# Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

## Gravity powered devices => Gravity powered devices => Topic started by: iacob alex on July 14, 2009, 08:13:43 PM

Title: A simplified MT 13 ...
Post by: iacob alex on July 14, 2009, 08:13:43 PM

...is a possibility to shorten,reduce,simplify the design of MT 13 from ;   www.orffyre.com/mt1-20.html   into   www.geocities.com/iacob_alex/Some_Drafts/text009.jpg

A wheel with 12 spokes,becomes a wheel with 2 spokes,only (one constant,one variable).

All the Best! / Alex
Title: Re: A simplified MT 13 ...
Post by: iacob alex on July 15, 2009, 10:55:15 PM

Hi Jim !

There are three great differences between MT13 and the proposed "Flip-flop wheel 01":

- 12 vs. 2 spokes

-as a helpful effect,an "amazing" much longer gravity fall (30* vs. ~350-355*)...just try to put in motion this design,beginning with  pos. nr.3 (variable  arm, as a long arm, in the up position ).

-bump effect to switch small arm into long arm

This is why I suggested a simplification,digest of  MT13...and to use a part of this,only.

I believe that a test is more efficacious than a lot of words...sorry,that for the moment I am out of possibility to make experiments.

All the Best! / Alex
Title: Re: A simplified MT 13 ...
Post by: iacob alex on July 16, 2009, 01:43:11 AM

Hi Jim!

-friction :6 times smaller

-fall time:11-12 time greater (v=g*t , Ek=1/2m*v*v )

By the way,the non-simplified mathematics of pendulum is a matter of study ,so far...we can't use it for the moment.

As I said,a simple test of this elementary design ,can be more conclusive than a lot of words or  ...of mathematics .

All the Best! / Alex
Title: Re: A simplified MT 13 ...
Post by: iacob alex on July 17, 2009, 02:57:01 AM

Hi Jim !

If you take a look in the history of PM,you can learn a lot of things...sometimes,that "Nothing is new under the Sun",a lesson to respect our ancestors.

Long time ago,without the help of "modern tools" (mathematics,computer simulations...) they used their minds and hands to solve the basic problems of life.

For instance,a MT 13 simplification,is a step only,in a long -lasting evolution of the same vision/idea of a possible PM :the long arm on the same side of the fulcrum.

Let's take a short look on net,for the history of the same "illusory" design;

-Taccola (1382-1458)
-Leonardo da Vinci(1452-1519)
-Bessler ~1712
-others...

On paper,this concept,has two critical points :0*(360*) /top position and 180*/down position,where we need a self-commuting process (short arm must move into a long arm,on the same side of the fulcrum).

In reality,this concept "hangs in the middle" :
-the critical down point(180*) works so easy (is self).
-the critical top point (0*/360*) has a lot of "problems" :needs a long period of time and space..but the most important fact...it's not self.

As a whole,the concept in reality ,it's not self.

Bessler made a step forward :he imagined to reduce the top commuting space from 180*(270*to 90*),to 30*(330* to 360*).

How can work his scheme,of an older concept...is the reason of this topic: "A simplified MT 13"...

All the Best! / Alex
Title: Re: A simplified MT 13 ...
Post by: iacob alex on July 17, 2009, 11:47:38 PM

...can be tested in a simple manner.

All that you need ;

-a rotary frame(bar or your bike wheel)

-two equal masses

A mass plays medium arm/handle,lever on a fixed position.

The second mass,on the same diameter,plays changing back and forth,face to medium arm.

How moves the second mass is your...lottery ticket.

All the Best! / Alex
Title: Re: A simplified MT 13 ...
Post by: iacob alex on July 21, 2009, 05:55:48 AM

....face to the original MT 13 (   www.orffyre.com/mt1-20.html  ) shows as the most important distinctive feature,the possibility to collect more power,because only gravity does the work.

The power drawn from gravty acts on the falling mass,relating to the time and space  factors.

With the original MT 13,we have a fall,no more than 30* (between two successive spokes).

With the "simplified" MT 13 ,we have a...surprising continuous 12 times greater fall (the design,pos.3,beginning with the "blue" mass in the top side,as a long arm).

All the Best! / Alex
Title: Re: A simplified MT 13 ...
Post by: lltfdaniel1 on July 21, 2009, 06:20:42 AM
The earth does have its own radio rf broadcast so to speak and we know rf from man made can be converter into power since rf it self is powered by electric.

Does it mean that the earths own rf broadcast cannot be converted into electric?

No.
Title: Re: A simplified MT 13 ...
Post by: iacob alex on July 21, 2009, 07:13:45 AM

Hi !

This is in the same line as a simplified MT 13.

Sometimes,less is more,because we discover a starting point for complexity.

All the Best! / Alex
Title: Re: A simplified MT 13 ...
Post by: lltfdaniel1 on July 21, 2009, 07:16:39 AM

Hi !

This is in the same line as a simplified MT 13.

Sometimes,less is more,because we discover a starting point for complexity.

All the Best! / Alex

I see it as simplicity.
Title: Re: A simplified MT 13 ...
Post by: iacob alex on July 21, 2009, 11:09:48 PM

Hi P-Motion!

If the gravity is the only source of power (does the work...),due to a falling mass,then:

-MT 25 falls no more than 45*,at every step

-MT 13 (12 variable spokes),falls no more than 30*,at every step

-MT 13 simplified (2 variable spokes),falls no more than 180*,at every step

-MT !3 simplified  (2 spokes,one fixed,one variable ),falls no more than 360*,at every step

It's a real fact,that a longer fall is related to an EVER ACCELERATED VELOCITY (m*v or 1/2 m*v*v...as you like).

To maintain a continuous motion of the up here sketches,we need,at every step to remake the short arm,into the long arm on the same side of the fulcrum...nothing more.

As you can see, with a simplified design,we can get a much greater power ,for the same "remake" consumption,use.

If you don't like the "avalanche" aspect of gravity fall ,then you can play with persistance,as all the people the "arabesque" decoration wheels...

All the Best! / Alex
Title: Re: A simplified MT 13 ...
Post by: iacob alex on July 22, 2009, 01:24:24 AM

Hi Jim !

You need no math or a plenty stack of words...

Imagine that you are living in the Middle Age...

Imagine that you have a simple stick,bar with a hinged end.

Imagine that you really have the free will to make it work...

Imagination is more important than knowledge,because doubt grows with erudition.

Sure,is more convenient to say "no",than to  move over the things...

All the Best! / Alex
Title: Re: A simplified MT 13 ...
Post by: iacob alex on July 24, 2009, 11:38:42 PM

Hi JIm !

...can be tested in the most simple manner.

All that you need is a bar:a long narrow piece of solid material.

Imagine this bar,to play as a first degree lever ,with two unequal arm.

The small arm will play the median arm.

The great arm must have a small hinged part,so to can play greater or smaller than the median arm,due to the hinged part.

This changing end of a linear bar ,is the "key" of the PM motion problem.

All the Best! / Alex
Title: Re: A simplified MT 13 ...
Post by: iacob alex on July 26, 2009, 04:10:16 AM

Hi  Jim!

I agree with you that ..."there are different ways..." to maintain the CoG on the same side   of  the fulcrum/pivot , as a main condition for a running PM.

Sometimes,you can perform directly upon CoG as  a "free gravity rolling ",if you look at  :
www.geocities.com/iacob_alex/Some_Drafts/text018.jpg

All the Best! / Alex
Title: Re: A simplified MT 13 ...
Post by: iacob alex on July 28, 2009, 02:47:48 AM

Hi !

I made a simplification of MT13,you can see it in a simple preliminary drawing.

You say that..."there is a way your idea can be modified" and..."a weighted lever swing   down and lift one or both weights".

I agree...so we have:

-the original :Bessler's MT13

-the simplified conversion of MT13

The next step(change) is yours...

I wish you success!
All the Best! / Alex
Title: Re: A simplified MT 13 ...
Post by: iacob alex on July 28, 2009, 10:25:24 PM

Hi  Jim !

We play the same game,but in two different manners:
-to simplify is one...
-to complicate,intricate is the other...

But you see,sometimes the less is more.

All the best! / Alex
Title: Re: A simplified MT 13 ...
Post by: iacob alex on August 17, 2009, 08:23:05 AM

Hi Jim!
As I see the things,after visiting Bessler's 143 designs,I was interested about MT13.

Why? Simply,because it was in the same line of an old solution(Villard,Taccola,da Vinci and others).

With MT13,he used the "classical" short arm-long arm reasoning,as simple as possible:

-in the lowest point,the long arm becomes a hinged arm(short arm),so easy, in the most natuaral manner ,due to gravity.

-in the top position,the same hinged arm,needs some "help",to switch  back into the long arm...here we have a problem,in fact the only one ...

This "help",can be acquired from a stored rotational inertia,as an effect of gravity fall.

Bessler's improvement was to minimize the switching time/and space from 180*(Villard,Taccola...) to 90*.

"A simplified MT13..."(two spokes only) can reduce even more this switching time,from 90* to a smaller value...

All the best! / Alex
Title: Re: A simplified MT 13 ...
Post by: iacob alex on October 24, 2009, 08:57:47 PM

...or Bessler's MT13, can be a starting point to achieve a PM,if we imagine and test,two steps :

-to simplify(two opposite arms,only).
-to modify (one hinged arm,only).

Some details,you can find at /Gravity "wheel" concept/.

All the best! / Alex
Title: Re: A simplified MT 13 ...
Post by: iacob alex on March 14, 2017, 03:24:56 PM
Hi !
An animation of MT 13 , at :