guess you have a lot of time on your hands.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on March 05, 2010, 10:18:56 PM
Lol, I sense a fear of answering the questions. You are either very stupid or love playing games. In any case your reputation precedes you, I guess you have a lot of time on your hands.

No, you are very stupid. Cut it out.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: fletcher on March 05, 2010, 10:22:15 PM
I notice your complete reluctance to post pictures with explanations of what you're attempting to explain omnibus - could that be so you can not be held accountable by having to commit to paper ? - so you can change things as the discussion develops ?

The only thing you have proved without a doubt is that you are a complete imbecile, IMO.

Your thoughts on e-orbo's violation of COE have now lost a tremendous amount of stock & I wouldn't trust your thoughts on how the mechanical orbo might work after hearing this charade, though steorn seem to have successfully diverted attention away from that worthy prize by the art of deflection to e-orbo which they can't get to self sustain - just like your argument !
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on March 05, 2010, 10:29:06 PM
I notice your complete reluctance to post pictures with explanations of what you're attempting to explain omnibus - could that be so you can not be held accountable by having to commit to paper ? - so you can change things as the discussion develops ?

The only thing you have proved without a doubt is that you are a complete imbecile, IMO.

Your thoughts on e-orbo's violation of COE have now lost a tremendous amount of stock & I wouldn't trust your thoughts on how the mechanical orbo might work after hearing this charade, though steorn seem to have successfully diverted attention away from that worthy prize by the art of deflection to e-orbo which they can't get to self sustain - just like your argument !

See, this kind of gibberish, as what you've written above, doesn't matter one bit to me. It adds nothing to the discussion and that can be explained--you can't say anything sensible but spew gibberish about unrelated issues. What has eOrbo got to do with the current discussion of CoE violation? Practically nothing. Your tactics of diversion was uncovered early on. It won't help you, I assure you.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: fletcher on March 05, 2010, 10:43:15 PM
You have the last word omnibus  ;D - that's what you're about - I'm not intersted in ego turf wars - just truth.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on March 05, 2010, 10:48:09 PM
You have the last word omnibus  ;D - that's what you're about - I'm not intersted in ego turf wars - just truth.

On the contrary, your posts show otherwise, you don't care about the truth.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: fletcher on March 05, 2010, 11:45:12 PM
The truth seems something you are not well acquainted with omnibus - not in a practical mechanical sense anyway - there is no extra Ke from balls following different tracks starting & finishing at the same heights - you have simply manipulated a slope, time & speed differential into a hypothesis about greater average Ke [which no one has disagreed with btw as it's obvious] & promoted that premiss of greater average Ke as being somehow meaningful & called it a clear demonstration of violation of CoE derived from Pe - since you can't use Ke, except in a physical contact & exchange of energy sense i.e. to do work, then it cannot be accumulated to give more work which is what your bogus claims are somehow promoting by quoting averages, if you could but think of a way to use it.

You'd have more success making a wheel turn by unlocking the energy trapped in the math than looking for a real energy source.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Cloxxki on March 06, 2010, 12:32:40 AM
I tried, but cannot see how Ombibus would NOT be a misinformation agent. No-one is that well-spoken, yet so misinformed, and then stubborn about it without burdened by havig to found his claims with substance.

At first he seemed like a knowledgeable FE advocate, ut along the way I found him calling OU on pretty much everything. I started out seing OU in ever proposition also, but am learning to not put my hopes up, and ask myself and investors questions that, if well answered, would convince me.

I don't think I've ever had to ignore a poster online before, although I know I've been the subject of a block more than once. I am not a fan of censorship, but as misinformation agents can just claim general ignorance, what should a site like this do?

In the mean time, Abeling hasn't stepped forward yet. We don't know whether he's really managed OU or not. Let alone how he's done it. So far, this thread is a failure, then.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on March 06, 2010, 12:53:06 AM
@Cloxxki,

You're looking for a practical answer and what we're discussing right now is a purely theoretical stuff. Please, ignore it. I asked you something on the practical side but you didn't notice it perhaps. Ignore this theoretical discussion and let's get to the practical side of it.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on March 06, 2010, 12:57:59 AM
The truth seems something you are not well acquainted with omnibus - not in a practical mechanical sense anyway - there is no extra Ke from balls following different tracks starting & finishing at the same heights - you have simply manipulated a slope, time & speed differential into a hypothesis about greater average Ke [which no one has disagreed with btw as it's obvious] & promoted that premiss of greater average Ke as being somehow meaningful & called it a clear demonstration of violation of CoE derived from Pe - since you can't use Ke, except in a physical contact & exchange of energy sense i.e. to do work, then it cannot be accumulated to give more work which is what your bogus claims are somehow promoting by quoting averages, if you could but think of a way to use it.

You'd have more success making a wheel turn by unlocking the energy trapped in the math than looking for a real energy source.

Like I said to @Cloxxki, this is a purely theoretical discussion and can hardly be used for practical purposes to build a working device. That lack of immediate practicality, as I said many times, doesn't at all invalidate it or make it unimportant in scientific terms. On the contrary, this and especially the other proof for the violation of CoE, has profound, far-reaching consequences for science far beyond any concrete utilitarianism. This has to be understood well so that the important pursuits are not mixed up making the confusion even greater than it is.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: fletcher on March 06, 2010, 01:39:47 AM
I guess we'll have to wait & see if your epiphany sinks in omnibus, to anyone else but you, & catches hold in the physics world as other than a passing abstract thought - then someone might take up the batton & run on with it & sell it as something actually of fundamental & far-reaching importance as you claim - somehow I doubt it's going to set anyone alight because averages are meaningless in this context & is a misappropriation of math.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on March 06, 2010, 03:18:51 AM
See, math is only a helping hand in physics. That's just a tool. Math doesn't make physics. Physics makes math.

Also, usually scientific discoveries have no practical value in a sense of having direct utilitarian application. This latest one we discussed here is of this type. Scientific discoveries often but not always are the basis of technologies but more importantly they serve us to understand the world better. In this instance, now that we already know CoE can be violated, our perspectives are widened and we feel much freer and expectant of approaches, even in practical sense, that will bring us to new levels of our existence.

Now that we know perpetuum mobile is possible in principle we should not waste time to implement that knowledge in producing a practical device.

Like I said, the best approach so far is to seek in concrete terms a construction which  demonstrates a persistent violation of the lever rule. I've already shown initial steps of making a model to that effect. As I said, in that model the greatest problem is keeping the upper part of the ramp in place. Let's discuss now this concrete technical problem.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on March 06, 2010, 03:50:29 PM
Anybody know what this is all about: http://brevets-patents.ic.gc.ca/opic-cipo/cpd/eng/patent/2497861/summary.html
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on March 08, 2010, 09:33:21 PM
Just wanted to mention that the "high road and low road" effect has already been discussed (http://www.physics4all.co.il/open.php?link=606) and has been tried unsuccessfully in the so-called "classic overbalanced wheel" (http://www.lhup.edu/~dsimanek/museum/art.htm).

Of course, we already know, that prior to this discussion it hasn't been noticed that the brachistochrone problem which maximizes the above effect, although well understood mathematically, has been overlooked as a violation of CoE in physics. Simanek's explanation is no exception in that respect as is his incorrect assessment of other devices.

We also now know that, although CoE can be violated in the above way, its dierct application for making a working OU device isn't straightforward.



P.S. The above text may be ignored by @Cloxxki and others who are only interested in direct technical solutions.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on March 08, 2010, 09:51:41 PM
In terms of practicality, the greater problem, as I already said, is keeping in place the upper part of the track in a device similar to that of Sjack Abeling which seems so far to minimize friction the most (I already gave twice links to that device).

Unfortunately, the ramp problem is probably the insurmountable obstacle in the oldest known unbalanced wheel -- Bhaskara's wheel (http://keelynet.wordpress.com/2009/10/09/bhaskaras-wheel-interesting-claim-of-replication/) -- which is probably the ultimate in minimizing friction. How does one make the liquid on the left stay closer to the axle?

Another  problem with the Bhaskara's wheel is that it cannot be studies theoretically, using WM2D. You may recall, I defined a rule which is a test for an unbalanced wheel to be OU -- a wheel demonstrating persistent violation of lever rule (whereby wheel's center of mass is persistently sideways on one side of the axle) at any angle of rotation, is an OU wheel. Using WM2D one can easily prove that Sjack Abeling's device is OU (certain trajectories of the balls being more efficient than others) by observing that it demonstrates a persistent violation of the lever rule at every angle of rotation. Like I said, WM2D program cannot be used to study Bhaskara's wheel in this way although it would be quite curious to see how the center of mass refers to the axis of rotation at different angles of rotation of that wheel too. It very well may be that certain constructions would offer a better discrepancy (that is, greater extent of the desired violation). The mentioned practical lack of friction makes it a very attractive object of study, though.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Cloxxki on March 09, 2010, 12:21:00 AM
I sympathize. You are dilusional, and no-one but you can see it. In your own eyes you're so smart and can see all the greatness others are seemingly just ignoring.
Dig up all of internet, my 50,000 or more forums posts over the past decade, and catch me expressing myself towards someone this strongly. I am a patient man, but can't tolerate intensional misinformation. You ought to know better, and no sincere thinker can explain a good idea this badly.

A steeper or deeper path is nothing more than a earlier energy conversion. Without friction, height is simply converted into velocity. A ramp can take KE with vertical path component, and store it in a horizontally moving object.
Horizontal displacement, as vital as it is in our everyday life, living on the surface of our friction infested planet, is useless in physics. Horizontal velocty is like a state, it does nothing. Brings nothing. All you do to it, will rob it of KE without any gains.
A weight one foot from level ground needs to reach the finishline at level ground, 10 feet out. The fastest route, without going under ground, is steep down, and then levels towards the finish. Get that max velovity (x=1/2gt2) and use it to cross the distance in a short time. Finish line still has this same max velocity, in a no friction environment. If you get to go underground, you may get there a bit quicker still. Go 3 foot underground, reach 2x max speed, travel the next 8-9 feet at that speed, and then go steep up to level ground, and beat the above ground fastest time. In the latter case, 4x more PE was converted into KE. That's how the speed got into the weight. You just got to give the 300% back at the end again, and end up with 100% speed. You don't get speed for free if you need to dig a well, jump into it, and then climb out. In the low road case it's a quick transition, but still not for free. In stead of digging the well, one could as well climb a pole.

I will not ignore misinformation when I see it. Tolerating a lie, not fighting to identify it, is to be part of the lie. This is not a personal game, or an ego thing. In the free energy case, misinformation is a crime to humanity. Even if unintentional (I'm not the best informed thinker myself), it should be identifying where and as it occurs.

Go promote OU where it has actual merit. OU doesn't need your single sided hurrays. People are paid well to ridicule the OU movement just this way.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on March 09, 2010, 12:42:47 AM
No, no, @Cloxxki, like I said, don't bother, that's not for you. That's theory. Stick to the practical side of this issue.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on March 09, 2010, 02:08:04 AM
@P-Motion,

Great build. The problem, as I see it, is in the lack of a ramp. Can you simulate it with WM2D? If you can, see if the center of mass is persistently sideways to the axle at any position of the arm. If that's the case you're there. If not, a suitable ramp has to be added to maintain that persistence.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on March 09, 2010, 02:03:48 PM
@P-Motion,

I tried to draw it in WM2D but didn't come out quite right. Has to be drawn first in AutoCAD or some of the solids. We had very skillful people here using WM2D, maybe they can help. It's really necessary to see if this construction maintains persistent sideways position of center of mass w/ respect to axle at all positions of the rotating arm. That's the problem of all devices that have been tried and have not worked -- more important than friction, the center of mass has shifted when they were turning and hasn't stayed always sideways on one side of the axle. Abeling's device is an exception if the trajectory of the balls is properly maintained, some trajectories being more efficient than others. All that is due to the proper form and position of the ramp. I don't see how a device without that will work.

As for what you call "reciprocating potential" I don't at all understand what you mean. Maybe you've discussed that earlier but I've missed that discussion.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on March 09, 2010, 06:53:41 PM
@P-Motion,

Here's one very rudimentary sim in WM2D just to show you what you have to look for and try to avoid. As you can see the center of mass in this sim is shifting with respect to the axle and instead of staying always sideways to the axle it moves from the left to the right of the axle in the course of the sway. Such behavior is trivial and will never cause OU. In order to have OU the device has to maintain permanently the sideways position of the center of mass with respect to the axle. Such device is Sjack Abeling's if one can technically ensure the trajectory of the balls to be permanently along the known trajectory forced by the combined action of the slots and the ramp. That should be the goal in our efforts. Maintaining that permanent trajectory throughout is even more important than decreasing friction.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on March 10, 2010, 02:22:38 AM
Sorry,@P-Motion, I should've done it earlier and not make you go through the trouble of downloading and installing software. Please see the attached compressed vid (in rar format for being too large as avi) and observe how the mass center floats from the right side downwards and then goes to the left. This behavior of the center of mass should be avoided and the device should always have that mass center uni-directionally sideways with respect to the axle for any position of the moving arm. That's the criterion for a gravity device to be OU.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on March 10, 2010, 02:27:31 AM
Wish someone could make an exact WM2D sim of your rig so that you can be helped in making a successfully spinning device.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on March 10, 2010, 05:12:33 PM
@P-Motion,

Here's with the moved up and down ball cages. Same thing. Keeping the center of mass on one side of the axle is crucial for the wheel to work and I don't see how this can be achieved without a ramp.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on March 10, 2010, 08:48:27 PM
@P-Motion,

This can also be analyzed in terms of a resultant torque. We need to have the exact drawing in AutoCAD of your contraption and I can do the torque analysis. The center_of_mass vs. axle analysis in WM2D is easier and as conclusive as the resultant torque analysis but, again, we need to have the exact drawing of your rig in AutoCAD, transferred into WM2D. If that's available I think that can help you a lot in figuring out your next step.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on March 10, 2010, 08:54:54 PM
Try the way you're doing it at 1:34 to hold by hand that upgoing weight closer to the axle and see if there's any negative torque (clockwise) tendency.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: grayone on March 11, 2010, 03:01:06 AM
 Now the Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel show an almost strait up ramp. Those who have tried it don't seem to get past the ramp. Is there any body else besides the claim of the inventor and his supporters that has any proof?

Michael
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on March 11, 2010, 03:19:25 AM
Now the Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel show an almost strait up ramp. Those who have tried it don't seem to get past the ramp. Is there any body else besides the claim of the inventor and his supporters that has any proof?

Michael

I showed earlier in the thread results for the net torque (sum of all eight torques) at every 5 degree rotation increment and the net torque value without exception was negative (clockwise rotation).

Also, I showed earlier that for any degree of rotation of the wheel the center of mass remains persistently sideways of the axis of rotation (to the right of the axle). This means that at any angle of rotation of the wheel there is a violation of the lever rule causing persistent clockwise rotation.

The above proves that the wheel in question is and OU wheel. The mentioned studies were carried out for several shapes of the ramps and while some shapes showed better results than others OU was present with all ramps.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: grayone on March 11, 2010, 03:39:47 AM
I showed earlier in the thread results for the net torque (sum of all eight torques) at every 5 degree rotation increment and the net torque value without exception was negative (clockwise rotation).

Also, I showed earlier that for any degree of rotation of the wheel the center of mass remains persistently sideways of the axis of rotation (to the right of the axle). This means that at any angle of rotation of the wheel there is a violation of the lever rule causing persistent clockwise rotation.

The above proves that the wheel in question is and OU wheel. The mentioned studies were carried out for several shapes of the ramps and while some shapes showed better results than others OU was present with all ramps.

Omnibus; Well then show a running wheel then. I have not seen a Sjack Abeling type Gravity Wheel run from anybody. As my mom say the proof is in the pudding. Crunching numbers does not prove OU.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on March 11, 2010, 03:49:48 AM
Omnibus; Well then show a running wheel then. I have not seen a Sjack Abeling type Gravity Wheel run from anybody. As my mom say the proof is in the pudding. Crunching numbers does not prove OU.

Proof is in the pudding says your mom, scientists say other things. Scientists use the scientific method and it includes theoretical analysis.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: grayone on March 11, 2010, 04:00:44 AM
Proof is in the pudding says your mom, scientists say other things. Scientists use the scientific method and it includes theoretical analysis.

Theoretical analysis, is not proof. It is theory. When one is running and not stopping on its own. Then and only then is it proof, and not theory.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on March 11, 2010, 04:08:31 AM
Theoretical analysis, is not proof. It is theory. When one is running and not stopping on its own. Then and only then is it proof, and not theory.

In principle it isn't bad to have an opinion, as we all see from the above you do. In the matters of science, however, it isn't enough. More is needed.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on March 11, 2010, 02:29:30 PM
@P=Motion,

The goal is not to conserve energy. Another way of seeing energy conserved is to observe the center of mass swaying from let to right of the axle and back until center of mass finds its equilibrium position below the axle -- potential energy had been transformed into kinetic and back and with friction it is finally lost equivalently to heat. That's what commonly happens with any construction we've observed so far. Here we're talking about a specific construction (which has probably existed but has been suppressed and therefore is not a matter of common knowledge) whereby the center of mass is permanently sideways to the axle at any position of the device thus making energy non-conserved. Just making slots longer or increasing the weight of the balls won't do any good in this respect.Like I said, I don't see how this making of energy non-conserved can occur without a ramp or without somehow maintaining the trajectory along which balls move such that the center of mass persistently stays sideways to the axle at any position of the arm.

Mind you also this, acceleration in this case is only due to the action of the force of gravity. The force of gravity will the greater (causing greater acceleration) the greater the potential energy of the ball is. Potential energy of the ball would be greater if there had been enough kinetic energy to endow it with that potential energy. The required kinetic energy cannot be supplied by anything else in this case but by spending potential energy. When potential energy is spent in this case part of it is also lost to heat so the kinetic energy obtained wil not be even enough to recover the potential energy it was derived from let alone be more than the initial potential energy. That's in this particular case.

We saw, however, that a given potential energy can give rise to varying accelerations (up to a point) but I don't see how this finding can be applicable in a construction such as this one, repeating the same symmetrical pattern.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on March 12, 2010, 02:03:45 AM
@P-Motion,

Gravity is a force and therefore cannot be a source of energy. On the other hand, in the case of a tribuchet the source of energy is quite clear -- the gravitational potential energy of the triggering mechanism that has been preset by someone spending muscle energy to lift it up. There;s nothing unusual or fascinating about a tribuchet. It would have been fascinating if after the discharge the tribuchet recharges on its own without expending of external energy. That doesn't happen, however.

In our case we're looking for such continuous self-recharging and that would be possible by making a construction that would allow spontaneous deisplacement under the action of the force of gravity. The kinetic energy that would be observed would only be a result of such opportunistic construction. Everything starts with the gravitational potential energy which the wheel has to be able to restore time and time again all by itself. Kinetic energy, acceleration, are only results and they cannot exceed the corresponding, causing them, potential energy.

Like I said earlier, that brachistochrone idea seemed to hold some promise but because for every wheel construction everything repeats symmetrically there will always be a given amount of potential energy transferring into a given amount of kinetic energy and not into a different amount of kinetic energy (even in a case when a different path could ensure that different kinetic energy arises from the same potential energy difference).
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on March 12, 2010, 02:07:16 AM
The number of weights and the length of the slots in themselves will not change the picture and the wheel will be still a non-working wheel unless the weights are forced to travel along a path ensuring persistent violation of the lever rule, that is, the center of mass to be on one side of the axis of rotation for any position of the arms. That's mandatory, otherwise it won't work.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Cloxxki on March 12, 2010, 03:43:11 PM
Hi Jim,
With such long slots I fear your wheel will turn too fast, and stall, as it does now.
The weights take time to shift, thus also waste overbalance effect. Not sure how to cambat this, but 2 things come to mind:
- constant work being extracted
- more arms, to make the bursts of overbalance shorter. Still, a smooth constant load may be needed. Like a wooded saw tooth splashing around a tub of water.
This is 180º against the typical "fight the friction" mindset, I realize that.

Or, the start-stop action timing of the wheel should promote sliding or the weights. Decellerate top top speed as the slot on the right top hits level.
A longer slot will also see the weights sinking deeper, and having to be dragged up higher, I suppose?

Or, let your weight arms be un-fixed, and turning on a second layer wheel, with freewheel action. Gain advantage, and haul it in.

The discussion seems to have moved far away from Abeling's understood approach though, and more into the general Bessler ideas category. Jim's designs seem to have the weights supported by the wheel at all times, Abeling has them exit the wheel for the main part of the lifting portion. Weight provide their own lift as much as they can, and are helped over the edge only by their opposities.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on March 12, 2010, 04:45:05 PM
@P-Motion,

The loss of balance, unbalancing or, as you call it overbalancing, has to occur in the same direction at every position of the arms (the wheel). Whether or not that's the case may be seen in a simple way if we had the exact drawing of the device in WM2D. The hard way to find out that's not the case is by making it. Seems to me it's better to shorten that effort and not spend too much tme in manufacturing variants that won't work. Why rely on hunch when we have such good tools to do the job of figuring out what will work? WM2D may be inapplicable in many ways, as seen already, but it is excellent for finding out what the disposition of center of mass is with respect to the axis of rotation.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on March 12, 2010, 06:29:21 PM
@P-Motion,

If you know CATIA please draw an exact dxf of your device so that we can import it in WM2D. Not all dxf files work with WM2D, though, but it's worth trying. This will save you efforts in building unnecessary variants.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: AB Hammer on March 12, 2010, 10:05:41 PM
Quote
The alleged invention of the "fall and Lift control system" was done towards the end of 2006

In November of 2007, an unknown Dutch inventor Sjack Abeling made the rather outlandish claim he had found a way to rotate and accelerate a large wheel by using twin weights and earths gravity as only propulsion. At the time this was merely ruled a hoax. We have heard nothing from the inventor or his machine since that I am aware of.

The first Weight Power Plant was expected to go online in May 2009. The location for the construction of the first Weight Power Plant was going to be the province of Groningen, the Netherlands." There has been no news of any such construction or new online power plants taking place in Groningen.

Don't you think 4 years is long enough to to see that this is a non-runner if not an outright scam. Consider the amount of advertising O-U achieved during the run of this topic.

I have said it before and I will say it again; members of this forum are wasting their time as well as mine as a subscriber. This machine will never work no matter how hard you try; it is and always will be a typical changing height for width scenario which Bessler himself stated will never work.

Ralph

Maybe it is time to talk about how and why it don't work.

Alan
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on March 12, 2010, 10:30:32 PM
@ABHammer,

I've given ample arguments as to why this machine should work. The problem is that to make it properly it requires special watchmaking skills. Like I've said before, not even just any watchmaker can manufacture a Patek Philippe or a Vaucheron Constantin let alone a device so temperamental as a working gravity wheel. Thus, the problem is purely engineering and manufacturing one.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: AB Hammer on March 13, 2010, 03:40:06 AM
@ABHammer,

I've given ample arguments as to why this machine should work. The problem is that to make it properly it requires special watchmaking skills. Like I've said before, not even just any watchmaker can manufacture a Patek Philippe or a Vaucheron Constantin let alone a device so temperamental as a working gravity wheel. Thus, the problem is purely engineering and manufacturing one.

Omnibus

I have looked very carefully at the wheel design and a watchmaker skill is not needed but precise tracks would be needed to reduce as much friction at possible. But the problem is it's just not enough lift. I know how it is suppose to work, and I would call it flawed. That would be the reason we haven't heard anything else. My opinion is, it was posted in hopes of somebody would be able to correct the flaws in the design.
 To push strait up an up track is allot tougher than going up an gradual incline. The attempts to replicate the wheel tell this as well.
 So unless proved otherwise I will have to stand with Ralph on this one.

Alan

PS
 Jim this is not your string and I was not talking to you. I was talking to Omnibus. So it is best not to talk to me either.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on March 13, 2010, 04:01:39 AM
@ABHammer,

Like I said, it has been proved otherwise. I'm not concerned whether or not someone like Abeling or anybody else has made it. Variants of this design are known for centuries and I have shown that only those designs work which maintain persistent violation of the lever rule, that is, center of mass is persistently sideways on one side of the axle for any position of the wheel. That's a systematical, irrefutable approach to the question and we now have it solved. It's a different story whether or not someone recently has been able to make a working rig (I don't know historically).

Your concern about the ramp being too steep is legitimate but that would be an issue only when we see everything else made with a watchmaking precision. With all due respect, all we see so far, including the alleged Abeling's wheel, is too crude to only consider the ramp to be the culprit. I guess, we need someone like that guy, if you remember, showing a mechanism ostensibly demonstrating Steorn's Orbo (not the eOrbo) effect to get interested in this project. Wonder what happened with him.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: AB Hammer on March 13, 2010, 04:30:41 AM
Omnibus

 I could build that machine with ease and precision. I am a blacksmith of 24 years and specialize with medieval armor recreation. But my plate is too full to try it, and it doesn't pass my pretest either. But I will say some parts on it that have been tried before have some merit but not in this configuration.

Here is a photo of how precise I do my work. I put the same effort in my real builds, not to be confused with my test builds. Reproductions of the Earl of Warwick legs. Hand made, no machine work except for buffing.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on March 13, 2010, 04:43:28 AM
@ABHammer,

This is a beautiful piece of armor, indeed, but I'm afraid we need a different kind of skills, connected with making moving mechanisms. Your creations seem more like works of art, don't they? One never knows, however. Look at Leonardo da Vinci -- a genius as an artist and at the same time quite skillful in some technical matters.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: AB Hammer on March 13, 2010, 05:10:37 AM
Omnibus

 Thanks, Leonardo Deviance is one of my historic heroes. I also specialize in historic machinery. I have built parts for a rev-war 3 pound cannon's. I lost my photos due to a computer crash, or I would post them for it was every metal piece on it, except the cannon itself. Next time I get to KY I will go by and take new photos. I will be finishing a few of my wheels next week. Maybe I will show one. ;D
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on March 13, 2010, 05:37:02 AM
@P-Motion,

How do you mean Abeling hasn't the time anymore? Has he abandoned the project or he's too busy to talk to anybody? I've spoken with him too, I guess, a year ago and even wanted to visit him but he declined fearing his investors won't like it. Especially showing me the wheel. Don't know what happened since.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Cloxxki on March 13, 2010, 12:46:10 PM
ABHammer, you may have touched on this before. Did you take into consideration perhaps the the Abeling style self runner might need, on top of it's super low friction, a significant kick-start velocity to come into a "zone"? The slower the wheel turns, the more one weight is lifting the other, over the whole height. At high speed, the weight would get itself reset easily, the remaining question mark being it's velocity relative to the rest of the wheel when hitting 12:00. I can see a velocity loss, obviously, but also a time GAIN. If the gain could be used somehow, or the initial 12:00 path be steeper, then I have some hope of syncronization with excess energy. The way I visualize it though, is as a deep high speed flow. Abeling's references to seeking extremely low friction materials would imply not just higher efficiency and durability of his machine, but more likely in my eyes, attaining high rpm's without friction building up faster than the gains. You'll be aware of especially air friction ramping up with speed, offering all kinds of bodies a velocity ceiling. Parashutists, large hail ice balls, cars (100bhp 210kph, 1000bhp 400kph), etc.
My gut is telling me Abeling found, or is searching a way to get high rpm at lower friction than his gains. Such a wheel would be vastly different in working from Bessler's, or simply an inferior version making it rely on high speed rather than inherent over balance.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: AB Hammer on March 13, 2010, 02:10:33 PM
ABHammer, you may have touched on this before. Did you take into consideration perhaps the the Abeling style self runner might need, on top of it's super low friction, a significant kick-start velocity to come into a "zone"? The slower the wheel turns, the more one weight is lifting the other, over the whole height. At high speed, the weight would get itself reset easily, the remaining question mark being it's velocity relative to the rest of the wheel when hitting 12:00. I can see a velocity loss, obviously, but also a time GAIN. If the gain could be used somehow, or the initial 12:00 path be steeper, then I have some hope of syncronization with excess energy. The way I visualize it though, is as a deep high speed flow. Abeling's references to seeking extremely low friction materials would imply not just higher efficiency and durability of his machine, but more likely in my eyes, attaining high rpm's without friction building up faster than the gains. You'll be aware of especially air friction ramping up with speed, offering all kinds of bodies a velocity ceiling. Parashutists, large hail ice balls, cars (100bhp 210kph, 1000bhp 400kph), etc.
My gut is telling me Abeling found, or is searching a way to get high rpm at lower friction than his gains. Such a wheel would be vastly different in working from Bessler's, or simply an inferior version making it rely on high speed rather than inherent over balance.

Greetings Cloxxki

 You are correct with Bessler's last 2 wheels IMO, but his first 2 wheels did not need a push, according to reports. So his last two wheels need a push to start reactions. From what I have seen Abeling would need one hell of a push to get reactions. I look at it like the walking up a hill story. You have ten steps in a wheel like ten steps up a small hill. If you go ten steps forward and one step back, it will not run, or you don't make it over the hill. But if you go 11 steps forward and one step back it will run, for you will have exceeded the minimum line to overcome the resistance and it is down hill from there.

Alan   
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on March 13, 2010, 06:42:46 PM
You mean his work on his OU wheel does not allow him to spend time with visitors, correct? Not that he is busy at work, doing something else, and can't do any more OU work?
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: AB Hammer on March 13, 2010, 07:33:08 PM
  Omnibus,
 i've talked withAbeling and he told me he hasn't the time any more.
I have challenged Alan to an open build off on youtube. This way, he and I can demonstrate what we know.
 I'll still work on this but would be building what i believe is Bessler's wheel.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=laPqtUMk5gA


                                                                                    Jim

 Greetings All

 Jim has challenged me on youtube. This is not going to happen for why should I give away what I may have already achieved on a foolish challenge. But when I am ready I will post with security.

Alan
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on March 13, 2010, 10:20:27 PM
Now, that's very interesting what you're saying, if I understand you correctly. Abeling has just wetted some people's imagination by splashing an untested idea in the cyberspace, waiting for someone to bring it to fruition while he goes on with his regular job unrelated to OU. Is that underhanded or what? Several people have expressed here and in other boards the concern that some "inventors" might be doing just this -- put forth an idea, wait for someone to actually build the device and then claim priority. If that's the case with Sjack Abeling that's most despicable. Wasn't he supposed to build the first gravity plant and didn't he write he's doing that in conjunction with major companies having the approval of the Dutch government to use the national grid for that purpose? So, all that turns out to be one big fat lie, is that it?
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on March 14, 2010, 03:01:21 AM
@P-Motion,

Quote
... as one weight would always be performing work.

Now, this I don't see how would happen. Periodically, that is. Always spontaneously restoring what's been lost. Need to see this in a sim. Can't you use AutoCAD and draw it?
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: AB Hammer on March 14, 2010, 01:09:18 PM
Omnibus

 If you do a sim on Jim's. Spin it at about 20 rpm and watch what happens to the weights.

Alan
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Alexioco on March 14, 2010, 07:00:07 PM
Heeeya

This seems like an interesting idea P-Motion, but seeming is different from being lol. Weather it works or not, its good to see people building and sharing their designs with the members on this forum in return for good quality criticism in order to gain more knowledge, and hopefully make one step closer to a great discovery.

Alex
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on March 14, 2010, 07:01:06 PM
You guys, why are you arguing? We're in the same boat and we need to find a solution to this. Everyone involved here contributes something. Only these liars, pretending to have done something only to wait for someone else to build it and then take credit, only these are to be uncovered sooner and rejected. Most other people here are honest and we shouldn't waste time bickering about nothing.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on March 14, 2010, 07:03:23 PM
@P-Motion,

Can you make a vid of that four-weight rig to see what's going on? Thanks.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: AB Hammer on March 14, 2010, 08:46:52 PM
  Alan,
 Why don't you accept my challenge so you can talk about what you are doing.
 The fact that you have already slandered me makes your comments not worth listening to.
But I have always worked openly and this allows others to determine what they think of what I am doing.
 As for you, you have never allowed me to comment on any project that you are working on.
When we firt started posting in this forum, it was considered then that only open builds could be considered legitimate as secret builds could be claimed to be an attempt at anything..
                                                                          Jim

edited to switch me to others.

Hay Jim

 Lets keep this string civil, and just talk about the wheels.  There has been no slander from me here or anywhere else. And as for your challenge? I am so far ahead of what you are doing, so the answer is still no. But I am willing to help you out by cutting a ball wheel version of what you are doing and have Plexiglas sides so all can see. Since you are lacking what you need, I am offering help.

Alan
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: AB Hammer on March 14, 2010, 09:05:12 PM
  @All,
http://www.overunity.com/index.php?topic=5374.0
 This link is to a thread a markh started about a design he came up with.
 It was based on Bessler having said he used scissors. If you read the thread, you can see what Alan did and said.
 With this design, the scissors top lever should have been extended further from the pivot to allow for more leverage to be used. This would have allowed a lite weight to have lifted the heavier one at the bottom. The 2 attachmnets show Mark's original drawing and how it could have been modified.


                                                                     Jim                                                             

 Jim

 Scissor Jacks are problematic at best the way they are shown. So unless you have used them, you won't understand all you will be facing when designing with them. That is why I showed examples.

Alan
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: AB Hammer on March 14, 2010, 09:22:32 PM
  Omnibus,
 I have to wait until later this year before I can afford to buy a design program. I would tell you why but Alan only considers it an excuse.
 I am going to do a scale build of the coaster wheel. Since the mechanics of various possibilities have been worked out, they can be scaled down. This is something Alan already told me he doesn't want me building.
 So that he's lurking around commenting on what I'm doing does make me a little nervous.
 You would think he would  be working on his own ideas. Of course, if he wishes to be first then sabotaging his competitors efforts would make sense. It's not unheard of. Watch the movie cOOL rUNNINGS.It's a true story about the Jamaican bob sled team having their sled sabotaged because their competitors didn't want them winning a medal. It stars John Candy and is a good movie.
 With 4 weights, the attached pic shows where a weight would be over balanced. By timing it so that the weight goes over balanced 45 degrees after top center would allow for this. This is because at 45 degrees, that is essentially the balanced position for the wheel if the top right and bottom left weights are at the start positions.


                                                                           Jim

Jim

 The reason I am willing to help you build or even build it for you is so you can move on. The design is a waste of time, and has been tried untold amount of time in history, and from what you have built you should have learned this by now. Sooner or later you will see, I have been telling you the truth about your wheel designs, all along. I just tried to save you and anyone else with the same thoughts some time. But for some reason you always took it as an attack. So for now on I am offering to help you if that is what it takes. I have long since been tired of arguing.

Alan
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: overtaker on March 14, 2010, 11:23:35 PM
awwww.   They kissed and made up.

What a great team they will be.   :)
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: X00013 on March 14, 2010, 11:24:56 PM
@ abhammer, my advice to you is for you to build the most simple scissor jack for yourself, and u will see where the true power is.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: AB Hammer on March 14, 2010, 11:46:45 PM
awwww.   They kissed and made up.

What a great team they will be.   :)

LOL No kissing, long distance is close enough. I am just tired of the same-o same-o. If I help, maybe he will quit defending it and learn. I don't know if he will even agree, but we can hope for future strings . What he wants is to know what I am doing. But as you know I hold many secrets, mine and other peoples as well.

Alan
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: FreeEnergy on March 14, 2010, 11:46:48 PM
awwww.   They kissed and made up.

What a great team they will be.   :)

lol
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: AB Hammer on March 14, 2010, 11:58:04 PM
@ abhammer, my advice to you is for you to build the most simple scissor jack for yourself, and u will see where the true power is.

X00013

 I know where the power is for I have built several scissor jack wheels and learned. It is the answer? That remains to be seen in a runner with them. Here is one from 1 year after Bessler's death by a Mr A B  ;)
There are two version. I have an original published design of the other one as well.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on March 15, 2010, 01:38:58 AM
@P-Motion

Please take a look at the attached avi. As seen that's a perfectly balanced wheel -- the center of mass tends to go underneath the axle and stays on there at equilibrium.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: AB Hammer on March 15, 2010, 02:38:26 AM
Don't forget to tell him there is a simpler way than what is illustrated. He won't get it though.

edited to add: if Bessler built an 8 weighted weights only wheel, there is a waythis might actually work.
But not allowed to discuss it.

Jim

 The design is public domain. So it is something to learn from. Why would I want to try to patent something that is public domain? I wouldn't bother. LOL


Omnibus

 Your video is what will happen every time, and if you spin it at 20 rpm the weights would stay in the outer positions. For some reason it seams, Jim thinks there is something there. I have been trying to tell him it is a dead end for over a year.

Alan
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on March 15, 2010, 03:17:45 AM
Alan, unfortunately that's true. This approach is a dead end. Jim is an excellent builder and a very dedicated researcher and should think through it carefully to find a more successful direction. Everyone gets stuck in his pet project and I'm glad there is WM2D to help easily abandon non-productive directions, rather than finding it out through manufacturing the device.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on March 15, 2010, 03:22:56 AM
What fascinates me is the Bhaskara's wheel (http://keelynet.wordpress.com/2009/10/09/bhaskaras-wheel-interesting-claim-of-replication/) -- the oldest ever perpetuum mobile --  which is the ultimate "Abeling wheel" as it were. This is the way to minimize friction to the lowest possible extent. How do you make the ramp, however, to maintain persistent violation of the lever rule? So, there's always a catch of a technical nature. Engineering, engineering and engineering (almost like the real estate mantra -- location, location, location).
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on March 15, 2010, 02:12:56 PM
@P-Motion,

Quote
Perpetual motion is impossible. All ideas are dead ends. Not even sure why a person wastes their time with it.

If that is true then what are you trying to accomplish by building your rigs?
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on March 15, 2010, 02:50:19 PM
Sorry to hear that. Hope it's behind you now. As for the attempts to build perpetuum mobile, like I said, the rig should be such as to maintain persistent violation of the lever rule -- the center of mass should always be sideways to the axle for all positions of the wheel. Yours doesn't abide by that rule and if you really want to make a working device you should change the design.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: AB Hammer on March 15, 2010, 06:29:01 PM
This is why I am quiting. it was not shown by anyone but Alan whop can not prove he has built anything.
In simpler terms, it is a waste of my time to argue a point when the person against has said that if math could solve it, it would have already done so.

Jim

People can go back through my strings and see several wheels and designs of wheels that I have built and designed, and they are even original. So what you are saying is a lie. I asked you, for this string to be keep civil and just talk wheel. But it seems you can't do that. But if you are quitting? May you have a good and less stressful life.

Alan
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: AB Hammer on March 15, 2010, 11:57:40 PM
  Alan,
Don't know what you said and don't care. But I don't consider something done behind closed doors to be a build. There is nothing to verify or document why it was built the way it was.
 As for what I work on, you buildonce4 and quit according to what you have stated, and with me, i do progressive builds which is something not very well understood.
 But for you and your dilike of matha nd science Alan, American kids rate in the bottom 1/3rd of all industrialized countries. apparently they agree with you that taking the time to elarn is not worth the effort.
 But where you posted in the thread Self Rolling Wheel that you do use math to figure over balance and take notes when you build is not supported by your actions. After all, you told me building was a waste of my time. But in building something i haven't built before, it would help me ona more involved project. And ever since I posted the Self Rolling Wheel, you have done nothing but attack me and diwagree with everythng i say. I think the build which was wrong according to markh'ss drawing shows the lengths youa re willing to go to to discredit me/
 Alan, one thing hasn't changed, you are still over weight. But do wonder why you quit posting that you have it worse than anybody in here.Anyone that starved for control has problems.Try a diet, it will do more for you than I ever could.

Sorry Jim

 You seem to have digressed to nothing but lies and insult, making you sound like a shit salesman with a mouth full of samples. Be civil or don't talk is my suggestion. You hurt yourself more with what you say than anything I could say.

Alan

Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: AB Hammer on March 16, 2010, 12:20:54 AM
Alan, What is it you told me once ? If I wish to be credible, I should follow your lead.
 And the next thing you did was explain to someone why their idea would not work.
 It is like Alexioco posted, people used to post their idea's in here and discuss them. It could be your negative attitude towards discussions isn't something people new to the forum find appealing.
 Maybe it is because in armoring, it has not changed in hundreds of years, that considering new thoughts is to much of a challenge ?

Jim
Have you ever considered it could be your mouth!!! ?  ::)
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: AB Hammer on March 16, 2010, 12:23:33 AM
  @All,
 With a progressive build, what eevr I would have built next would have been to try new techniques so I could have an idea of how I might build differently. But it really isn't worth listening to an Alan. I don't think he has ever been exposed to engineering where the builds start simple and increase in complexity.
 With trying an advanced design with 4 weights would have been more about the engineering in the construction of the wheel. As I've seen on youtube, i am one of the very few people who build decent size wooden wheels.
So there really isn't anyone I can turn to to ask for help. This means building is the only way i can learn. And trying things along the way while I develop my proficiency seems to make more sense than building something that I am not sure how I would do it.
 But I guess I am wrong.

You need a tissue?  :'( :'( :'(

The string was starting to get back on track until your started you poor jim act and start attacking me.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: X00013 on March 16, 2010, 12:55:18 AM
attack video http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wLMe_MzC2Ag
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: overtaker on March 16, 2010, 01:33:14 AM
Xx00013  Why can't I be attacked by one of those? :)
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: AB Hammer on March 16, 2010, 12:05:24 PM
  Nah Alan, you always go off topic. It's your real engineering experience. It doesn't allow anyone else to know anything.
 I mean really, your not my dad yet you claim you had your son trying to straighten me out because I wasn't doing what you told me to do. I know who my father is. he's a Norwegian immigrant that you don't like.
 How do I know ? he's done more than you ever will and yet you say your engineering is the real thing. Talk about having no respect. I've worked with him and can gaurantee you your aromring would be to easy for him. He's used to doing more difficult metal working which was sometimes done by hand.
 So if you ever get it Alan, i don't consider your ecxperience to be worth shit. You can't even man up and admit to having served in the USCG. Why ?
 You remind me of a little kid who says I'll have my big brother (Ralph) beat you up.
The fact is Alan, you took it off topic because your one and done build by randomly placing weights negates the need to do a stress analisys which real engineering requires.
 After all, when I build something, i don't need your approval. That is what I call arrogant. Assuming why i'm building soemthing without asking me what build plan I am working to.
 This shows you really don't know much.
 Of course, that's why I'm not building any more.  you're an expert yet refuse to do an open build. Talk about backwards.

Jim

 IMO you are one mentally sick person.

You said >> I know who my father is. he's a Norwegian immigrant that you don't like.<<

Another lie! I said nothing of the sort. For I am no a raciest, like you seem to be, and I  take offense when someone tries to say so. But I did say you should listen to your father.

you said to me >>you're an expert yet refuse to do an open build.<<

 Your statement just proves I am not a ranting fool. I asked you very nicely to keep this on wheel work and you went to complete slander and lies about me. So if this is all you are about? leave me alone!!!.

By the way!!.
 It has been checked by modern engineers and machinist that it would take equipment pricing well into the millions to achieve the work I do by hand. But once set up it could do it faster. But for each change it would cost several thousands more to adjust to all the different sizes as well and then what about the real custom stuff.  No Jim your father nor you, can not do what I do unless he or you was willing to spend millions of dollars and then he or you, would be lost on the custom unless he, I wouldn't allow you, to apprenticed with me for at least 4 years with his prior experience. What I do is a very specialized work, and is a true art.

Alan
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: AB Hammer on March 16, 2010, 07:16:29 PM
Alan,
 I've said before I don't work with private builders. Besides, if the water wheel is capable of being a runner, you can't be a part of it. I could never explain away your posts for the last 2 years.
 As for my dad, I doubt he would ever work with a bigot like you. or is it someone so lacking in ability ? I think he'd be laughing to hard at you. He'd see you as a little boy trying to prove himself. Kind of like Don Knots on Mayberry RFD.
 By the way Alan, the only thing to be answered is if you are going to accept my challenge. As you say, your ideas are much better than mine. I am giving you a chance to publicly demonstrate how much better you are than me. And you can even have Ralph help you if you like.

LOL Jim

You said
As for my dad, I doubt he would ever work with a bigot like you.

I am not the bigot, I deal with each individuals by their own merits. Not their color, religion, or origin. You are the pronounced anti American, IMO and probably most others too, which makes you a real bigot. I guess I will have to look up your Dad and let him take care of you, for using him in your delusions, and dishonor. If he is alive, he can be found.

 Besides I don't want to be apart of any of your wheels. The only reason I offered to help your build is to try to shut you up on what has no chance in hell of being a runner, specially for what you have posted, and you keep telling the world that you know something you obviously don't, and an embarrassment to real builders. As for your challenge. It is nothing but a cheep asinine trick to try to get my information, which you will NEVER GET!!! So quit trying. You will know only after the patent with every one else.  I have said this many times before. "SO GET A CLUE!!".

I help by pointing out the problems like a good teacher that makes you learn. I don't spoon feed the answers. No one should ask or in your case demand the answers without earning it.


You said this, but it is more of a self description of yourself.
I think he'd be laughing to hard at you. He'd see you as a little boy trying to prove himself. Kind of like Don Knots on Mayberry RFD.




I don't have to prove myself for I have been proved many times over. I have been recognized in several countries for my mastery of armor work. and I have been paid for shows at ABBANA sponsored conferences. I have been in art magazines and newspapers for my work. I have had my work in museums as well.
 What have you done or Had? So far a big 0, but you have allot of claims of knowledge that has been falling apart before everyone's eyes. So then you revert to attacking me. How pathetic. ::)
 
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: overtaker on March 16, 2010, 11:22:55 PM
Alan said:  What have you done or Had? So far a big 0


This is not true!   He pushed a broom in an engine room.  He discovered how great the engineering was in the corner broom.  He used math to determine the perfect sweep pattern.  Your just jealous you can't clean a floor as well!
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: AB Hammer on March 17, 2010, 01:51:17 AM
  Alan,
 Plain and simple, you're a hater.

Jim

So if defending myself and my wrights that makes me a hater. Well it is only in your book, not in reality. I could easily go back through all the strings and add up all your statements of hate and we will see who is a hater. But I would rather call it over and all you have to do is stop talking to or about me. I will not stop talking to others and I wouldn't expect you to either. And most of all keep it on the wheel only. Like I have said before. This has to stop.

Alan
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: AB Hammer on March 18, 2010, 12:02:24 AM
You're not defending yourself Alan, you're defending your position.
 This is what you said about Mt 24
>>AB Hammer
elite_member
Hero Member

Posts: 1012

Re: G-Force
« Reply #9 on: January 05, 2009, 02:17:11 PM »QuoteYou are ignoring this user. Show me the post.
MT 24

 The wheel that show a interesting movement, but the problem that kills it is the keel factor no matter how much movements you get in it.<<

 As you see, no discussion. What almost killed it was you Alan.
You also posted was my ignorance in only discussing math and that a common denominator was needed. In engineering, math is the common denominator.
 And anyone can check that thread and see how many people were involved in that discussion until you insisted on controlling the discussion.
Would you like me to show the posts where you support Ralph ? And where Ralph knowing English is my second language posted a few times that my spelling in English proves I'm an idiot.
 i think anyone that supports a bigot is a bigot.
  And now, once agian you are telling me you are trying to stop me from wasting my time on an idea that can not work.
 It seems history is on my side Alan, not yours. Of course, i have taken the time to become familiar wwith it.

Jim Lindgaard

 The fact that you will not leave well enough along and only talk wheel shows you to be the real cyber-stalker. I wasn't going to bring this up. I still hoped that there was hope for you. But you are not holding back at your constant attacks and misinformation to try to discredit me, has reached fanatical levels. >:(


To all
IMO, Jim Lindgaard can't reed, or understand a simple grid. Nor does he understand the basics of the research of gravity motors. If it is not in long drawn out math, he is incapable of understanding it. This makes him at best an educated idiot. This means you have to get inside his head and pray you don't get lost, to truly talk to him and I am not a psychiatrist so obviously I can't talk to him. But I will try this very basic part that all have to surpass to get a gravity wheel to even have a chance, unless a totally new way/approach was found.

So Jim
If you don't have enough weight in the correct position above the 3 to 9 mark, what I call the keel line. You will never ever lift the weights over for reset and achieve over balance. Very basic Physics uses falling weights (designs similar to what you show) to show this to be impossible.
Are you that disconnected from reality? Or are you just that desperate for attention? ::)

 So just stop talking to or about me. I will not stop talking to others and I wouldn't expect you to either. And most of all keep it on the wheel only. Like I have said before. This has to stop.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: AB Hammer on March 18, 2010, 12:03:38 AM


  Alan,
 You keep referring to your armoring. This is not an armoring forum.
 You told me
>>"SO GET A CLUE!!". <<
 maybe you need to get one.

 You again
>>No one should ask or in your case demand the answers without earning it.<<

 Hmm, you mean you don’t recognize 2 ½ years of discussions and builds not earning it ?

 You again
>> Besides I don't want to be apart of any of your wheels.<<

 If this were so, you would leave me alone.
 But as has been discussed before, you are nothing more than a business man looking for opportunity for yourself. In the thread “My Current Build”, you said you had ideas for my design. That one was a non-runner but you wanted to be a part of it as you liked the idea.
 This is an advanced design of what you admitted liking. And even if it doesn’t work, there are people that would find it interesting. After all, they might come up with their own variation or decide it does look good but doesn’t quite do it.
 But as I have said, people should be allowed to make decisions for themselves. And as to your being a  teacher that does not consider math, science, engineering or mechanics, that would go back to religion of which your step son Michael said you are a Theologian. As such, teacher and Messiah are the same word. Someone an expert in Antiquity such as yourself and a theologian would know that when jesus was called Messiah, he was being called teacher.

Jim Lindgaard

Stop talking to or about me. I will not stop talking to others and I wouldn't expect you to either. And most of all keep it on the wheel only. Like I have said before. This has to stop.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: AB Hammer on March 18, 2010, 12:05:25 AM
  @AB Hammer,
 You hAve me at a disadvantage.
I asked Alexioco to talk to you about leaving me alone. He told me I should stay away from you.
I told him that in the USA, what you have been doing is considered cyber stalking.
 While you might have posted in Museum of hoaxes that you are an American man and have said in here that I am anti-American, it is you who rejeect my schooling in engineering end experience int he US Navy and what I learned working at Boeing, Americca's largest exporter.
 You claim that your Medievel british Armoring makess you more knowledgeable. And really, can i expect alexioco to not support someone who supports the midievel British Empire ass much ass you do ? I would be a fool.
 After all, my own father is the same way about Norway. He does love his country. I think that is where I am different. I have lived in Europe as well as America and have family in both. Should I say one is superior ?
 This is where I might as well post in my own forum. Sooner or later people who would like to actually discuss more than British Armoring would be able to do so.

                                                                                         

Jim Lindgaard

 Stop talking to or about me. I will not stop talking to others and I wouldn't expect you to either. And most of all keep it on the wheel only. Like I have said before. This has to stop.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: AB Hammer on March 18, 2010, 12:25:55 AM
OK Jim

 WILL YOU STOP !! if I let you know one of my secrets?

Alan
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: AB Hammer on March 18, 2010, 01:11:17 AM
  Alan,
 I might be stopping. Doing builds that is. It is like when i was going through chemo therapy. One of the nurses said she heard it was like getting ran over by a car. I told her it was. They had to give me steroids so I could lay on my couch instead of the floor.
 Then with 2 weeks in the hospital for 2 surgeries could be dealt with. But add on another 4 1/2 weeks for infections plus the time out of the hospital with those infections and going a couple of weeks just about with out eating, thought I'd do something to forget about that. But have found this isn't it.
 Besides Alan, I think you have missed it. The water wheel is Bessler's wheel. But even that doesn't matter.
So the fool figured oiut how to use hydraulic principles. Unless someone could have invented a seal, it was worthless. With a seal, they could've had running water.
 But as it was then is as it is now, still the wrong time.

Jim

 Stop talking to or about me, and filling the forum with your delusional bull$#!+ of how you "know for sure"  (When it is best a hypotheses) with only veg relations at best. This can be translate and is by many as taking credit where credit is not due. For instance, nothing you have shown, shows any real relation with Abeling's wheel. If you do some research you will find another patent claim that is similar to Abeling's. A warped board (which was never said by Bessler by the way), only has a VEG resemblance to a large ramp. That is like saying that your home is like the Winchester house because it is made of wood. No real relations with design at all.

Alan
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: AB Hammer on March 18, 2010, 01:59:48 PM
[  Alan,
 What is delusional is you considering yourself a teacher.
Considering I got my self what schooling I could and have always taken the initiative in my life,
not sure why i would need an abusive person like you instructing me.
 I'd have to hate myself to learn anything from you.


                                                                    Jim

OK Jim

 So you go on baffling with bull$#!+ because you have no brilliance. And it seams you hate me so much. You fill it is your life's obligation to falsely accuse, and lie about me to try to destroy someone who may very well have the wheel. You have become my personal hemorrhoid of life. I need to buy some cybor hemorrhoid cream.

 As for Abeling's wheel you should read back on my comments from before where I said something like. I couldn't see how it could work and also posted an example of something that had been tried before. But Abeling is not trying to tell the world how much smarter he is than I so comments don't keep going back and forth.

There is a lesson for you there. If I say something prove me wrong with facts, not baffle with BULL$#!+. and then it moves one. Is that simple enough for you?


  But ass I've said, all you do is disagree with me. I mean really, calling me an educated idiot. Do you say that to anyone else ? Maybe not because peole quit posting when you join the discussion.

 I have called allot of people educated idiots in my life. They have all the book smarts and no basic capability. For instance if you can quote books and have no idea how to check you oil in their car. That is just an example of an educated idiot. As to killing strings. You are the main problem. You start attacking me and I have to defend myself from you lies and harassment. That is one of the reason you have been banned from several forums.

 OH! :o I think I have it. You are a Moe to mislead and attack inventors who may have the wheel. This way people will be tired of the forum because of your crap. And I am making the mistake of talking to you instead of pressing charges for your slander.  I hope they are paying you well. :o 

Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: X00013 on March 19, 2010, 03:24:05 AM
I need an over under spread, and or some dxfs
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: X00013 on March 19, 2010, 03:27:26 AM
I will bookie all bets. winner gets all via paypal thru public poll link.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: X00013 on March 19, 2010, 03:29:59 AM
just kidding, go elf urself, cheer up boys, life is futile
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: overtaker on March 19, 2010, 03:41:22 AM
X00013,    I will take the OVER  !   Jim will never quit.   I wish he would.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Dusty on March 19, 2010, 04:35:48 AM
I made a video where I measured the force at the end of both tracks: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aiAZJ70tf7k

Mostly it's an experiment to see what's really going on.

Thanks, Dusty

Oh, by the way I haven't given up on the gravity wheel.  I have some new ideas I need to test.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: overtaker on March 19, 2010, 12:18:15 PM
Great work as usual Dusty!   Many thanks.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: mondrasek on March 19, 2010, 02:32:11 PM
@Dusty, nicely done.

The start and end points of both ramps need to be at the same angle as well as same height to get exactly equal force results.  It looks like your "long ramp" ends with a slightly upward trajectory vs. the straight ramp.  If so, that would be the cause of the slightly different end force results you are seeing.

M.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: ramset on March 19, 2010, 02:42:16 PM
Dusty
Thanks for taking the time to test this!
It does seem like something to have in the mental tool box
when your thinking of the "what ifs".

Chet
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on March 19, 2010, 02:47:22 PM
@Dusty,

You the man. That's what everybody who's interested in this should be doing -- take the bull by the horns. Would it be possible to make this same experiment with a cycloid rather than with that wavy track? For one thing the average speed of the ball will be the fastest with the cycloid path, as is known from variational calculus. Cycloid path seems easier to make and it will be easier on the ball in terms of friction and steadiness of motion. Thanks again for the video.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: AB Hammer on March 19, 2010, 02:54:45 PM
Dusty

 I like what mondrasek said to the end of the ramps that way they have an equal impact direction and add to the due round bar I suggested. We also hve to remember that in a wheel it all has to take place in 1 second  per revolution at 60 rpms for an example. I will admit I like your impact test.

Alan
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: AB Hammer on March 20, 2010, 02:33:40 AM
  Dusty,
Don't worry about it. I already know it will work.
Alan is the actual problem. He has said many times he only considers his armoring to be real engineering.
This is because when I worked at Boeing, I worked in a hammer shop. He doesn't consider hand work parts that support the structural integrity of an airplane as engineering.
 He's also said my having cancer doesn't matter as other people have cancer. My mother died from the same cancer I had last year in 2005. He can tell it to her along with his supporters.
 You will see, there is ignorance and then there are Alan and his supporters. They think a bad attitude os better. it means they don't have to do or show anything.
 After all, none of them have shown a build based on an idea. For what you builtt, Alan couldn't do.
 To let you know how bad it can be in here, when I posted that if I got what I believe to be Bessler's wheel on the history channel, I would be happy. Alan responded that I wanted to rule the world.
 And next he'll post I lie but his post is still there.

Correction time as usual for Jim

Alan is the actual problem. He has said many times he only considers his armoring to be real engineering.

No you are the problem, and I said Blacksmithing/armouring is an early and pure form of engineering as well. YOU!! said it was not engineering.

The rest is so many lies and bull$#!+ it is not worth commenting on.

I knew he would to come back to lie and slander

By the way Jim. How are you going to keep your wheel from doing this as show in the picture below? For what I see this is all you are going to get. Like I said I only want to talk wheel.

Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: overtaker on March 20, 2010, 03:05:17 AM
Here is another BRILLIANT idea from Jim.  ::)

P-Motion
elite_member
Hero Member

Posts: 1162

Re: Bessler's Water Wheel ?
« Reply #92 on: February 25, 2010, 09:50:24 PM »Quote  @All,
 The attached pic shows one way the weights could work together. This would allow for gravity being used twice as a weight falls.
 First, it lifts a weight inward helping to conserve energy.
Then second, the lever it is on presses against a warped board pumping the water upward.


I don't know how he expects one weight to lift another equal weight as pictured and have power left to force water up.  All this in a fraction of a second! 

Jim,  you hate being proven wrong and when you are, you act like a whining bitch!  Stop allready.  Just talk wheels or shut up. 
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: topothemtn on March 20, 2010, 04:24:42 AM
SO. After 2.5 years and 156 pages ,has anyone made one of these that really works????
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: AB Hammer on March 20, 2010, 11:23:04 PM
  overtaker,
 This is the reason Alan and I are not getting along right now. While he won't admit it, it is the reason he didn't want me building new slots for the wheel I have.
 This is also why I believe he refered to himself as a teacher. Not sure, but do believe teacher's would be concerned about the health of their students. I don't think he understands the problems that can come along with medical problems. Otherwise, he'd be hoping I'd work past my problems so I can build it.
 I am fairly certain other people in here would like to see it built. But at the moment I don't have the $150 minimum for tooling I would need before I think about starting the build.
 But the wait also allows me to review the design as it does have to have one to be built. And for it being built using wood, I am about the only one in here with any experience in building wheels that are 6 feet in diameter.


                                                                                              Jim

edited be ause I left the k out of like

NO! NO! NO! Jim

 I want you to build your wheels. For only then, will you see I was only trying to save you some time and money. But since you don't believe my opinion you have no choice but to build. Also once I finish building my running wheel I will even help you out with the expenses.

 Now stop crying about your illnesses. Like I said before, you are stronger than that. I believe this statement is what you called me being cruel to you. Now I work with pain every day, but I am stronger than my pain. That is the lesson you should learn. I have a big wooden sign over the door way to remind me to go on. Thou shalt not whine.

Here is something my grandfather told me a long time ago. (he died at 96 years of age) he worked till the day he died.
>> Never retire in your hart or mind for that is a consent to death. <<
 So when you give up, your heath will deteriorate. Now, have I been truly cruel? Only if you look at it as you have to be cruel to be kind. ;)

P.S. Bessler said something like size didn't matter. LOL  I stick with wheel no bigger than 4 foot. That way I can transport them in a car or truck. Now that doesn't include the stands height. 
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: X00013 on March 21, 2010, 05:34:47 AM
Good Talk  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v3pYRn5j7oI
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: AB Hammer on March 21, 2010, 02:46:12 PM
x00013,
 What I consider pure eengineering are the Viking Long Ships. Considering that to think about these, we need to consider going back in time about 1,000 years.
 Also they allowed the Vikings to cross the Atlantic Ocean as well as sail to the Middle East.
With the speed they possessed and the cargo they could carry, it shows they were strong and durable.
 Pure engineering at it's finest.

Thanks Jim for bringing this up.

 In viking times the blacksmiths were always involved  with any construction and engineering. From the designing to the tools and what ever is needed to build the ship. Except the wood cutting, and sail weaving but the smith made their tools to do that job as well.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: AB Hammer on March 21, 2010, 03:17:14 PM
  To discuss armoring as pure engineering, I think I would go with Roman Armoring.
 One of the reasons for this is that British Armoring was far more mechanized.
http://www.buzzle.com/articles/ancient-roman-armor.html

The advancements of the Romans were impressive for all the construction and military tactics ect. Alot was assimilated from other countries they conquered. All the artisans, blacksmiths/armorers, ect. were always assimilated into the roman society for their advancements.

Now back to wheel work. Bessler dealt with blacksmith for all the tools, weights, gears, drills, fasteners, files, ect. of what he needed. 

BTW, Here is one of my Roman chest plates that is a bit more historic. I study all ancient history for the mechanical advancements. For I am quite often involved with reconstruction of such machines due to my skills. 
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: AB Hammer on March 21, 2010, 04:59:23 PM
  I doubt metal smiths designed those ships. In what I have learned about them, that has never been suggested.
 As for the sail making, the needles were most likely made out of bone. So as far as the sills go, metal smiths most likely had nothing to do with them.
 It is possible the ships were made using the adzes the metal smiths made. and that could be the closest they came to those ships. Of course if they were cross trained, then I would have something in common with them.

Jim you need to read this about viking needles.
http://www.stringpage.com/viking/needles.html
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: AB Hammer on March 21, 2010, 05:19:09 PM
Or it could be you're just an armorer. With your air bubble idea, I made a couple suggestions. But you stayed with your idea as posted. The design did have flaws.
 Such as a blower consumes to much energy before it can pump air. it is not positive displacemnent which is needed at low rpm's. Also, air bubbles in water will try to float what is above it. Yet you believed it would decrease the density of water allowing a weighted float to sink.
 There is a difference between manufacturing soemthing and understanding the engineering behind it.

Jim
 
 About the bubbles. Even the Myth Busters proved you can sink boats with bubbles. The only real problem is can it get enough bubbles to make it work and will it work well enough to keep enough bubbles.

As for being an engineer it means

Quote
Engineers apply the principles of science and mathematics to develop economical solutions to technical problems. Their work is the link between scientific discoveries and the commercial applications that meet societal and consumer needs.

Quote
Metallurgy is a domain of materials science that studies the physical and chemical behavior of metallic  elements, their intermetallic compounds, and their mixtures, which are called alloys. It is also the technology  of metals: the way in which science is applied to their practical use. Metallurgy is commonly used in the craft of metalworking.

metallurgy. safety equipment/armour. designs of all kinds of equipment and the construction of.  ballistics, to know how much protection to apply to the armour. Like I have said, the Blacksmithing/armouring  is pure engineering. But there are allot of engineering titles, and allot of them have nothing to do with what either of us do. So can we stop with all this of who is or is not an engineer? It is totally trivial in reality.

Alan
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: AB Hammer on March 21, 2010, 06:32:48 PM
In your concept Alan, bubbles would not have worked. As usual, you cahnged the discussion to someone else. You're not the Myth Busters. Besides, they've already proved perpetual motion is impossible if you go by what they say.
 As for what bessler said, a good carpenter could build his wheel. This means my brother Eddie would be better qualified than you as he has over 35 years of construction experience.
 I know what an engineer is Alan, I've worked with many in my life. This is how I know you are not o0ne.
 You sound more like an attorney trying a case. But you can present no eviddence as to your engineering abiliity. Your grid and Keel Effect are testaments to this. You do not discuss the actual engineering.
 If you understood it, you would. I think this is why you get upset with me, I do dscuss engineering in detail.

FDROLMAO Jim

 I prove without a shadow of a bought with quotes from definitions of an engineer and you now say  you that it don't count and you judge. WOW I didn't realize I was talking to an engineering god. ::)
Give it up! It is only trivial, especially your opinion. As to what someone is. You don't have the authority or the qualification to give or take titles away.  So go play with yourself and leave this trivial crap out of it.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: AB Hammer on March 21, 2010, 06:37:46 PM
  What's your point ? You said they used metal needles. I pointed out your mistake and you have proven me right.
 At least one of us knows history.

You Idiot, I never said they didn't use bone but what the link said is only large needles the rest are metals. And that doesn't mean large needle were not made or metal either. What tools are there to make the large needle. A metal knife perhaps?

 Without Blacksmith we would all be in the stone age. Nothing more need be said.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: AB Hammer on March 21, 2010, 07:21:20 PM

 Your grid and Keel Effect are not engineering. They both missed the potential of Mt 24.
 Yet things in here will never change because you wish to be recognized as having some type of engineering ability which you are unwilling to demonstrate.


                                                                                Jim

Jim

 Do you still don't know how to read this simple stagnant grid?  It is nothing more that a grid of spacing yet it is more valuable than all you have ever talked about. If you need to check the movement you will have to use the grid for each and every movement of the wheel to check placements. If your placements don't show overbalance you better hope your effects will compensate, or you won't have a chance of a runner. But yet it is a simple grid  ;D

Alan
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: AB Hammer on March 21, 2010, 10:42:17 PM
  I prefferr learning. If I lived in the Stone Age, then it might seem like a good idea.
But in being a modern human or homo sapien, I can reason.
 This means I can understand concepts in math and how the laws of science might apply to them.
 Of course, as I have mentioned, it missed the potential in Mt 24. It did not observe there was an over balance.
 If so, you would not have been pushing your keel effect. Still don't know how that applies to a wheel with an obvious over balance, but you sy it does. End of discussion.
 That is why there is nothng to talk about. You won't let us out of the Stone Age. After all, I beleive Bessler used hydraulics which in his time would have been an advanced concept. It is something that you seem to have no understanding of.
 But we could continue on talking about how vital your work  is to the rise of modern science and living, but it is only a part of what has been learned.
 After all, when iw orked at Boeing I worked with exotic metals but haven't said that without Boeing we'd have nothing.

To much Bull$#!+ to reply. Totally out of content.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: AB Hammer on March 21, 2010, 10:53:35 PM
  Thi8s is a funny one. Speaking of exotic metals, the Chinese had developed titanium 2,000 years ago.
But they turned their metalurgy into plows.
 The secret they discoverred which European metal smiths missed was that round bellows pumped more air than the spade type bellows they used.
 If they would've understood how air flow could increase the burn in their fires, who knows what advances they might've helped bring about. But they missed a principle in engineering that they worked with on a daily basis.
 You see, the Chinese used double pistons to move more air. This allowed one pump to be pushing air into the fire box. Because of this, theyr actually invented diffeent alloys. And with your bubble machnie, I suggested to you to use a piston type pump but you said you would only consider a blower because you had worked with them.
 As I said Alan, there really is nothing to be discussed. And it is okay if you call me an idiot. Your friend has ridiculed me for admitting I served in the U.S. Navy while you call me anti-American.
 And to think you can't admit having served in the U.S. Coast Gaurd.

                                                                                 Bye
 A modern parallel for an observation about the past.

tiss tiss Jim

People don't ridicule you for serving in the US Navy. That should be something to be proud of. It is the anti American statements you have made.
 I don't flaunt my time in the Coast Guard as a crutch. I severed it proudly and have no need to bring it up to the likes of you. 

PS you don't know jack about Blacksmithing. Your little search into bellows proves it. And I am not going to teach you. You found a reference and I have hundreds. I don't think you know what a forge it either.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: AB Hammer on March 22, 2010, 01:21:53 AM
You're funny Alan. You tell me to listen to Michael and he said that is where your keel effect came from your time in the USCG. You said it was your armoring made you aware of things in histroy.
 I was ridiculed for serving in the Navy by a friend of yours. That is anti-American in my book.
You keep saying I make anti_American statements but have never shown anything.
 What is even funnier is how you say metal smiths have done this and that and yet reject machinists as not as valued as armorers.
 Myself, I've worked on parts that allow planes to fly and have made parts that went on satelites in space.
A modern metal worker.
 By the way, the specific reason i was ridiculed for serving in the Navy is beause I said I went to school.
It seems you and your friends reject education.
 As for you wanting me to look up bellows, look up when advanced alloys were discovered, it was either late 19th or early 20th century.
 But as I said, you sound like a lawyer trying to prove something. Could be you have no physical evidence to support your claims. Other wise you wouldn't be saying you proved a definition or technical point. You have a position to protect which would make you entitled.
 I think that's all you are about. That is why you used to promote yourself so much as belonging to rlortie's private for profit build group. Lately you haven't mentioned your affiliation with him ? Has he tired of you ?

p.s. I didn't do a search about the bellows. I'm not like you. Did you find when they could make titanium ?

It is funnier that you keep telling everybody what I think and believe. For you have no idea.
But here is one of your statement, that I never said or insinuated. Your slander is endless.

 What is even funnier is how you say metal smiths have done this and that and yet reject machinists as not as valued as armorers.
 Myself, I've worked on parts that allow planes to fly and have made parts that went on satelites in space.

The fact are you are taught to operate machines. You build to specifications. If you do your job correctly it passes inspection and is applied to the machine it goes on. This will make you a good worker that follows instruction.
 Now a Blacksmith get a picture, description or part of a machine he has to fit and design a part to fit or even invent and he makes it by hand. Histrionically the first machinist tools were made by blacksmiths. If it were not for Blacksmiths mechanical engineers would not exist. You owe your job existence to the blacksmith trade.
 The glory if the machinist trade, they at first were Blacksmiths that built the machine which was used to build a bigger and better machine and it continues from there to our modern technology.  This will be the same with the wheel. From each wheel that come into existence the next one will be a bigger and better wheel. That is the way of progress. Don't ever forget your origin, or you insult the trade.

PS. When I get time I will go back through all the post and get all the anti American statements and put them on a string just for you with all references to where you posted them. That will be a job for it will take time to sort through all your Bull$#!+.  But that is what you are asking for and have given permission in writing, so you can't holler slander. FDROLMAO

Your statement
You keep saying I make anti_American statements but have never shown anything.
Legally you just asked me to show them. FDROLMAO
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: AB Hammer on March 22, 2010, 03:40:55 AM
  Alan,
 Do you know what makes you sound like a bigot ? When you said that if my dad worked for you for 4 years you could teach him.
Then you turn around say people like him who built ships, boats, tooling and other things support the fact that you're an engineer.
 It shows how funny you are in a sick way. He can do the work and you say it supports you. He's shown many people how capable he is. Yert all you can say is armoring, one thing.
 It's like even omnibus tried pointing out to you, it has nothing to do with wheels.
 If you're such a good armorer, why are you trying to make yourself out to know all types of engineering ?
The fact I spent my time learning is something you don't like. It doesn't allow you to contol my thoughts.
 Of course, I haven't seen you harass anyone like you have me. And yet you call me anti-American because I don't support your beliefs. Another sign of bigotry.

Jim
 I am about to go to bed. I have been working wheel work off and on all day and I should be finished tomorrow night. But I am winding down and I will answer all this statement piece by piece.

 Do you know what makes you sound like a bigot ?
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/bigot
Sorry but a bigot falls in the same category as a raciest and sometimes call together a raciest bigot. I am neither and have friends of all races and all over the world. And would not be afraid of calling any of them brother, or sister.

When you said that if my dad worked for you for 4 years you could teach him.
To build by hand it would take about 4 years to cross train for the average person, because it does not depend on machines, and hand skill is harder to learn. But I am sure he could teach me allot of modern machinist work as well.

Then you turn around say people like him who built ships, boats, tooling and other things support the fact that you're an engineer. It shows how funny you are in a sick way. He can do the work and you say it supports you. He's shown many people how capable he is. Yert all you can say is armoring, one thing.
 It's like even omnibus tried pointing out to you, it has nothing to do with wheels.
 If you're such a good armorer, why are you trying to make yourself out to know all types of engineering ?
 There are all kinds of engineers and in history the Blacksmith was in the middle of all of it.  The rest you spouted is nothing but garbage and I believe omnibus was talking to you about starting all these arguments. Again for all these argument you are the sick one. I want to talk wheel.

The fact I spent my time learning is something you don't like. It doesn't allow you to contol my thoughts.
 Of course, I haven't seen you harass anyone like you have me. And yet you call me anti-American because I don't support your beliefs. Another sign of bigotry.

No good deed goes unpunished they say. I tried to help you and you call it controlling your thoughts, and forever more attacking me and calling me what you have proved to be. FDROLMAO  It is so ridiculous I have to laugh.

Good night
Alan
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: AB Hammer on March 22, 2010, 01:24:32 PM
 And when you call me anti-American for being unhappy with people who harassed me beause I wanted to meet a woman who lives in the Ukraine is called what ?
 As to your engineering tools like your grid and keel effect, neither allows for hydraulics to be considered.
I think this helps to demonstrate your lack of understanding when it comes to engineering.
If you had a point to make that wasn't based on a technical definition, you wouldn't need to write so much.

Jim

 And when you call me anti-American for being unhappy with people who harassed me beause I wanted to meet a woman who lives in the Ukraine is called what ?

Personally, I couldn't care less about your personal life and who you meet.

 As to your engineering tools like your grid and keel effect, neither allows for hydraulics to be considered.
I think this helps to demonstrate your lack of understanding when it comes to engineering.

This show your ignorance. Hydraulics fluid/water has weight. From what you have shown in your approach is using the fluid as weight. The grid is use for weight displacement. You do have to know how much weight the fluid is for your calculations. Like I said, it is a stagnant simple grid. It is not a animation computer simulator like it seams you want. But if you learned how to use it, it would be a useful tool in wheel designing. Your biggest problem is you want to over complicate everything in long drawn out math.

Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: AB Hammer on March 22, 2010, 09:41:01 PM
We're discussing your theology, right ? It's like Michael said, nobody wants to discuss it with you because you are right. This implies everybody else is wrong.
 And that is what you say about engineering. We need to accept your belief based on your testimony and your witnesses. Yet with engineering, it is something usually demonstrated.
 I like what you said about your grid, it is stagnant. That would be a proper assessment. using math allows for the rotation of the wheel and is much easier to calculate. As you said with your grid, the wheel would have to be turned and everything figured out numerous times. A lot of work for questionable results. With math, the estimates would much more approximate the real values being discussed. but for someone who has never taken the time to learn any math, I should expect as much.
 By the way, why won't you let Michael post any more ? Was it because he let us know something about you ? I believe that is why.

Jim

Every time you loose an argument, you change direction and attack from a non related position, again, and again. We call this a dizzying intellect. You and your opinions have proven over and over, time and time again to have absolutely no value. Therefor you have no value and you are a complete wast of time. IMO

I did find your stupidity funny from time to time. For IMO you can't see the end of your nose. But overused humor get old quick and is no longer funny. Well there is wheel work to be done and promoted.
Good Buy

FDROLMAO,FDROLMAO,FDROLMAO,FDROLMAO,FDROLMAO,FDROLMAO,FDROLMAO,FDROLMAO
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Cloxxki on March 23, 2010, 12:23:36 AM
Gentlemen, please. Take it offline, will ya?
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: overtaker on March 24, 2010, 12:49:00 AM
Jim said: 

With the water wheel, I can show where about all descriptions and clues of Bessler's wheel fits it.


This is great.  Move back to your thread on the water wheel and state them one by one.  Let us respond one by one.  It should make for some good conversation. Let us point out any faults or improvements to the design without the bickering.
Sound good?   :)    We may all learn something.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: grayone on March 24, 2010, 12:56:58 AM
Jim

Every time you loose an argument, you change direction and attack from a non related position, again, and again. We call this a dizzying intellect. You and your opinions have proven over and over, time and time again to have absolutely no value. Therefor you have no value and you are a complete wast of time. IMO

I did find your stupidity funny from time to time. For IMO you can't see the end of your nose. But overused humor get old quick and is no longer funny. Well there is wheel work to be done and promoted.
Good Buy

FDROLMAO,FDROLMAO,FDROLMAO,FDROLMAO,FDROLMAO,FDROLMAO,FDROLMAO,FDROLMAO

P-Motion Jim; You don't get the hint do you. He said Good Buy. Not goodbye. FDROLMAO He has to much to do to talk/bicker with you.

Goodbye
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Lucius Annaeus on June 03, 2010, 05:34:37 PM
Hi all, I'm new here, and wanted to know if someone has found out something new about Sjack Abeling's machine/power plant recently.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: pstroud on July 10, 2010, 04:20:17 PM
Attached is another video on my progress with having 16 weights installed and 8 cross-bars. The ramp at the bottom has been revised. I shortened all of the cross bars so the weights move in 12" on the ascending side.

Next, I plan to install a ramp at the top as shown in the video below:

<link>http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P_lZgn4pasA</link>

Preston Stroud
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Cloxxki on July 11, 2010, 12:55:02 AM
Best Abeling build quality so far Preston! That's a lot of parts you crafted there...

What just occured to me. If the wheel turn fast enough, might the centrifugal forces help the weights to fall in place on top? A telecopic rod might do this job. Push/support at low speeds, extend when the top weight wants to take a wider radius.
In dusty's wheel, the sling shot action on the top was quite violent, just not a self runner. Perhaps weight should not be restricted all the way around...
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: robbie47 on December 29, 2010, 08:20:00 PM
An update on Sjack Abeling's website:

http://www.mooieenergie.nl/index.php/en/component/content/article/1-bedrijfsinformatie/11-nieuwsbrief-november-2010
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on December 29, 2010, 09:18:50 PM
That's an old chestnut. There's nothing happening there.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Cloxxki on December 29, 2010, 11:09:10 PM
That's an old chestnut. There's nothing happening there.
Well, it seems they're claiming to make one self-runner-destructor at a time.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: getterdone on January 23, 2011, 04:11:40 PM
  Hi Preston, a few years ago I had built a wheel very similar to the Sjack. After a while I came to the conclusion that I was trying to lift the weights to fast from the six o'clock position , to the nine o'clock position. I then built two tracks one going from the 4:30 position to the 6:oo position and the other from the 12:00 to 2:00. With that track arrangement the weighhts were being shifted while rolling down on tracks. I was getting close, but I think that my wheel design had more friction in it than yours

   I which I could find pictures of this build, but I thinK they got deleted by my kids playing with the camera.
 
    Best of luck

    Leo
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: neptune on January 23, 2011, 04:37:40 PM
They claim that experiments are difficult and expensive , because the device runs out of controll . Bullshine I say . A large generator with a resistive controll would take care of it with a car type brake as back up .
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: getterdone on January 25, 2011, 01:45:21 AM
     Hi Neptune, I agree. I can easily think of a dozen ways to slow down a wheel. A hydromatic braking system would solve that problem quite easily.

     I also think that what they are doing is, say they got something and try to raise money, then drag it out. Should someone else solve the riddle then they'll claim it was their design.

       Regardless I still think that the design has merit
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on January 25, 2011, 02:00:31 AM
     Hi Neptune, I agree. I can easily think of a dozen ways to slow down a wheel. A hydromatic braking system would solve that problem quite easily.

     I also think that what they are doing is, say they got something and try to raise money, then drag it out. Should someone else solve the riddle then they'll claim it was their design.

       Regardless I still think that the design has merit

I agree, the design has merit. The problem is how to decrease friction.

Like I've said many times, the winner is the one who can make a working device and have it replicated independently. They are fooling themselves if they think they can claim priority over such a trivial idea, known for centuries.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: spinn_MP on January 25, 2011, 10:52:13 AM
Sorry to say, but the design concept is almost as old as humanity, and without any chance of a success...

But I can understand that some of you need to find out that all by yourself.

So, Good Luck!




Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: spinn_MP on January 25, 2011, 11:24:38 AM
I agree, the design has merit. The problem is how to decrease friction.

Ah, geee...

If I can provide you with a zero loss environment and equipment, how much power would you possibly been able to squeeze out from that (naive) concept?

The answer is very easy.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on January 25, 2011, 01:55:12 PM
Producing excess energy is a matter of principle and science isn't interested in how much excess energy is produced. Any amount of excess energy produced, even very small, violates the principle of conservation of energy. In a zero-loss environment production of excess energy is inherent in this well-known design. By the way there's no guarantee that a working wheel based on this or a similar principle hasn't been made sometime in the past but has been suppressed. So it's better not to resort to statements that it has never been done to justify beliefs that a working machine of this kind can never be made.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: MrMag on January 25, 2011, 04:20:31 PM
In a zero-loss environment production of excess energy is inherent in this well-known design.

In a zero-loss environment, most of the devices on the "unworkable devices" website would also work. We could get all kinds of devices to work in a zero-loss environment. Damn you losses!
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on January 25, 2011, 04:24:40 PM
The site for the unworking devices is to be ignored by anyone interested in scientific argumentation. The fact that someone called Dsimanek doesn't understand that some of these devices are not unworking doesn't make them unworking.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: WilbyInebriated on January 25, 2011, 04:31:24 PM
The site for the unworking devices is to be ignored by anyone interested in scientific argumentation. The fact that someone called Dsimanek doesn't understand that some of these devices are not unworking doesn't make them unworking.
indeed, the fact that they don't work is what makes them nonworking...
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: MrMag on January 25, 2011, 04:40:18 PM
The site for the unworking devices is to be ignored by anyone interested in scientific argumentation. The fact that someone called Dsimanek doesn't understand that some of these devices are not unworking doesn't make them unworking.

The reference to the site is in response to your "zero loss environment" statement. If there was such a thing, those devices could possibly work.

Your statement "these devices are not working doesn't make them unworking", makes a lot of sense. Can't argue with logic like that. :)
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on January 25, 2011, 04:44:54 PM
The fact that they don't work only indicates that someone has been incapable of making them work. The fact that someone has no talent or infrastructure to make a workable machine workable doesn't prove that the machine is unworkable in principle. Hwere's the proof that someone called Dismanek can make a workable internal combustion engine, for instance? Placing an unworkable internal compustion engine in the museum of unworkable devices doesn't prove that internal combustion engines are unworkable. It only shows that Dsimanek is a charlatan and has to be ignored to say the least.

Making something is one thing, scientific principles and logic quite another.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: WilbyInebriated on January 25, 2011, 04:47:53 PM
The fact that they don't work only indicates that someone has been incapable of making them work. The fact that someone has no talent or infrastructure to make a workable machine workable doesn't prove that the machine is unworkable in principle. Hwere's the proof that someone called Dismanek can make a workable internal combustion engine, for instance? Placing an unworkable internal compustion engine in the museum of unworkable devices doesn't prove that internal combustion engines are unworkable. It only shows that Dsimanek is a charlatan and has to be ignored to say the least.

Making something is one thing, scientific principles and logic quite another.
whether or not "someone called dismanek can make a workable internal combustion engine" or evidence of proof of such is irrelevant and nothing more than a red herring... internal combustion engines work...   ::)

that's cute how you reference logic while utterly failing to use it... been studying under q2?
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on January 25, 2011, 04:52:56 PM
The logic behind "these devices are not working doesn't make them unworking" is clear unless someone wants to twist logic. The museum is not set up to demonstrate a bunch of crap that doesn't work but to prove that the principle these devices are based on is unworkable. If general principles can be disproved by placing a bunch of unworkable crap in a compilation called museum then it's easy to disprove any workable principle -- just show how incapable you are and that'll do.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on January 25, 2011, 04:58:06 PM
Internal combustion engines work not because someone has made them to show you they work. They would work even if you haven't seen them work because the principles they are based on work. Same applies to perpetuum mobile. The fact that someone called Dsimanek cannot make a perpetuum mobile work doesn't at all mean that a working perpetuum mobile cannot be made because the principle for a working perpetuum mobile to be made works. No one has ever seen a Tokamak work but billions are still been poured in to make a working Tokamak because the principle it's based on works.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: WilbyInebriated on January 25, 2011, 05:01:40 PM
The logic behind "these devices are not working doesn't make them unworking" is clear unless someone wants to twist logic. The museum is not set up to demonstrate a bunch of crap that doesn't work but to prove that the principle these devices are based on is unworkable. If general principles can be disproved by placing a bunch of unworkable crap in a compilation called museum then it's easy to disprove any workable principle -- just show how incapable you are and that'll do.
LOL
::) the general principles these devices are based upon is what makes them unworkable. not the fact that someone has made a collection out of them...

Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on January 25, 2011, 05:07:42 PM
Someone called dsimanek has only proved how incapable he is to make a workable device. That's the only thing he has proven with the collection he has made. There is no proof provided by the individual dsimanek that the general principle these devices are based on is unworkable. And, how can he proce that since just the opposite can be proved, namely that the general principle these devices are based on is workable.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: MrMag on January 25, 2011, 05:19:50 PM
Someone called dsimanek has only proved how incapable he is to make a workable device. That's the only thing he has proven with the collection he has made. There is no proof provided by the individual dsimanek that the general principle these devices are based on is unworkable. And, how can he proce that since just the opposite can be proved, namely that the general principle these devices are based on is workable.

I think you are now starting to confuse yourself. The general principle these devices are based on is workable? Maybe they look like they can work. You may even be able to prove it scientifically, if you use the formulas you like, but in real life, they don't work.

Tell you what. You build a working model of one of the devices that he has on his site and I will start a petition for him to remove it from his site. I am sure you are more then capable of building one of these devices.

Wilby, not sure if even the double will suffice.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: spinn_MP on January 25, 2011, 05:21:20 PM
Someone called dsimanek has only proved how incapable he is to make a workable device. That's the only thing he has proven with the collection he has made. There is no proof provided by the individual dsimanek that the general principle these devices are based on is unworkable. And, how can he proce that since just the opposite can be proved, namely that the general principle these devices are based on is workable.

Your anger towards "dismanek" just proves that you don't have a clue about what you're preaching here day in day out... 
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on January 25, 2011, 05:24:39 PM
If someone would apply the non-scientific approach of asking to first see a working device in order to understand that a principle it is based on works then that someone should first ask the Tokamak guys to present a working Tokamak before waiting for new billions of dollars for their project to pour in.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on January 25, 2011, 05:28:40 PM
Dsimanek site proves nothing else but the fact that he is an opportunist who doesn't quite understand scientific reasoning let alone how to make a working device. His lack of talents and understanding can serve as no proof for whether or not a principle is workable.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: MrMag on January 25, 2011, 05:38:03 PM
Dsimanek site proves nothing else but the fact that he is an opportunist who doesn't quite understand scientific reasoning let alone how to make a working device. His lack of talents and understanding can serve as no proof for whether or not a principle is workable.

opportunist? You mean he is making money on his site? I didn't know that.

Scientific reasoning trumps building a unworkable device that doesn't work.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: spinn_MP on January 25, 2011, 05:41:35 PM
Dsimanek site proves nothing else but the fact that he is an opportunist who doesn't quite understand scientific reasoning let alone how to make a working device. His lack of talents and understanding can serve as no proof for whether or not a principle is workable.

This is silly. Anyone who understands what is on prof. Symanek site, can also understand that you're talking nonsense.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on January 25, 2011, 05:44:58 PM
Indeed, scientific reasoning trumps showing a device that doesn't work. When scientific reasoning proves that the principle is workable, as in the case at hand, presenting an unworkable device doesn't overthrow that scientific reasoning.

As far as making money on that you should know better.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on January 25, 2011, 05:46:48 PM
Anyone who understands what's on the dsimanek site should know better not to conclude that the scientific principle at the basis of these devices is unworkable. That site is just a compilation of something an opportunist such as dsimanek fails to understand and that's only a demonstrqtion of his misunderstanding of the matter at hand.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on January 25, 2011, 05:51:02 PM
The confusion of someone such as dsimanek should never be used as an argument in scientific reasoning.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: WilbyInebriated on January 25, 2011, 05:59:45 PM
Anyone who understands what's on the dsimanek site should know better not to conclude that the scientific principle at the basis of these devices is unworkable. That site is just a compilation of something an opportunist such as dsimanek fails to understand and that's only a demonstrqtion of his misunderstanding of the matter at hand.
you're being far too vague and general. select one device out of the collection and let's get down to brass tacks. that means pick one, then define the scientific principle that is the basis of said device and we can go from there...

and why don't you start a new thread to do it in... ::)
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on January 25, 2011, 06:02:46 PM
Sjack Abeling's device, for instance, is based on a workable principle. It inherently contains in its very construction a persistent violation of the lever rule at every position of the wheel.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: spinn_MP on January 30, 2011, 01:17:22 AM
Sjack Abeling's device, for instance, is based on a workable principle. It inherently contains in its very construction a persistent violation of the lever rule at every position of the wheel.

Working principle, my ass.
Sjack Ab's device is a joke for the kids. Naturally, you swallowed it, hook and sinker.

Now, what?
Where are your proofs, Omnibot?
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on January 30, 2011, 02:11:36 AM
In addition to the fact that the center of mass is always sideways with respect to the center of rotation at any position of the wheel (that is, the lever rule is persistently violated at every position of the wheel) which can be verified at once using WM2D, the total torque calculated for every position of the wheel is always of negative value, as is seen in the graph below. These two facts prove that inherently the wheel at hand is an overunity device. If a technical way is found for friction to be decreased below the limit of obstructing the inherent OU effect (OU effect is inherent, friction is changeable, depending on the skills of the builder) a working perpetuum mobile can be built.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: spinn_MP on January 30, 2011, 02:33:29 AM
Lol, Ok, Omni, try to comprehend this:

An usefull work is something that you can ACTUALLY use to do something... And, a "zero loss environment" doesn't guarantee you that. 
"Sjack's Abeling's wheel" is a dead duck. One of the many, many, previously understood concepts.

Btw, why don't you start with Leonardo's calculations? Wrt. "overbalance", that is? And even Leonardo had a "version of Sjack Abelings"  concept in his papers... (lol)

And, why are you so frustrated with a friction? Surely, you should be more concerned about the "useful work"?
Friction would be just a small part (losses) of the (otherwise) WORKING device.

Typically, energy IN equals to energy OUT ("useful work" + "losses").

Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on January 30, 2011, 02:47:42 AM
It's just propaganda that perpetuum mobile has never been made because, obviously, the concept it is based on is viable and therefore doable. Unfortunately, the mainstream resoirces and infrastructure are deliberately diverted to mostly fruitless projects.

As for useful work, the work done by violating the lever rule is an example of useful work. Persistently violating the lever rule, as in the device at hand, known for centuries, is persistent doing of useful work. Working internal combustion engines also do useful work but when increasing friction by, say, placing sand inside an ICE will make it non-working. That doesn't mean that ICE's cannot do useful work.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: spinn_MP on January 30, 2011, 02:55:03 AM
Btw, what is a (persistent) violation of a "lever rule"
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: rlortie on January 30, 2011, 02:58:24 AM
In addition to the fact that the center of mass is always sideways with respect to the center of rotation at any position of the wheel (that is, the lever rule is persistently violated at every position of the wheel) which can be verified at once using WM2D, the total torque calculated for every position of the wheel is always of negative value, as is seen in the graph below. These two facts prove that inherently the wheel at hand is an overunity device. If a technical way is found for friction to be decreased below the limit of obstructing the inherent OU effect (OU effect is inherent, friction is changeable, depending on the skills of the builder) a working perpetuum mobile can be built.

Omnibus,

I do not post on this forum very often any more, it is guys like you and P-motion that have driven me away. You keep screaming about how good Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel is but yet you post a wm2D graph showing negative torque for every position of the wheel. when will you come to your senses and get off your soap box. 

This thread is now 161 pages long and pushing it's third year of existence. Some of the best members to be found have built, modified, and experimented with similar proto-types.  All to no avail, this thing will never work. I advised Preston Stroud of that fact when he offered to collaborate with me on his build. I told him that I was not interested because it will not work.

My biggest bitch is to be interrupted with e-mail notifications that a new post has been made on this thread which should by all rights be dead and closed.

As for Abling's website stating that they were having problems with the machine running away with itself is a crock of bull.  The machine has never worked, in fact I rather doubt if the build of his plywood proto-type shown in his introductory video was ever finished.

Please take your negative results stating that it will produce power to some other forum, or at least to a different catagory that I am not linked to.

Ralph   
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: spinn_MP on January 30, 2011, 03:07:14 AM
Sorry, Ralph, I am guilty of provoking Omni...

I had some free time to tease him...

It won't happen again, I promise! 
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on January 30, 2011, 03:19:19 AM
The negative torque data I posted is not obtained by using WM2D but by a very rigorous, alas tedious calculating of the total torque for each position of the wheel. It is good that those who do not understand the scientific argumentation, let alone have their own contributions, restrain from posting here. They should continue to do so. Otherwise the important stuff will sink into gibberish, as sometimes happens, unfortunately.

As to why no one so far in the forum has been able to make a working machine, the answer is simple, everyone who tried is working under substandard conditions, thus cutting his throat. What else is new? Making a machine such as this one, which needs fine-tuning, is difficult but not as difficult as, say, making an Intel processor. If you disagree, go to your garage and use @Dusty's tools to make one. I admire @Dusty for his great persistence and skills but even he, sorry to repeat, is working with infrastructure that isn't up to the task. This is not to mean I blame him but the proper infrastructure and resources are fully controlled by the powers that be who not only don't want to hear about perpetuum mobile but will drown it in a drop of water if they could.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: spinn_MP on January 30, 2011, 03:34:06 AM
The negative torque data I posted is not obtained by using WM2D but by a very rigorous, alas tedious calculating of the total torque for each position of the wheel. It is good that those who do not understand the scientific argumentation, let alone have their own contributions, restrain from posting here. They should continue to do so. Otherwise the important stuff will sink into gibberish, as sometimes happens, unfortunately.

As to why no one so far in the forum has been able to make a working machine, the answer is simple, everyone who tried is working under substandard conditions, thus cutting his throat. What else is new? Making a machine such as this one, which needs fine-tuning, is difficult but not as difficult as, say, making an Intel processor. If you disagree, go to your garage and use @Dusty's tools to make one. I admire @Dusty for his great persistence and skills but even he, sorry to repeat, is working with infrastructure that isn't up to the task. This is not to mean I blame him but the proper infrastructure and resources are fully controlled by the powers that be who not only don't want to hear about perpetuum mobile but will drown it in a drop of water if they could.

(Sorry, Ralph..)

Oh, you silly Omnibot...... When you'll be prepared to take a lesson, starting with nr.1 ?

1) 1+1=?
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Omnibus on January 30, 2011, 03:46:33 AM
The machine under discussion is a viable machine and, given the proper infrastructure, can be turned into a working gravity motor. That's the conclusion from this whole discussion. The problem now is to find ways to set up proper conditions for its making. That I will continue repeatIng no matter how much someone whose postings are worth as much as his promises tries to silence it.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: XS-NRG on January 30, 2011, 09:00:05 AM
Thread started on April 03, 2009
We are almost 3 yr's later and i have seen NOTHING from this Abeling TWAT.
I did found however that they are going to build TWO new nuclear reactors in Holland.
Make of it what you want  :)
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: neptune on January 30, 2011, 09:05:13 PM
Ask yourself this question . If you were in charge of energy policy in The Netherlands , or the UK or anywhere else , before committing trillions of dollars to nukes , with attendant problems of waste dangerous for the next 250,000 years ,wouldn't you take a quick look at what the cold fusion boys are doing in Italy?
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Grimer on September 13, 2012, 06:30:32 PM
I'm with Omnibus. I think Sjack Abeling's works.


He hasn't given up on it as you can see from the following link


http://mooieenergie.nl/index.php/en/component/content/article/1-bedrijfsinformatie/12-nbnov2011 (http://mooieenergie.nl/index.php/en/component/content/article/1-bedrijfsinformatie/12-nbnov2011)[/size]
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Grimer on September 13, 2012, 06:37:36 PM
Indeed, scientific reasoning trumps showing a device that doesn't work. When scientific reasoning proves that the principle is workable, as in the case at hand, presenting an unworkable device doesn't overthrow that scientific reasoning.
...


That's what I like to hear. The appliance of science as that advertisement (whose product name escapes me) used to trumpet.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: TinselKoala on September 14, 2012, 10:47:07 AM
Grimer is that really you? Sampled any Greek atmospheres lately? You should check in once in a while at the other place, people have been wondering about you.

 ;)
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Grimer on July 07, 2013, 07:00:08 PM
Grimer is that really you? Sampled any Greek atmospheres lately? You should check in once in a while at the other place, people have been wondering about you.

 ;)
My Greek atmospheres are doing fine, thanks, especially the Beta-atmosphere. I can now tie up some work I did very early in my career


http://www.besslerwheel.com/forum/viewtopic.php?p=111674#111674 (http://www.besslerwheel.com/forum/viewtopic.php?p=111674#111674)


with the Mizuno effect, catalysis, Uncle's toy and that monster that the Boys from Brazil are building.


As far as Sjack is concerned I see from his latest posting that he hasn't given up.


http://www.mooieenergie.nl/news/the-green-revolution-has-begun/ (http://www.mooieenergie.nl/news/the-green-revolution-has-begun/)


I believe his problem is that though he may be developing third derivative energy, it just ain't commercial. The Brazil boys have the same problem of course but they don't care. It's been some time since they updated their website so presumably they are having difficulty getting it all together.
Still, if their smaller machine works they will no doubt persist.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: a_user on June 24, 2016, 03:58:51 PM
It seems like they still working on it.

http://www.mooieenergie.nl/en/
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Grimer on January 07, 2017, 07:43:15 PM
Thanks for that update on  SJack ABeling's gravity wheel.


I've always believed that SJack is harvesting higher derivatives of position with respect to time.
What's holding him up is an adequate understanding of where the energy is coming from, namely, earth reaction or Ft, force multiplied by time, 3rd derivative energy.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Russ Lee on January 20, 2017, 07:01:31 PM
 "The working prototype is located somewhere else."? What? = Scam.
Greetings.

I was surprised to see a search on Abeling receiving "0" hits.

So, long overdue as he is about to go ballistic. (I think)

In November of 2007, an unknown dutch inventor made the rather outlandish claim he had found a way to rotate and accelerate a large wheel by using twin weights and earths gravity as only propulsion. At the time this was merely ruled a hoax.

See the dutch media (local) coverage here: Noord TV Report on Abeling device (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A_0kYz4LhHw) Edit: added Broli´s version with subs

After that it has been very quiet around Sjack, until a few months back he created a company Abeling Beheer B.V. and started a website which explains his intentions:

"The construction of the first Weight Power Plant is expected in May 2009. The location for the construction of the first Weight Power Plant is probably going to be the province of Groningen, the Netherlands."


and

"The Fall and Lift control system. The invention of the "Fall and Lift control system" was done towards the end of 2006. The system transports, controls and transmits mass/weight to (for instance) a drive shaft. This system was the foundation for a machine that can work on weights/mass only, without adding any form of energy. It's purpose is to drive other objects."


Abeling claims he now partners with reputable businesses like Henkel and has all the approvals needed to go ahead with the project.

Link to the bi-lingual webpage: http://mooieenergie.nl (http://mooieenergie.nl)

He appears to be a cool customer, not at all media hungry, and has quietly filed his patents, raised capital and signed partner agreements.

Time will tell if he is 100% legit, his claim is that he will be able to provide power to the general public with at least a 50% discount against current regular provider rates. I think that still is too high, 95% would be better.

My questions to all in here are:

1) What do you think?
2) Have you heard anything about this?
3) If this is a "scam" why pursue it further now that he has all he needs?

My thoughts are that he truly has found a way to generate acceleration using weights and gravity only, or at least HE is 100% convinced.

I have sent him a message of encouragement, warning and a plea for full publication as soon as possible.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Cloxxki on November 02, 2017, 05:35:55 PM
http://www.mooieenergie.nl/category/news/ (http://www.mooieenergie.nl/category/news/)
---
Dear reader,[/font][/color]
In the past few years it seemed quiet around our project. But we have certainly not been idle: We made another important discovery at the end of 2015. Thanks to this discovery it is now our objective to bring a functional system, powered by gravitation, to the market, possibly in 2016.[/font][/color]
With several unique transport systems masses are kept in balance and their centrifugal force is converted into potential gravitation; This is transformed into kinetic energy to drive, for example, a generator. The provided return is expected to be over 80% for driving secondary systems. On customer demand these can be low-, medium- or high-voltage, 50 or 60 Hz, 4 to 24 poles, and from 5 MW to 25 MW. Such generators are currently used in power plants and can be powered by the gravitational systems of Abeling Economy Group.[/font][/color]
Kind regards,[/font][/color]
De Abeling Economy Group…
---

Does anyone have fresh ideas? If the man doesn't back up his elaborate initial patent application with anything tangible, he looks to be yet another who thought to getsome millions from big corporates. Great liar, though, I'm Dutch myself.

I've also though there is some magic going on when you use gravity to gain an advantage. But I've only consiously found applications where it adds distance, never height. Examply, traveling in a straight line, perfectly level, on say an electric bicycle, no pedals, max speed, air drag limited. If a side road appears that lies lower, later to rejoin with the main road, you can use the gravity to speed up, win distance, and end up losing only part of that distance advantage when re-joining. This is especially true in system with high mass or low friction. In the case of near vacume, say a pre-Hyperloop system, going deep gets you across great distances really fast, with barely any energy input. Especially for the usual hard part : acceleration. 9.8m/s for every second you go vertical.

But how might Abeling exploits such a physics quirk?  You need to gain height, surely? Distance is not work, or can it be under some circumstances?

Through the work with Rodin coils, it seems to have been proven that electron flow more easily (less resitance) when spiraling (a cire) spiraling a certain way. Could Abeling have uncovered geometry for rolling weights to become lighter to be hurried along up higher? A combination of disconnect betweeen weight spin and travel curve?

I'm losing hope in Abeling though. Be may be like many, planning to take his findings to the grave, or go to the grave knowing that some still fell for his deceipt. If he wanted to go forward, he'd find better help.[/font][/color]
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Thaelin on November 20, 2017, 09:45:02 AM
He like all the rest are trying hard in vain to hold out for the "millions" of dollars (or what ever currency) while the world squanders in poverty. Mankind for mankind is the only way it is going to work. That means full release to the world of a working device. When you have the comforts of life, what else is there? Do I need a Lexus? Hell no, that just feeds the ego and nothing more.

A gent here on the forum many years ago made the same statement, Centrifugal force is your friend, use it.  Natures best. Next is a good old lever. put those two together and you can move mountains.

thay
 
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Paul-R on November 24, 2017, 05:28:24 PM
Centrifugal force is your friend, use it.  Natures best. Next is a good old lever. put those two together and you can move mountains.
This is hardly a method to move forward with.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: memoryman on November 25, 2017, 04:48:38 PM
" Centrifugal force is your friend" considering that Centrifugal force is an APPARENT force, not real, I don't want an apparent friend, but a real one.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: a_user on January 23, 2018, 07:28:03 PM
NEWS

http://www.mooieenergie.nl/

Quote
Newsletter January 2018

History
Back in 1996 we got interested in the process of transforming the energy/power of gravity on objects into kinetic energy, ultimately resulting in a continuously driving force.
Patiently and motivated we continued working on the solution for more than 10 years, despite all external opposition and negativity (always blindly referring to the laws of conservation of energy).
More than 750 days ago we had a major breakthrough with a new invention. And last month we achieved our goal: We can transform gravity into a driving force; 100% kinetic energy, generated from the quadratic acceleration of weights in our “AirGravityMill”, driving a generator.

Invention
With the special invention of the M.D.S. system, a primary active flywheel (that we call the “AirGravityMill”) can drive a secondary generator.
The special weight-lifting capabilities of the invention generate 800% more energy than the energy that is needed to generate and control the free fall of weights in the “AirGravityMill”.

Production
With the help of intermediaries, external companies and the growing interest of investors we now aim at producing 50 machines with a 250 KW to 1 MW capacity by the end of 2019.
We want to install and operate “energy islands” for the regional industry, producing and supplying our “Mooie Energie” (beautiful energy) where needed.
We estimate the “AirGravityMill” could ultimately drive 24 MW generators.

Introduction
Towards the end of January our system will be introduced in The Hague and Brussels (the political capitals of The Netherlands and the European Union respectively).

Product information
The “AirGravityMill” is a 100% closed pneumatic/hydraulic system and therefore does not require special permits. Depending on the capacity of the generator local authorities may have to be notified, or the system can be operated using the business license of the host of the “energy island”. The system can be installed in a barn, warehouse etc.

Location
Only air and gravity are required. Therefore the system can be installed stand-alone. The only limitation is the accessibility of the location to install the system.

Of course there is no danger for surroundings or environment. Our energy production method is cheap, local and completely independent. The energy island can generate energy on a small footprint.

Characteristics of the “AirGravityMill”
100% constant capacity
Can be linked to own or existing (public) infrastructure.
Independent.
Can be installed almost everywhere
Low energy price for (power) consumer.
Quiet and safe.
Can be easily switched off and restarted.
Very small footprint compared to other systems.
Remote control and monitoring.
Environment
From mid-2018 we will first power our upcoming production facility with an “AirGravityMill”. We will then slowly expand and provide beautiful and affordable energy to surrounding regions.

We will help to:

Provide cleaner air to breath.
Reduce “horizon pollution” and reduce nuisance for surroundings.
Increase safety.
Return the huge footprint of solar plants to agriculture, nature etc.
Our challenge
In the next 30 years we want to become one of the largest energy suppliers and install our systems around the world.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: a_user on February 10, 2018, 12:13:29 PM
Even more news:

Quote
We understand that the news about our AirGravityMill raises a lot of questions. You will understand that we are careful when providing information about our intellectual property. Nevertheless we will try to answer the most important question.

Question: How is it possible that, with just a minimal amount of external energy, the mill can drive a secondary system with 100% gravity?

Answer: The AirGravityMill is equipped with at least two “MDS” systems, one per mass. The working masses in the mill are set in motion with a small amount of external energy, activating the MDS systems. The ‘law of conservation of energy’ will make sure that approximately the same amount of energy remains in the mill for the next rotation. But the motion of the wheel and thus activation of the MDS systems has additional consequences that do not take energy from the rotation.

The MDS systems in the AirGravityMill will shift the masses to a height exceeding their starting positions by several meters. The “Inertia attachment points”* of the working masses (weighing 1000 to 15000 kilograms) are lifted to a higher position, generating potential kinetic energy.

One of the phenomena is that each mass wants to move up to 40 degrees of arc above the top of the AirGravityMill. Of course the mill will guide the mass along a fixed trajectory, so it can use the energy that is released in the free fall (quadratic acceleration). The energy is used to compensate the resistance on the side of the mill that is moving upwards. The remaining energy is used to drive a secondary system.

*The inertia attachment point is the position (anchor-point) where a mass would settle if the mill was stopped. Several anchor-points are used during the rotation.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: sm0ky2 on February 10, 2018, 01:25:51 PM
Multiple displacement systems, such as the chaos-pendulum
or Vikram’s “see-saw” found in another thread,
utilize a difference in gravitational potential across a differential
of radial displacement.


The “net energy” remains in a zero-state, however, internally,
the system can fluctuate through ranges of internal energy
much higher than that which initiated the motion.


The assumptions that energy can be extracted internally from these
“high energy states” seem logical.
However, at least in the case of the chaos-pendulum, doing so disrupts
the initial energy to the point of system decay.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: a_user on March 24, 2018, 06:00:52 PM
More news again...

http://www.mooieenergie.nl/en/

Quote
So, what is our view on providing an energy source that is as close to the user as possible, that provides constant energy without any emissions and without unpredictable costs? What is the energy or force we will use? The answer has always been out there in our solar system and is as simple as ‘catching and releasing’ in a circular motion. By combining weights to harvest gravity and air for continuity into an AirGravityMill we are creating a TRUE and continuous renewable energy source. A true revolution in renewable energy!

We do not intend to create mega structures and rely on a network to transport our energy over long distances. Like the Dutch did for ages with their solitary windmills we want to install thousands of smaller units at the site of the energy consumer. Not relying on advanced networks or batteries reduces operational costs to a fraction and requires only minor infrastructural modifications. And small units do not require costly and complex licensing or building permits.

We no longer need to look at the cost of creating and delivering for instance 1 megawatt of energy. We simply calculate the cost of producing a machine with such capacity and the cost to install and maintain that machine on site.

That is our view and our mission…
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: memoryman on March 24, 2018, 06:55:41 PM
What news? Just a statement. A quality video demonstrating a real device, along with measurement would be news.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: a_user on July 07, 2018, 06:42:59 PM
More news and a picture.

http://www.mooieenergie.nl (http://www.mooieenergie.nl)

(https://overunity.com/blob:https://overunity.com/b43132fd-b454-46ce-b412-f14e63c2310c)
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: a_user on July 07, 2018, 08:23:44 PM
(https://overunity.com/blob:https://overunity.com/12995460-82be-40c1-819f-cfa731e2aa27)
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Grimer on August 04, 2018, 01:20:07 AM
More news and a picture.

http://www.mooieenergie.nl (http://www.mooieenergie.nl)

(https://overunity.com/blob:https://overunity.com/b43132fd-b454-46ce-b412-f14e63c2310c)



You have to admit those photos are pretty impressive. He's come a long way from his wooden wheel days.


I'm sure he doesn't understand why his device works. He's not harvesting gravity and his claim that he is will put off the scientific establishment for sure. Gravity is merely acting as a "catalyst" like temperature in the Carnot cycle.


He is harvesting the energy of the electromagnetic field (shades of Tesla). I wonder what will happen when the authorities discover it's genuine.
No doubt the first thing they will do is tax it.  :D
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Fiiocolor on August 08, 2018, 10:35:33 AM
Again, we have been discussing the issues discussed here.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Grimer on August 13, 2018, 09:38:42 PM

I suppose the biggest stumbling block for belief in Sjack's invention is the RAR Energia machine
which seems to have disappeared without trace.


Curiously enough they seem to be persisting with their patent applications.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Grimer on November 21, 2018, 12:27:04 PM

POSTED ON 13 NOVEMBER 2018


Newsletter November 2018
We are still going strong! A small update for our loyal followers.


Progress of the development of our system


Important objectives in designing our AirGravityMill were that it:


Would be possible to assemble it with two workers
Would not cause pollution or nuisance in its environment
Should be safe, easy and quick to maintain
Had to be able to reliably supply electricity 24/7.
Should be possible to switch it on and off in a controlled manner.
These goals seem to have been achieved!


The recent months we spent a lot of time on further optimizing the basic system, and on developing the design for a mobile ‘Energy island’ that should be able to be installed at any location.


Two versions of this mobile ‘Energy Island’ have been designed: A 1 and a 2 MW version. Both can produce electricity 24/7 for immediate use.


The 1 MW version requires a floor of approximately 6 by 6.3 meters and consists of two mills.
The 2 MW version consists of three mills on a floor of approximately 6 by 10 meters.
The objective is to deliver prefab systems in segments on location where the customer can have a distribution cabinet with offtake points of 2
000 and 4000 Ampere.


Progress of our company


With the introduction of new products (including storage batteries), the possibilities that new technologies offer us and new services that are provided to us, the foundation of our company has been strengthened in recent months. We have created a sound basis for the roll-out of our beautiful systems.


In the coming months we will to work out the details of the production method of our systems. Then we can start preparing and starting production.

Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Low-Q on November 21, 2018, 12:49:04 PM
I don't believe anything of this pseudoscience before I actually see a working machine in real life.
People works with models, simulations, faulty calculations etc., and claim proof of concept before the machine is built.
This is the case that repeat itself over and over, with no machine to prove anything - or machines that needs "adjustments", "fine tuning", "rare parts" (often expensive, and they need fundings from the public). Next, they are selling books, which no one receive, with all the secrets for over unity - ofcourse a scam, to make money on stupid people.


Vidar
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: ramset on November 21, 2018, 02:42:41 PM
doesn't hurt to look ,would be nice if we could get someone to take a look ? is it possible to see this unit working ?

and again the links

http://www.mooieenergie.nl (http://www.mooieenergie.nl)
I think our ability to manage our environment  thru the things we can now do with programming..will make experimenting with the gravity field much more interesting.
PCM's and managing them are just one such example
Gravity is A true MONSTER just waiting to be tamed....
and to note...but off topic for this thread ,that Phase change water wheel you looked at here a few months back [the Dutch fellow with the leak problem ?? ,will add his name here ]still torments some of us.and there is a spot on my bench for that.

this did lead some to look at Phase Change materials [PCM's

maybe we should start a topic on Phase change and gravity ...or phase change and heat storage
Or Phase change and photons
Or.......................
what an amazing time to be alive on Planet earth...
and note to the readers : DON"T waste it !!

just one mans opinion

respectfully
Chet K
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Low-Q on November 22, 2018, 06:23:48 PM
Chet, do you mean that guy inside those large wooden wheels, that he put big tubes through?
That wheel is busted btw. I did calculations on buoyancy difference and the pressure difference between front and rear of the tubes. The area is greater on the front than the rear side. This difference corresponds to the angle between the wheels. The same angle is resposible for the buoyancy difference, so the net sum of forces is zero, because those two forces, pressure- and buoyancy difference is exactly the same, but in opposing directions.


Vidar
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: ramset on March 17, 2019, 02:01:53 AM
A tribute to Cloxxki

Thank you for supporting  the old fellow at the other forum ,I believe he is a member here under a different name [ has a Tesla car in the UK ?] A nice fellow who deserved better.very hard to make sense of that place ... and what they are actually trying to accomplish .
Sorry for the off topic here but Cloxxki made an exceptional statement for "doing the right thing".

 respectfully  Chet K 
 PS to Vidar yes that s the one ,the Dutchman's tech.... its getting warm here now and that device is on the menu to play with ,TinMan found
promising results in his investigation .I will add the Device link here when I find it.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: a_user on May 12, 2019, 10:59:53 PM
Still alive, Abelings gravity wheel:
http://www.mooieenergie.nl/en/


Quote
POSTED ON 9 APRIL 2019
Newsletter April 2019
Dear reader,

Our products are now protected by patents. This enables us to delve a bit deeper into the question that everyone asks us: “How does the system work!?”


Balance
Let’s start our explanation with a familiar construction everyone knows: A scale. If there are equal weights on a scale, on arms that are equally spaced and with the exact same length, then there will be a perfect balance: Nothing moves.

Now suppose our scales could make a full rotation instead of moving up and down like a seesaw. It now no longer matters whether there are two, three or more arms with weights on the scale: Position the arms at the same distance, with the same length and the same weights, and there will again be balance (no movement).

Imbalance
If one of the arms is shortened (its weight gets closer to the center of rotation), an imbalance will occur. The remaining weights will move down because they are less affected by the movement resistance of the repositioned weight. The longest arm(s) move downwards to find a new balance. During the rotation the centrifugal force has an unfavorable influence on the movement technique.

The AirGravityMill (AGM) called “The Optimist”

With the movement techniques used in the AGM (the invention), the effect in basically the same as the operation of the described rotating scales. In the AGM, however, the imbalance is not caused by shifting a weight towards the center of rotation (shorter arm), but by shifting the force at the push-off points.

Those points in the AGM are alternately used to:

Let the weight push itself off
To receive the power of the weight
At one stationary moment of the weight allow the AGM to temporarily push-off (accelerate)
To let the force of the weight jump over a very large distance to another push-off point (removal of resistance).
The resistance on the ascending side with one or more “working weights” is so low that the forces on the descending side are always extremely dominant in the AGM. In addition, the centrifugal force has no negative influences on the applied movement technique during rotation.

Most of the external energy used to keep the system running is preserved (law of conservation of energy) and contributes to the overall yield. Almost all kinetic energy generated in the AGM (free fall with quadratic acceleration of the working weight) can therefore be used to drive a secondary system such as a generator, water pump etc.

Safety
We understand that this explanation is still very brief and that without sketches and the necessary details you will not be able to start building your own AirGravityMill. And that is fine: Building an AGM requires more than understanding a basic principle. An AGM is a complex machine with enormous weights that generate extreme forces. All of this must be strictly controlled to make sure that safety is never compromised.

Our priority is to provide a safe, durable, practical and cost-effective system. We invest all our time, energy and resources to achieve this. We will keep you posted on the progress!
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Grimer on May 17, 2019, 09:56:57 AM
Well done a_user.


I check Mooie from time to time but you got there before me this time.  ;)


One thing for sure. Assuming that the device works and is not one huge
scam, it isn't harvesting Newtonian Gravity (NG) but Ersatz Gravity (EG)
or centrifugal force as my critics prefer to call it.


NG potential is constant with NG height so no gain there.
EG however is not constant with EG "height" (distance from the centre
of rotation) and so there will be energy gain from the difference in
EG potential as one mass goes "down" in EG space and an equal mass
moves "up" in EG space.


The trick is in using conservative NG as a catalyst to reset EG.
Think of NG as the magnetic field in a simple electric motor
and EG as the current.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Grimer on May 28, 2019, 06:45:40 AM
Another way of looking at it is to think in terms of weight.


Newtonian Gravity (NG) weight doesn't change with height. As a mass is lifted from 2ft to 4ft, say, it weighs the same at 2ft as at 4ft.


But for a space station passenger rotating round on the inside of his space station as depicted in that  film 2001: A Space Odyssey, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1wJQ5UrAsIY a mass "weighs" less
at 4ft than at 2ft and the "weight" keeps on decreasing as the mass is lifted towards the centre of the space station. At the centre it is weightless.


NG does not change significantly with height. EG (ersatz Gravity) does and it is this
change that Abeling must be employing, assuming that his claim is genuine and not a scam.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: NathanCoppedge on July 01, 2019, 06:55:49 AM
Much more promising....

Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: memoryman on July 01, 2019, 08:22:41 AM
Should be easy to actually make a working prototype by you...
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Grimer on July 17, 2019, 11:31:30 PM

Conventional physics shows that we cannot move a weight around a wheel and gain energy from gravity. 
[/font]


And conventional physics is absolutely right. We cannot move a weight around a wheel and gain
energy from Newtonian Gravity. This is because Newtonian gravity does not vary significantly
over the distances involved in conventional gravity wheels.


However, we can move a weight around a wheel and gain energy from Ersatz gravity,
i.e. centrifugal/centripetal gravity, space station gravity as depicted in the film 2001.
This is because Ersatz gravity does vary enormously between the perimeter and
the centre of a wheel.


This is where Abeling must be getting his energy from although he doesn't seem to realise this.







Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: memoryman on July 17, 2019, 11:42:50 PM
"ersatz" is German , meaning 'replacement'. Gravity is a force which acts exactly like any other force. Centripetal force is NOT real; centrifugal force IS real.
(Sjack should be Sjaak)  does not have anything OU.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Grimer on July 18, 2019, 08:47:28 AM
"ersatz" is German , meaning 'replacement'. Gravity is a force which acts exactly like any other force. Centripetal force is NOT real; centrifugal force IS real.
(Sjack should be Sjaak)  does not have anything OU.


[/font]STATEMENT FROM SJACK ABELING:Beste lezers,

Uit de reakties van vele bezoekers van onze site blijkt dat u zich grote zorgen maakt dat de uitvinding die wij hebben gedaan en alle kennis die inmiddels is vergaard zal verdwijnen door bijvoorbeeld overname, omkoping of machtsmisbruik van de diverse industrieën of landen.

Meer informatie verstrekken?
We krijgen de vraag om meer gedetailleerde informatie te verstrekken, dit als "beveiliging" zodat ook in de meest fantasierijke scenario's de uitvinding behouden blijft. Maar het delen van informatie over een dergelijk revolutionair systeem leidt voor ons uiteindelijk alleen maar tot enorme problemen.

Doelstelling
Wees gerust: niets zal ons er toe kunnen verleiden om het door ons ontwikkelde systeem te laten verdwijnen. We zijn er namelijk van overtuigd dat ons systeem de mogelijkheid heeft om het energie probleem van onze planeet en onze kinderen op verantwoorde wijze op te lossen. Onze doelstelling is daarom duidelijk: uiteindelijk zullen we onze uitvinding inzetten om energie te produceren!

Samenwerking?
We werken er hard aan om binnen drie jaar een commercieel verantwoord systeem of product te produceren. Dat kunnen we niet alleen, maar Mooie Energie zal alléén samenwerken en overeenkomsten aangaan met bedrijven die hetzelfde uitgangspunt hebben!

Sjack Abeling
TRANSLATION:
Newsletter May 27, 2009

Dear readers,

The reactions of many visitors to our site indicates that you are very worried that the invention which we have done and all knowledge that has been collected for example, will disappear over corruption or abuse of the various industries or countries.

We have the demand for more detailed information, as a "security" so that even in the most imaginative scenarios the invention is preserved. But the sharing of information on such a revolutionary system in the end only leads to enormous problems.

Objective
Do not worry: noone will be able to seduce us for the system developed by us to disappear. We are convinced that our system has the possibility of solving the energy problem of our planet and our children in a responsible manner. Our objective is clear: ultimately, we will use our invention to produce energy!

Cooperation?
We work hard to within three years make a commercialy sound system and product to produce.  We cannot do that alone but Mooie energie will only cooperate and enter into agreements with companies that have the same vision!

Sjack Abeling
It looks like our little "campaign" brought a reaction. Still not the one we all hoped (disclosure). Thanks all, you know who you are...And let me be blunt: WHAT IF SOMEONE DECIDES YOU NEED TO HAVE AN ACCIDENT SJACK? Think about it. You can call all of us crazy but you must take into account the numerous deaths of inventors like Stanley Meyer & Jan Sloot in the last 30 years. Even though this is the Netherlands.AZ
[/font]
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: memoryman on July 18, 2019, 02:22:51 PM
So where is the overwhelmingly conclusive demonstration?
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Grimer on July 20, 2019, 11:54:39 AM
Ignore the new clone of @alsetalokin with the new handle @BAR. Don't be gullible. These @Tinsel Koala's of the world are paid (maybe not only monetarily but in various other ways) to act in these "innovative" ways of fighting for the party line, so that the rest of the incredible nasty nonsense going on in science, massively misappropriating billions of dollars in public funds, is well protected. Obviously, the powers that be, elaborately stealing from the public billions of dollars under the pretence of doing "proper science", have found out that in the age of internet that's one way to fight what they perceive as the wide-eyed garage-geniuses who, God knows, may suddenly stand in their way if something not under their control pops up in their basements and home workshops.   


Well said Omnibus. Sjack started off in his garage. There's something in this thread relating to
springs which has clicked with my own research. I'm busy going through all 159 posts in
order to find where I read it. Coming across your post I had to stop and congratulate you.  :)
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Grimer on July 20, 2019, 12:02:05 PM
Just thinking out loud: If Abeling is using springs where would he put them?
Where indeed!  8)
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Grimer on July 20, 2019, 12:12:08 PM
I have no idea what the hell you are talking about. The people who should get their heads out of their arses are the ones who think they can get away with a patent on an overunity device.

Anyone who is not willing to share an invention which will profoundly further mankind is either too dumb to realise he or she will bathe in riches regardless of patent or money for selling or not because the CREDIT will be linked to them, are too greedy or simply have nothing to show and are looking for attention.

Bessler falls into the second category.

Genius or not, Bessler was a greedy bastard and I do blame him for not disclosing his invention.
Completely agree with you. I'm sure he went to hell.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Grimer on July 20, 2019, 01:37:58 PM
(Edited, I added some explanations)

OK, I suck at this:

Weights connected by pull-spring. Neutral when weights are at minimal distance. May not even engage until some distance has been established, offering the outer weight a wider trajectory.
Aweful sketch, lacking a scanner to do a horrible one.

Over unity or not, does this use stored centrifugal forced for vertical acceleration?

Obviously, in such a setup, you'll want the weights to roll even so smoothly over the inner and other faces of the wheel, and it's neighbouring ramps. Perhaps the outer weight must engage both the outer wheel and outer ramp with a smooth running bearing rather than rolling right over it, and during its sling it will not gather rotation proportion to its "air speed". Landing on the underside of the wheel without a bearing in between, would cause rotational friction. The inner weight could be a rolling wheel, its outer force should keep it rolling along neatly, if not at varying velocity. I think its diameter as interacting with wheel and ramp should not be too small, for both contant speed friction and preventing slippage during the velocity changes.

In my sketch, without the guiding sleeves in the wheel for the weight, you'll see an abrubt bend onto the ramp for the inner weight.
Restricting its leftward should nett it (in a frictionlessworld) to travel vertically to just as high as it started. In a real world, it would not make it.
BUT, the outer weight swinging a wider trajectoy, from a partially loading spring, will be decellating as well, but not without lengthening (charging) the spring. When the transitions are done right, the outweight will also in the perfect world now have enough to make it back all the way up. But, the spring is not contracting again, causing the two weights to be attracted to each other faster than their restricted sloped collision trajectories, resulting in additional upward energy to become available to both.

I have not yet figured out whether, if this at would work, we'd want the weights to swap places now. This would not only make the guidance more complicated, but also might created some counter effective vectors.
If I'm not mistaken, the outer weight is as I sketched now always travelling faster than the inner weight.

Now I didn't read the patent too thoroughly, and as said before I have seen zero youtube vids or simulation, but I think that although Abeling did not specify the relationship between the weights, my sketch seems to be in line with his statements.

Please debunk me now, it's 1:57AM.

Thanks,
At last - I've found what I was looking for. A pair of weights connected by a spring.
Well done Cloxxki.


Executive summary:


Two weights following each other around a circular path under Newtonian gravity will extend the spring on the going down side and compress the spring on the going up side.


In effect the spring is the working fluid and you have a compression expansion cycle.


The rest is engineering.  ;D

Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Grimer on July 20, 2019, 10:39:49 PM

Two weights following each other around a circular path under Newtonian gravity will extend the spring on the going down side and compress the spring on the going up side.



https://frankgrimer.uk/pendulum.gif (https://frankgrimer.uk/pendulum.gif)
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Grimer on July 22, 2019, 10:56:26 AM

https://frankgrimer.uk/pendulum.gif (https://frankgrimer.uk/pendulum.gif)


I was trying to get the gif show up directly by attaching it
but as you see it only shows the first frame.


You will just have to click on the link I'm afraid. That will
take you to my website.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Grimer on July 22, 2019, 11:49:39 AM
This is just a test to see how it handles a jpg.
It seems to do it just fine. That's good.  :)
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Grimer on July 22, 2019, 03:49:18 PM
This shows the expansion-compression regions for a train of 360° pendulums.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Grimer on July 22, 2019, 04:00:01 PM
Of course, these tension and compression regions exist in any wheel rotating in a vertical plane.
They exist in the form of tension and compression strains.
However, these strains are so minute that even someone with the experimental
skills of a Nikola Tesla might have difficulty in actually measuring them.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Grimer on July 24, 2019, 06:46:33 PM
https://frankgrimer.uk/wheel%20stuff/3D%20Pendulum2.mp4 (https://frankgrimer.uk/wheel%20stuff/3D%20Pendulum2.mp4)


I thought I'd lost this. I couldn't find it among my chaotic website so I had to ask for Dr Robotnik's (a.k.a. Edwin)
assistance.


Interestingly enough it's the same shape as you get with a solid mobius strip.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Grimer on July 25, 2019, 08:17:13 PM
Here's a model I made by twisting a plastic tube and joining the ends.


Sorry about the advert but I suppose I should count myself lucky that
PB didn't just ditch all my images when they suddenly changed from
free hosting to some egregious charge which I wasn't prepared to swallow.

Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Grimer on July 29, 2019, 06:22:52 PM
I was discussing with Robotnik how one might extract the 3rd derivative precession kinetic energy from the action of the 360° full circle pendulum (FCP) and he came up with the following rough sketch.



However, I've come to the conclusion that 3rd derivative energy is only going to provide a relatively small free energy production, far less than is being claimed by Sjack. I believe he must have found a way to employ higher derivative energies, although not as high as the snap crackle and pop derivatives of military tank busting ordnance.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Thaelin on July 30, 2019, 01:31:00 PM
   I watched his vid where he showed the "D" arrangement and that prompted me to set up an experiment using linear tracks to follow that shape. All is good on the curves but when it gets to the corner into the straight line, there is such a force side ways as to jam the track and not want to move at all.
   Not a total loss there as it made me see an older idea with new light. Will be trying that in the next few days when I can get the parts all together and parts printed.  Got to love that 3D machine for proto work.
'
thay
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Grimer on July 31, 2019, 05:24:49 PM

I was going through Prof. Laithwaite's controversial fourth Christmas lecture:-


https://www.rigb.org/christmas-lectures/watch/1974/the-engineer-through-the-looking-glass/the-jabberwock


.....  when I came across the following section about 50 minutes in.


I didn't appreciate it the first time I watched it many years ago but I
certainly do now. He had implicitly discovered 3rd derivative energy.




Below is a transcript of the relevant part of the lecture.
 
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(50min 21sec)


However distasteful it is we now have to say the the object
has something more than mass. It's got a mass, and a mass only, so
long as we want to push it about in straight lines, weight it, accelerate it, and
so on.


But if we ever come close to spin it - it has another property all of its own
which corresponds to the inductance of a coil.


This is the updating of Newton's Law of Motion.


But I am not saying that Newton's Law of Motion is wrong. I am merely
pointing out that they are restricted to motion in straight lines and to motion
where there is no rate of change of acceleration
[/color][/b].
(Pointing to the ammeter)  (51min 10sec)


No rate of change of current for Ohm's Law.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Grimer on August 01, 2019, 10:39:13 PM
https://frankgrimer.uk/Mass.jpg (https://frankgrimer.uk/Mass.jpg)
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Grimer on August 03, 2019, 09:06:01 PM
I was going through Prof. Laithwaite's controversial fourth Christmas lecture:-


https://www.rigb.org/christmas-lectures/watch/1974/the-engineer-through-the-looking-glass/the-jabberwock (https://www.rigb.org/christmas-lectures/watch/1974/the-engineer-through-the-looking-glass/the-jabberwock)


.....  when I came across the following section about 50 minutes in.


I didn't appreciate it the first time I watched it many years ago but I
certainly do now. He had implicitly discovered 3rd derivative energy.

--


Later in that video he shows what are effectively a series of pendulum, or what would be a series of pendulums
if the had been free to rotate independently at the axle and not rigidly connected. This might have led him to
recognise the change of angular momentum, i.e. the third derivative of position with respect to time, precession
kinetic energy.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: NathanCoppedge on August 05, 2019, 09:28:36 PM
IF YOU ALL ARE NOT BOTS, YOU'RE DOING AN AWFULLY GOOD JOB AT PRETENDING.

YOU SOUND LIKE ALL THE SAD AND CONFUSED VOICES I SEE ON THIS FORUM.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Low-Q on August 06, 2019, 12:07:38 PM
Sooo, does this gravity power plant work or not? If not (most probably not), It's interesting that this thread consists of 160 pages, and 2698 replies... ::)
Vidar
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Grimer on August 07, 2019, 11:17:27 AM
Sooo, does this gravity power plant work or not? If not (most probably not), It's interesting that this thread consists of 160 pages, and 2698 replies... ::)
Vidar
Hopefully, within a year or two we might see. We've never had photos before so that's a good sign.  :)
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Grimer on August 07, 2019, 11:29:18 AM
IF YOU ALL ARE NOT BOTS, YOU'RE DOING AN AWFULLY GOOD JOB AT PRETENDING.

YOU SOUND LIKE ALL THE SAD AND CONFUSED VOICES I SEE ON THIS FORUM.
I'm not a BOT. But then if I was I suppose I would say that wouldn't I.  ;D


I'm glad to see you are only 36. I think many significant contributors to this thread
must have died since 2009. Bit of a problem since I want to quote one of them (spinner)
and hope for a reply.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Grimer on August 13, 2019, 11:59:01 AM





From Dumbbels on incline... (https://overunity.com/8813/dumbbels-on-incline/msg538366/#msg538366)
« Reply #1 on: Today at 03:03:58 »
[size=0.85em]

Quote from: iacob alex on 22-02-2010, 18:26:26 (https://overunity.com/8813/dumbbels-on-incline/msg229614/#msg229614)... ...may be,a simple puzzle question.

    So,we have an inclined plane and a dumbbells (see weightlifting sport...).

    It can roll down,freely,on an inclined plane ,between two gravitational levels,one way or another :

      -rolling on the weight disks (plates ).

      -rolling on the connecting rod (handle).

      -....rolling on an ever increasing thin ("slim" ) handle,until a simple straight line.

    Now,it seems that,the rotational inertia is different...namely,ceaseless increasing ?!   


          All the best! / Alex


Well done Alex. You've found the connection between the Keenie wheel and the Abeling wheel.
Not only that but there's a connection between the Keenie and the WhipMag, i.e. transfer from
an outer perimeter to an inner perimeter, from GW to AGW (gearwheel to anti-gearwheel) that
figured so prominently in the Steorn forum.

I suppose you could say that they found the way to weaponize the tippee top where EG is tranduced in NG.The Tippee is a one way street however. Keenie and Sjack have found a way to cycle it. Keenie was reputed to be some kind of descendent of Bessler so that figures.I always thought that Bessler's covering the end of his weights was to hide a hole through the weight but it now looks as though it was to hide an axle. To be fair to him he did give a big clue on his toys page, i.e. the top.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Grimer on August 13, 2019, 12:23:39 PM
Greetings.

I was surprised to see a search on Abeling receiving "0" hits.

So, long overdue as he is about to go ballistic. (I think)

In November of 2007, an unknown dutch inventor made the rather outlandish claim he had found a way to rotate and accelerate a large wheel by using twin weights and earths gravity as only propulsion. At the time this was merely ruled a hoax.

See the dutch media (local) coverage here: Noord TV Report on Abeling device (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A_0kYz4LhHw) Edit: added Broli´s version with subs

After that it has been very quiet around Sjack, until a few months back he created a company Abeling Beheer B.V. and started a website which explains his intentions:

"The construction of the first Weight Power Plant is expected in May 2009. The location for the construction of the first Weight Power Plant is probably going to be the province of Groningen, the Netherlands."


and

"The Fall and Lift control system. The invention of the "Fall and Lift control system" was done towards the end of 2006. The system transports, controls and transmits mass/weight to (for instance) a drive shaft. This system was the foundation for a machine that can work on weights/mass only, without adding any form of energy. It's purpose is to drive other objects."


Abeling claims he now partners with reputable businesses like Henkel and has all the approvals needed to go ahead with the project.

Link to the bi-lingual webpage: http://mooieenergie.nl (http://mooieenergie.nl)

He appears to be a cool customer, not at all media hungry, and has quietly filed his patents, raised capital and signed partner agreements.

Time will tell if he is 100% legit, his claim is that he will be able to provide power to the general public with at least a 50% discount against current regular provider rates. I think that still is too high, 95% would be better.

My questions to all in here are:

1) What do you think?
2) Have you heard anything about this?
3) If this is a "scam" why pursue it further now that he has all he needs?

My thoughts are that he truly has found a way to generate acceleration using weights and gravity only, or at least HE is 100% convinced.

I have sent him a message of encouragement, warning and a plea for full publication as soon as possible.


The above is the very first post in this Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel thread. As you can see SA uses "twin weights",
 a dumbbell in other words, two weights on one axle in contrast to Keenie who uses one weight on two axles, one
each side of the weight.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Grimer on August 15, 2019, 09:12:19 PM

I am constructing a kinetic strain microscope in order to magnify induced micro kinetic strain to macro kinetic strain.
The figure below shows the main frame consisting of a wheel mounted on a tower.


Micro kinetic strain will be induced in the tower by rotation of a 360° pendulum bob attached to the periphery of the wheel.
Kinetic strain magnification from micro to macro will be achieved by employing of four additional wheels.

Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Grimer on August 16, 2019, 10:45:15 AM
Here is a screen grab of the Kinetic Strain Microscope  with the four "lenses" (wheels  ;D ) in place.


mp4.s of the KSM in action will follow.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Grimer on August 17, 2019, 02:44:30 PM
https://frankgrimer.uk/VID_20181228_144929689.mp4 (https://frankgrimer.uk/VID_20181228_144929689.mp4)


Above is a link to a video of an early run of the KSM.


Below is a screen shot in case the link doesn't work.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Grimer on August 20, 2019, 12:06:00 PM
Next - half wave rectification using ratchets mounting on the wheel axles to send the return macro kinetic motion
back down to micro kinetic strain motion.



First, forward spin.
https://frankgrimer.uk/wheel-anticlockwise.mp4


Next, back spin.
https://frankgrimer.uk/wheel-clockwise.mp4


Sorry about the wide angle lens. Couldn't get further back - the fridge was in the way.  ;D
The line is, of course, straight.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Grimer on August 21, 2019, 03:23:54 PM
An analogous situation to the difference in travel of the Kinetic Strain Microscope happens with the
flight of a cricket ball.


https://frankgrimer.uk/Spin%20forward.jpg (https://frankgrimer.uk/Spin%20forward.jpg)
https://frankgrimer.uk/Spin%20back.jpg (https://frankgrimer.uk/Spin%20back.jpg)
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Grimer on August 21, 2019, 03:37:15 PM
jpegs
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Grimer on August 23, 2019, 08:44:20 AM
http://gyroscopes.org/heretic.asp (http://gyroscopes.org/heretic.asp)


I've been re-watching this.


Eric didn't "follow it too far". He didn't follow it far enough.
He didn't realise that the omega-atmosphere is the ultimate field,
the field that forms the frame of reference for rotation.


It's the ω-atmosphere that my wheel is gripping on, the other
boundary from that of the cricket ball, i.e. the alpha-atmosphere, the air.


It's rather ironic, indeed even spooky, that the last letter of the Greek
alphabet was chosen for rotation.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Grimer on August 27, 2019, 01:09:20 PM
I thought I'd lost this image but eventually found it on my obsolete Photobucket site. I'm not sure where it came from.

I've been though his RI lecture where there's another ball and stalk wheel and I couldn't find it there.
It shows magnification of kinetic strain energy. Obviously, it's where I must have got the idea of a Kinetic Strain microscope.


It brings the kind of moment responsible for holding an unbalanced offset gyro up into view.
The back spin of an unbalanced gyro means that the top of the gyro is going slightly slower
in the direction of travel and the bottom of the gyro is going slightly faster.
It is this differential that accounts for the moment holding up an unbalanced offset gyro.
I must dig out my video on an unbalanced gyro driving a carriage.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Grimer on August 28, 2019, 06:12:08 AM
... Abeling's egg shaped weight path, ...
... is the solution.


The semi-circular path from 3 o'clock to 9 o'clock involves ground reaction. The parabolic path from 9 o'clock through
the zenith at 12 o'clock onto closure at 3 o'clock does not.


So from 3 o'clock to 9 o'clock we have an unbalanced vertical component of ground reaction thrusting the weight upwards.
This ground reaction also accounts for the enigmatic hot wheels phenomena. In fact it was puzzling about the hot wheel
cars that gave me the answer. That and the fact that my kinetic energy microscope railway gave rise to an unbalanced
horizontal reaction. If you can rotate the world you can also push it down and away from you.


I'll have to find that post with the hot wheels cars and copy it to this thread.

Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Grimer on August 28, 2019, 06:25:16 AM
[/font]https://www.youtube.com/watch?reload=9&v=jlSv_IlXmBg (https://www.youtube.com/watch?reload=9&v=jlSv_IlXmBg)...
[/font]
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Grimer on August 28, 2019, 06:34:19 AM

And of course we mustn't forget that chap with the wheelchair who provided experimental evidence of energy gain.

Quote
This great invention,
is my electric wheelchair,
When I go up + down hills,
I gain power,
As in, a net gain of energy,
After going up and down a steep hill,
This is a gift from God,
As He has shared this with me,
To share with the world,
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Grimer on August 28, 2019, 01:37:01 PM
This should throw light on the enigma of the spring, too.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Grimer on August 29, 2019, 10:34:18 PM
And of course we mustn't forget that chap (one_christian_warrior) with the wheelchair who
provided experimental evidence of energy gain.


It's an interesting co-incidence that ocw and Sjacks device both have an air gap in the cycle
and involve the transit of rotating masses.
In the case of the generator/motor combination we understand what kinetic strains are involved.
In the case of mooie energy we don't.



Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Grimer on August 30, 2019, 12:13:39 PM
Offset-gyro microscope magnifying Kinetic Energy Micro Strain (KEMS)



Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Grimer on August 30, 2019, 10:06:40 PM

Video for the previous illustration.

https://frankgrimer.uk/wheel%20stuff/Vid01.mp4 (https://frankgrimer.uk/wheel%20stuff/Vid01.mp4)
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Grimer on August 31, 2019, 06:52:17 PM
Offset-gyro microscope magnifying Kinetic Energy Micro Strain (KEMS)



Had Laithwaite sped up his ball and stick KEMS microscope to the point where
a balancing weight was no longer needed, he would have observed the following:
The top weights bend towards the tower.
The bottom weights bend away from the tower.
This bending arises from the back spin giving a differential travel speed to
the top and bottom line of weights, cf. the effect of back spin on a cricket ball.


Thus the top weights rotate around the tower at a lower speed than the bottom weights.
This induces a couple, or moment to use the structural engineering term more
familiar to me, acting on the gyro.
This couple is the pair of centrifugal and centripetal forces holding up the
gyro as it orbits the tower.


What about centrifugal force? Surely this should pull the gyro away from
the tower since the end of its axle is simply resting on a shallow depression on
the top of the tower.


The answer to this conundrum came to me as I was pulling my shopping basket up the
hill from Sainsbury's.  ;D


Looking down from the top of the gyro the it will be seen that the top line of weights
is convex towards the the tower whereas the bottom line is concave.
Thus there are two centres of curvature for the path of the weights on either side of
the gyro orbit.
Far from being no centrifugal force there are two.
These act in opposite directions and virtually cancel each other out.
 
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Grimer on September 05, 2019, 09:54:46 PM
I now understand how Professor Laithwaite was able to lift those heavy gyros.
He was generating EG energy and utilising the rotary reaction of the earth.
Funnily enough I had appreciated the linear reaction of the earth way, way
back  (and met violent opposition for that suggestion) - but I found it again
with the half wave rectification experiments of the combined Vimmy wheel
and pendulum.


I then realised (when thinking about how half wave rectification of
horizontal energy) that the carriage could also give rise to
unbalanced radial earth reaction as the carriage was driven up hill.

I had thought of rotary reaction before but hadn't connected it up
with the other two.

One other thing which needs mentioning is the leverage reaction which Eric
was providing. His two hands gave the moment which was balanced
by an opposite moment of the earth. Had he stood on a friction-less turntable
he wouldn't have been able to provide that moment.

You can see that the horizontal moment he applied is analogous to the
vertical moment which holds the offset gyro up so mysteriously -
mysteriously that is until Laithwaite's KEMS microscope is brought into play.

[/size]
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Grimer on September 06, 2019, 11:48:35 AM

Here's a video of the Prof lifting the gyro with one hand.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JRPC7a_AcQo
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Grimer on September 06, 2019, 05:07:25 PM

I now understand how Professor Laithwaite was able to lift those heavy gyros.
He was generating EG energy and utilising the rotary reaction of the earth.
Funnily enough I had appreciated the linear reaction of the earth way, way
back  (and met violent opposition for that suggestion) - but I found it again
with the half wave rectification experiments of the combined Vimmy wheel
and pendulum.


I then realised (when thinking about how half wave rectification of
horizontal energy) that the carriage could also give rise to
unbalanced radial earth reaction as the carriage was driven up hill.


I had thought of rotary reaction before but hadn't connected it up
with the other two.


One other thing which needs mentioning is the leverage reaction which Eric
was providing. His two hands gave the moment which was balanced
by an opposite moment of the earth. Had he stood on a friction-less turntable
he wouldn't have been able to provide that moment.


You can see that the horizontal moment he applied is analogous to the
vertical moment which holds the offset gyro up so mysteriously -
mysteriously that is until Laithwaite's KEMS microscope is brought into play.


So where does the energy come from?


It has to come from the Ersatz Gravity (EG) field. The moment that the Prof
applies to the heavy gyro unbalances the opposing centrifugal forces and
generates EG energy. One centre of curvature moves in towards the gyro, the
other moves out. The energy generated is the difference between the two.
Remember, EG obeys a square lay whereas NG is linear.


The beauty is the evidence is unarguable. The experiment has been done.
Anyone can easily repeat it for themselves. He raises 50 pounds in the air
expending very little energy. Energy is obviously being supplied from
somewhere other than the gyro because the speed of the gyro doesn't
change. If he had been tall enough he could have gone on lifting the gyro
until he reached stationary orbit providing he kept his feet firmly on the
ground so as to maintain ground reaction.


Frankly, I would have more sympathy with someone who claimed the
demonstration was fraudulent than some who tried to explain away
the obvious gain in energy. It's a bit like Desertphile's attitude to
Al Setalokin's WhipMag. He recognised it was obviously generating
free energy so he claimed it must be a trick of some kind.


Clearly, developing this phenomena to obtain energy on a continuous
basis will not be difficult once the psychological block of cognitive
difference is removed.


I feel a bit sorry for poor old Sjack Abeling. He has been overtaken by events,
SuperMac's biggest problem. Still, I expect it will take quite a time to sink
in so Sjack may have a small window of opportunity to wow the world and
make some money.


If I had oil shares (which I don't) I would sell them now.  8)



Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: memoryman on September 06, 2019, 05:20:27 PM
Do you know the meaning of ersatz? It weans 'fake', 'artificial'. It does not exist. Neither does centrifugal force.
If you have such a clear understanding of 'how it works'. demonstrate it and become very rich/famous.
Don't worry about the MiB or big oil: they deal in reality, not fantasy.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Grimer on September 06, 2019, 07:04:14 PM
delete
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Grimer on September 06, 2019, 07:18:17 PM
Do you know the meaning of ersatz? It weans 'fake', 'artificial'. It does not exist. Neither does centrifugal force.
If you have such a clear understanding of 'how it works'. demonstrate it and become very rich/famous.
Don't worry about the MiB or big oil: they deal in reality, not fantasy.

Ersatz also means substitute and that is the meaning I'm using.
It is analogous to Newtonian Gravity. Pilots of jet fighters refer
to it as Gee.


Fitness fanatics in space stations use it as a substitute for
Newtonian gravity.   :)



Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: memoryman on September 06, 2019, 07:27:51 PM
There is gravity and (the very real) centripetal force; neither are energy.
The real question is: why haven't YOU implemented what you 'believe' to be a sure way to generate free energy?
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Grimer on September 06, 2019, 10:04:12 PM
Good question.  :)
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Grimer on September 11, 2019, 10:43:30 AM

Exploring Prof Laithwaite's strong man act further I've found the
mechanism that's aiding him in lifting the gyro above his head with
so little effort.


In the past I've often disparagingly referred to women drivers of large
expensive cars who fondly imagine that when they turn their steering wheel
they are turning the front wheels.


They haven't a clue that they are merely providing a small contribution to the
turning action. They have no idea that there delicate effort is being magnified
by a servo-mechanism which provides the much larger effort required for
steering.


With all respect to our dear departed Prof he is that woman.


When he steers the gyro above his head he is operating the servo-mechanism
inside the gyro disc.


And what, you may well ask, is the nature of that servo-mechanism.


It is the contra-rotating ultra high speed flows of the Kinetic micro-strain.


Like Laithwaite, I have long realised that there was something not right
about mass.


I have long realised that is was a property of matter, accident not substance,
not an amount of matter.


I have long realised that linear inertia far from resisting acceleration was
assisting acceleration. That a servo-mechanism was in operation.


I could see that this is very difficult to demonstrate experimentally.
Fortunately, the Prof has come along with his offset gyro and done just
that ............ and provided a source of free energy in the bargain.


Because the gyro disk is rotating rather than translating it's a lot easier to
visualise what is going on.


If anyone wants some of the background to all this I suggest they read the
following link.


https://frankgrimer.uk/IHM_N103_87.pdf
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Grimer on September 11, 2019, 05:32:01 PM
The Precession Enigma


I think Laithwaite must have been homing in on the servo-mechanisms
embedded in gyro disks. Somewhere in the various videos is a picture of two
disks in parallel - presumably on the same axis.
I'll look for it. In the meantime if anyone knows where it is please let me know.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: memoryman on September 11, 2019, 06:04:21 PM
It is in the same place as centrifugal force...
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: ARMCORTEX on September 11, 2019, 08:12:51 PM
That wont be necessary Grimer, your quest has ended.

https://overunity.com/18226/physicist-needed-will-this-self-loop/new/#new

Either by magnetic propulsion/impulse of a 2 sided pulse magnet system like in trains, or the flywheel double sided squeeze method, overunity will be provided.

Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Grimer on September 20, 2019, 07:17:51 PM
Exploring Prof Laithwaite's strong man act further I've found the
mechanism that's aiding him in lifting the gyro above his head with
so little effort.


In the past I've often disparagingly referred to women drivers of large
expensive cars who fondly imagine that when they turn their steering wheel
they are turning the front wheels.


They haven't a clue that they are merely providing a small contribution to the
turning action. They have no idea that there delicate effort is being magnified
by a servo-mechanism which provides the much larger effort required for
steering.


With all respect to our dear departed Prof he is that woman.


When he steers the gyro above his head he is operating the servo-mechanism
inside the gyro disc.


And what, you may well ask, is the nature of that servo-mechanism.


It is the contra-rotating ultra high speed flows of the Kinetic micro-strain.


Like Laithwaite, I have long realised that there was something not right
about mass.


I have long realised that is was a property of matter, accident not substance,
not an amount of matter.


I have long realised that linear inertia far from resisting acceleration was
assisting acceleration. That a servo-mechanism was in operation.


I could see that this is very difficult to demonstrate experimentally.
Fortunately, the Prof has come along with his offset gyro and done just
that ............ and provided a source of free energy in the bargain.


Because the gyro disk is rotating rather than translating it's a lot easier to
visualise what is going on.


If anyone wants some of the background to all this I suggest they read the
following link.


https://frankgrimer.uk/IHM_N103_87.pdf (https://frankgrimer.uk/IHM_N103_87.pdf)


If you think about it precession resistance is very weird. After all, if a disk
is stationary on its axle you can turn it about about a diameter with no problem.

Why in heaven's name does it suddenly become so unwilling to be turned
when the disk is rotating?

Why when the disk is rotating in the x-y plane and the z direction resultant
of any vector in the x-y plane is zero, does it become so difficult to rotate the
disk perpendicular to that plane?

It's as though the mass has been polarised and has become much bigger in
the perpendicular planes than in the x-y plane.

And the more we speed up the rotation of the disk the bigger the resistance
mass becomes.

There seems to be no limit to this mass increase.

Very, very weird.

------------------------------------------------

But of course there is a precedent for all this.

The physicists tell us that as a body is speeded up to the velocity of light
its mass increases, eventually to infinity.

They even give us a formula for this increase.

Since we humble engineers have no means of getting our machines
up the the speed of light we'll just have to take their word for it.

Does this increase in mass mean that the number of atoms the number
of protons in the body increase like the loaves and fishes of the gospels?

If not why not?

Presumably not since if they did I'm sure we'd have been told..

Now it occurs to me that if as I've suggested we are operating a servo-
mechanism when we spin a disk, the mechanism consisting two opposite
flows of kinetic strain within the material of the disk, then the weird
precession behaviour might just be connected to the effect of these flows.

After all, these flows are probably the interaction of electricity and magnetism
and electromagnetic waves travel at the speed of light so there we have a big hint.

By experiencing the increase in inertial mass bought about by precession
we are treading on the physicists hallowed ground - off limits to lowly
engineers like Laithwaite (I did so tread at RRL - great fun).

Maybe the rotation servo-mechanisms are hogging all the precession
servo-mechanisms and allowing engineers a glimpse of translation mass
increase.

The positive strain in the x-y directions and the negative strain in the z
direction do hint at this.

Now I'm sure that the physics establishment will find a hundred and one
reasons, accompanied by reams of mathematics to show why I'm wrong.
Although, since unlike Professor Laithwaite I have no reputation to destroy
they won't even lower themselves to think about it - if, that is, they ever got
to hear about - highly unlikely.

They should remember that the Copernican system did not supersede the
Ptolemaic system because it was more accurate. It wasn't. It succeeded
because it was intellectually and aesthetically more appealing.

There are two kinds of event which might prompt an establishment rethink,
an AGR prestressed pressure vessel failure or gyro free energy.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Grimer on November 19, 2019, 02:49:49 PM
Italia mooie
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: a_user on March 03, 2020, 09:37:33 PM
Abelings patent, how to find status of the patent?
Active or not?
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: lancaIV on March 03, 2020, 09:57:19 PM
In #12 patent details which let you enter and fill the espacenet advanced search page and on the left side you get
the actual legal status : NL1034252C1 related :
since 16-03-2011 IP right cessation because of non payment of annual fee.
It was only a national application,NL = Netherlands = international free useable source


https://worldwide.espacenet.com/publicationDetails/inpadoc?CC=NL&NR=1034252C1&KC=C1&FT=D&ND=3&date=20090216&DB=EPODOC&locale=en_EP (https://worldwide.espacenet.com/publicationDetails/inpadoc?CC=NL&NR=1034252C1&KC=C1&FT=D&ND=3&date=20090216&DB=EPODOC&locale=en_EP)


but there has been since that patente more R&D :


https://worldwide.espacenet.com/searchResults?submitted=true&locale=en_EP&DB=EPODOC&ST=advanced&TI=&AB=&PN=&AP=&PR=&PD=&PA=&IN=jacobus+johannes+abeling&CPC=&IC=&Submit=Search (https://worldwide.espacenet.com/searchResults?submitted=true&locale=en_EP&DB=EPODOC&ST=advanced&TI=&AB=&PN=&AP=&PR=&PD=&PA=&IN=jacobus+johannes+abeling&CPC=&IC=&Submit=Search)






https://worldwide.espacenet.com/publicationDetails/originalDocument?FT=D&date=20190718&DB=EPODOC&locale=en_EP&CC=WO&NR=2019139472A1&KC=A1&ND=4 (https://worldwide.espacenet.com/publicationDetails/originalDocument?FT=D&date=20190718&DB=EPODOC&locale=en_EP&CC=WO&NR=2019139472A1&KC=A1&ND=4)
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Turbo on March 07, 2020, 06:16:48 PM
I haven't seen anything from this developer yet.
Well ive seen some pictures but nothing more then that and i can only conclude that Mr Abeling has been unable to make it work.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Turbo on May 19, 2020, 12:01:01 PM
Ok so i am here to inform you all that the Abeling website and project has vanished.

Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: gyulasun on May 19, 2020, 01:05:27 PM
Hi Turbo,

The internet wayback machine can bring back the last September state of that site, see here:

https://web.archive.org/web/20190914033512/http://www.mooieenergie.nl:80/ (https://web.archive.org/web/20190914033512/http://www.mooieenergie.nl:80/)     

Greetings,
Gyula
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Turbo on May 19, 2020, 03:06:51 PM
Yes but that doesn't help.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Turbo on December 30, 2020, 02:52:46 PM
Well here is the official report that Mr. Abeling went out of business.
https://www.faillissementsdossier.nl/nl/faillissement/1574178/abeling-beheer-b-v.aspx (https://www.faillissementsdossier.nl/nl/faillissement/1574178/abeling-beheer-b-v.aspx)
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: a_user on November 06, 2021, 09:54:08 PM
I can really see that it is possible. Question is, how small device can you make?
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: ramset on November 15, 2021, 06:41:48 PM
Turbo
How’s tings ?


I hope ok


Thx
Chet
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: a_user on December 24, 2021, 12:22:41 PM
https://eagle-research.com/product/wisemans-wheels/
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Grimer on September 26, 2023, 03:07:09 PM
I now realise why Sjack's Garage Wheel worked.
I always believed it probably worked and that he
just had difficulties getting it to work consistently.
I found the weird thing about his wheel was the way it
flung the weights up into the air.


What is the view of other forum members on this?
Does anyone else think it worked.
Does anyone think he was a fraud.

Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Grimer on September 26, 2023, 06:12:51 PM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DhWQpPkgWd8&list=UUhLg4plP2LAso4lVtG3bA-A&index=12 (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DhWQpPkgWd8&list=UUhLg4plP2LAso4lVtG3bA-A&index=12)



Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Grimer on September 26, 2023, 06:25:49 PM
Maybe the first 20secs of that previous video is part of where Sjack Abeling got his inspiration. :)
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Cloxxki on September 26, 2023, 06:59:45 PM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DhWQpPkgWd8&list=UUhLg4plP2LAso4lVtG3bA-A&index=12 (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DhWQpPkgWd8&list=UUhLg4plP2LAso4lVtG3bA-A&index=12)
I like the next video I got more https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jlSv_IlXmBg&list=UUhLg4plP2LAso4lVtG3bA-A&index=11 (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jlSv_IlXmBg&list=UUhLg4plP2LAso4lVtG3bA-A&index=11)
It's the method I've been writing about, for having trains that cross vast distances at high speed on little energy. Kinetic energy conservation would become the main game: aerodymamically slick trains with...high mass. The air drag to be experienced will slow down a heavy train less. All stations would have similar altitudes above sea level. Departure platforms a bit higher than than arrivals perhaps, the difference overcome with low speed winches of sorts. Or single arrival/departure platforms, and the kinetic energy lost being added to the train mid-journey, perhaps even only on the final ascend to the next station. Low speed, low loss. On long distances, a cruise drive would be desired to keep speed up.
Stations would be on tall (strong) buildings and/or distances would be travelled on deep underground level tracks. Tube vacuation is a total pain, but if it were possible, a train on track following the bottom of the Atlantic would beat an airplane London to New York, and barely use any energy. Why? Very deep descend, no air drag, very high speeds.

Yes, in a Besser/Abeling type of wheel, I wonder how a weight could render itself absent for part of the lift phase.

Of we'd place that car jump on the wheel, in which phases would the car be driving the wheel, of be driven by it? Is there a case to be made for the car to only partially drive/be driven by the wheel, rather than be in full lock step at the rim?

We can achieve vast horizontal displacement of a weight with much loss in kinetic or potential (height) energy. Can that be an advantage in applying leverage? With a long lever, if connected to the main wheel, the vertical force from gravity will closer match that of the weight on the wheel. On the way down, the wheel may be pushing the weight down more than the other way around. Curious corner case for higher rpm or larger size gravity wheels, but I don't see the gain there, rather a hindrance to scale up.

Another curious thing to consider perhaps is that a horizontally traveling weight that hits a ramp, will ride up up 4x as high when its horizontal speed at the bottom of the ramp was only double. No gain there I can see.

An asymmetric wheel could have the weight take a lot less time to move back up than it did to come down. Might this allow for an imbalanced wheels, expecially if (part of) the ascend is detached from the larger wheel?

The thing that hurts my brain, is the idea that came to me that there might be something with the second derivative of speed. The first derivative is acceleration. The second would be increase/decrease of accerelation. Intuitively I feel something might ben gained there, but I don't even know where to start with it.

With Abeling's patent now defunct, might he be open to getting help to open source the whole thing, or rather die like Bessler, it being a matter of belief? I'm Dutch like him. How to approach an inventor that tried to go commercial but failed? He marketed it as beautiful energy, but for hima dn the patent office were the only beneficiaries.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Grimer on September 26, 2023, 11:25:30 PM
Maybe he got the leaping into the air idea from the first 20 seconds of the previous link.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: sm0ky2 on September 26, 2023, 11:44:35 PM
@Cloxxi


Thats a great idea, the Romans used to do this to move infinite masses of water without pumps.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: Cloxxki on September 27, 2023, 12:52:47 AM
I've been out of the game, hadn't seen that Abeling website. He's giving pretty big hints, I now realize.

Says the upward side is "light". Makes me suspect the weight join it with excess speed versus the place on the wheel where they join. With curved slots as we've seen of him in the past, the weights, given some good horizontal speed at the bottom, could be radially catching up to the upward side of the wheel.
The "jumping" longitudinally, doesn't need to be a real jump. The Dutch language kind of implies it, but I'd also also accept the weight moving off the wheels at the upward side, around main axle height or higher, and shifting to a near horizontal support ramp that's OFF the wheel. The weight could then be dropped to hit the wheel with some speed, radially catching up and tranferring some impulse, but still keeping momentum on or off the wheel at the bottom, to hit the tighter bend upward, transfer some energy to the wheel before locking onto it, and being lifted quite straight up near the main axle.

Random thought.
Imagine the weight indeed freefalls (clockwise wheel) from say 2 to 4, and then lands on a pring loaded lever that tightens the weight's inward trajectory and leaves it would do good residual speed for the hard work on the early ascend. The moment the weight leaves that lever, there is a snap back that would positively drive the wheel late in that phase, for the weight, when the weight really at that moment has some decent radial speed, going largely horizontally at the rim of the wheel and perhaps even faster than (being off) the rim.

The weight may have a pretty elaborate path around the wheel, and may even at not one moment be on a circular trajectory around the main axle. Shifting between freefall, helping push the wheel down around 2-4, then pushing again from 6 to 7 or even 7 to 8, and then a passive phase where the momentum of the main wheel is lifting the weight, but hardly necessarily in an orbit of the main axle, At 10 or even 9, it could roll through a trap, transition to a near horizontal path and get freefall from 4 or 3 again.
Perhaps the free fall could be from the height of 12, but above 3 and then do the mother of all freefalls to 3, transfer a lot of momentum there, fall through a trap again and then ROLL across the rim, faster than the rim itself, arriving at 6 early and then doing a vertical push against the wheel. If falling from 12 height, the work up would be going higher. With so little time on the wheel, let along a fixed location on the wheel, it may hardly matter whether you drop from 3 or 12. 12 would just be higher energy.

Anyone here proficient with these simulation softwares I used to see on forums?

Intuitively, I sense there might be something with the relationshipo between the freefall energy (not height or speed), work down on landing, kinetic energy achieve at 6 (could be below 6, I don't know whether that would help, simulation might tell us), the work done on the way up, and how much the wheel needs to work to get the weight to the freefall height. Where the weight surfaces at it summit, left or right, doesn't matter at all. Abeling says that it "jumps", so I suspect it summits left of the axle, tranfers to the right while off the wheel, and then only rejoins the wheel (momentarily or partially by transfering energy but never slowing down to wheel speed and radius), to leave an upward left strike. In my theory, the lifting is the hard part, but the wheels has its own momentum and gets help from eight weight once or twice.

The much discussed tightening radius from 6 to 8-9 MIGHT be the holy grail where the centrifugal force is able to bring anomalous work. A smart exact curve to be taken to make it all work? Don't tell me it's the gold ratio curve...

I like the idea of the weight exceeding wheel speed at 6, making the tight bend, and ending up pushing the wheel as it transition to the radial that was at 7 or 8 already when the weight just passed the 6 position and actually doing some work to the wheel on the way up.
Abeling mentions the wheel being light on the upward side, that might indeed be the vertical car jump thing. That car goes nearly all the way up, and doesn't do work on the way up.

Abeling mentions a stationary moment for the weight from which it's accelerated. Now that could be a previously loaded spring that lifts the wheel to its summit. If that spring is mounted to the downward side it's a double kicker, but harder to accomplish. The spring load could be a sub system loaded when the weight lands (catch is mentioned), and it could be timed to not need any spring at all, just a well placed off-the-wheel lever that is hit by a falling weight and then kick another to its summit.
Title: Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
Post by: ramset on September 27, 2023, 01:07:37 AM
Maybe he got the leaping into the air idea from the first 20 seconds of the previous link.


I believe Member Dusty (associate of Butch LaFonte ) did build a launching wheel
Earlier in this topic ?
I remember this launch idea being discussed,and Dusty giving it a try ?


Will have to search a bit as Dusty did a few builds ( other topics?)
Respectfully
Chet K