Storing Cookies (See : http://ec.europa.eu/ipg/basics/legal/cookies/index_en.htm ) help us to bring you our services at overunity.com . If you use this website and our services you declare yourself okay with using cookies .More Infos here:
https://overunity.com/5553/privacy-policy/
If you do not agree with storing cookies, please LEAVE this website now. From the 25th of May 2018, every existing user has to accept the GDPR agreement at first login. If a user is unwilling to accept the GDPR, he should email us and request to erase his account. Many thanks for your understanding

User Menu

Custom Search

Author Topic: Gravity wheel concept  (Read 9156 times)

Cherryman

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 642
Gravity wheel concept
« on: June 08, 2009, 01:28:57 PM »
Just tried another concept..  couldn't resist..   ;D
« Last Edit: June 08, 2009, 03:49:24 PM by Cherryman »

Cherryman

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 642
Re: Gravity wheel concept
« Reply #1 on: June 08, 2009, 03:13:04 PM »
This one works better.

It is based on the "hefboom" principle.


Cherryman

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 642
Re: Gravity wheel concept
« Reply #2 on: June 08, 2009, 03:21:10 PM »

Cherryman

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 642
Re: Gravity wheel concept
« Reply #3 on: June 08, 2009, 05:02:45 PM »
Another one, more spokes.. more weight difference


Cherryman

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 642
Re: Gravity wheel concept
« Reply #4 on: June 08, 2009, 08:05:18 PM »
Screenshot.

The weights are simply pushed to become levelers, the flywheel connects them all together.


Cloxxki

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1083
Re: Gravity wheel concept
« Reply #5 on: June 08, 2009, 09:23:26 PM »
I like that last one, although the first one is just as simple.
Wonder why they wouldn't work.

If indeed they don't, perhaps it's worth to investigate having a ramp on the lower right quadrant, leaving extra room rather than restructing it as most wheel choose to do.

Cherryman

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 642
Re: Gravity wheel concept
« Reply #6 on: June 08, 2009, 09:48:47 PM »
I like that last one, although the first one is just as simple.
Wonder why they wouldn't work.

If indeed they don't, perhaps it's worth to investigate having a ramp on the lower right quadrant, leaving extra room rather than restructing it as most wheel choose to do.

Tnx for the input.  I do think there is a problem with WM2D also, because i can not understand why it is capabele of turning counterclockwise by itself..

A ramp on the lower right corner?  If the wheel turns clockwise.. What action will that ramp provide?  I do not understand.

Greetings

Cloxxki

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1083
Re: Gravity wheel concept
« Reply #7 on: June 08, 2009, 09:58:14 PM »
Tnx for the input.  I do think there is a problem with WM2D also, because i can not understand why it is capabele of turning counterclockwise by itself..

A ramp on the lower right corner?  If the wheel turns clockwise.. What action will that ramp provide?  I do not understand.

Greetings
Just trying to think upstream. It's hip now to do it your way.
I thought a wider path 3-6:00 might also add some torque.
Not fighting CF as much, I brainfarted, rather giving way to it, at least at 3:00. Upper left then takes a shorter turn also.

alfilmx

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 10
Re: Gravity wheel concept
« Reply #8 on: June 11, 2009, 11:32:14 AM »
This one works better.

It is based on the "hefboom" principle.
    *
    *

Re: Gravity wheel concept
« Reply #5 on: June 08, 2009, 09:23:26 PM »

I like

Obelix

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 11
Re: Gravity wheel concept
« Reply #9 on: June 11, 2009, 03:41:00 PM »
Hey alfimx,

Try LT3A1.wmd with circle body(12) mass = 10 kg
Wait and see what happend .....
Very instructive .... ;D

Obelix

RebeLLz

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 95
Re: Gravity wheel concept
« Reply #10 on: June 12, 2009, 11:26:14 AM »
don't work

Paul-R

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2086
Re: Gravity wheel concept
« Reply #11 on: June 12, 2009, 03:34:09 PM »
I like that last one, although the first one is just as simple.
Wonder why they wouldn't work.
As the crucial barbell (which runs 8.00 o' clock - 2 o'clock) moves from
8.00 to 9.00, it will need work in order to raise the weight at the right
hand end by the amount that it will rise.