Mikhail Dmitriyev - Input 1000 W, Output near 3000 W.

[soundiceuk]

I hadn't read your response Regster when I wrote mine.

I can get the CAD done in any format.

Here is a ball park from one of my contacts.

_____________________________

Hi Paul,

Here is the design costs for your project.

This note below is from Bob our designer.

I have priced this job to include an interim meeting to review the
design before detailing. Design revisions after approval at the meeting will
incur additional costs.

.................................................. ......................

The total price for design and modelling of this price .......... £ 1350.00
+ VAT

This includes 3D models,GA and detailed drawings.

Cleared funds will need paying before we start the design work.

Hopefully we should have a GA within a week of cleared funds.

Once you have approved the GA we will proceed and get a tooling quote
together.

If you have any questions please feel free to call or pop in.

Best Regards

Paul Lambert

[SkyWatcher]

Hi folks, this is definitely an intriguing device, was testing something similar and was also very impressed by a toy that we've played with many times, called a flingsock, basically a long sock with a weight in the end and swing and release and it goes so far as to be astonishing.
Try getting that same amount of weight as high or as far without centrifugal, centripetal, etc. forces and it can not be done, no matter how strong ones baseball arm is and if it can, one would use way more energy in doing so and that arm would get tired real quick.
That is why this device principle is very awesome.
Not sure the cost of those bearings woopy received, though free wheels for bicycles can be had for 9 dollars, maybe cheaper, don't know.
Thanks to all for your efforts and woopy and the man who applied this principle.
peace love light
tyson

[purelyprimitives]

Wouldn't it make sense to wait and see what prototype 12 looks like before investing in CAD development? The statement from Mikhail was that the new one will be "simpler and more efficient". Whatever that may mean, it will most certainly be different from prototype 11.

[soundiceuk]

Yes, we should definately wait to see what protoptype 12 is all about.

I cannot fathom in my head how the same torque could be produced in the trunk of a car.

A large van maybe.

It is just a waiting game at the moment.

Great videos Woopy!

[purelyprimitives]

Yes, we should definately wait to see what protoptype 12 is all about.

I cannot fathom in my head how the same torque could be produced in the trunk of a car.

If prototype 12 is small enough to fit in the trunk of a car, it will be considerably smaller than prototype 11. It would seem that the only way to produce the same torque would be to increase the mass or the speed or both! Can't wait to see it!

[Regster]

I hadn't read your response Regster when I wrote mine.

I think we are talking apples and oranges here. I am suggesting getting a dynamic simulation made but you are asking for a quote for getting manufacturing drawings made.

A dynamic simulation would be an indisputable validation.

[markusbraunfe]

Hi Regster,
why are you thinking that that you will achieve your goal of demonstrating overunity by using a physics simulation program which is based on incomplete laws of physics?
Sorry but this is completely nonsense.
Overunity, if it exists, is not yet programmed into simulation software.
Simulation software works according to the laws of Newton (F=m*a etc) and according to these laws, overunity is not achievable.

Feel free to prove me wrong

The only way to have a "indisputable validation" is to build the real model.
Build a simple, cheap model. If it works then only later think about making something bigger with multi kW generators etc.
I'm working on replicating prototype 10 with 32 weights (30kg rotating mass) and I will share my findings here, probably in a few weeks.

Does anyone have a part number or manufacturer name for the one-way bearings Mikhail used in prototype 10?

If you want to build a decent prototype 10 replica you have probably to invest a few hundred $, alone the one way bearings can cost several $ each.

Of course using simulation software to "experiment" is cheap, no machining tools required, no material expenses. It works for conventional devices, but for OU devices, you will not achieve your goal. It's a waste of time.

The life of the experimenter is frustrating, many failures, few successes, each model costs time and money to build, but there is no way around it. On the bright side, nature will not lie to you. Let the developers of simulation software update the laws of physics when we have an OU device which is easy to replicate so they can study it in their software development labs and correct their "bugs"

I have faith that Mikhail has discovered something interesting, but I'd like to see a good replica working, so that we can be certain that it really works.
After this, it is only a relatively simple mechanical engineering problem to build more powerful wheels which can generate a decent amount of kW.

woopy: your setup will never show any kind of OU. You need to introduce the perturbing element (deflector mechanism which perturbs the system and adds momentum to it).
Turning the main wheel with a drill will not show any OU effects. It's just a flywheel. Add more weights and the deflector mechanism, then the effects will start get interesting and the rotation will be powerful.

I think we are talking apples and oranges here. I am suggesting getting a dynamic simulation made but you are asking for a quote for getting manufacturing drawings made.

A dynamic simulation would be an indisputable validation.

[Michael John Nunnerley]

@ markusbraufe

Laurent is not trying to see OU in the little units he is doing, he is getting a feel for what is happening in this type of system, where there is gain, where there is loss, is there needed a system to extend the weights or not etc etc, it's called walking before you run and very applaudable, he is an excellent experimenter

Mike

[Regster]

Hi Regster,
why are you thinking that that you will achieve your goal of demonstrating overunity by using a physics simulation program which is based on incomplete laws of physics?
Sorry but this is completely nonsense.

Because everyone apart from you seems to think that this device does not break standard laws of physics.

[purelyprimitives]

Hi Regster,
why are you thinking that that you will achieve your goal of demonstrating overunity by using a physics simulation program which is based on incomplete laws of physics?
Sorry but this is completely nonsense.
Overunity, if it exists, is not yet programmed into simulation software.
Simulation software works according to the laws of Newton (F=m*a etc) and according to these laws, overunity is not achievable.

Feel free to prove me wrong

While I agree in principle, check this out:
Gravity wheel 2 - YouTube

[purelyprimitives]

While I agree in principle, check this out:
Gravity wheel 2 - YouTube

Sorry had to run out and didn't finish my thought on this. Simulation software is valuable to narrow down options and put you in the ball park but like the video above, can give you unusual results. However, I also agree with Regster that there really is nothing here that violates any Newtonian laws of physics.

[woopy]

Hi all

Thank's for kind words and encouragement and proposal.

So i spent 2 days now to improve my bench test and avoid as much as possible the subjective feelings and measurement error.

So my results so far

Mikhail wheel no mopre finger subjectiv feeling - YouTube

The texto above the video is complete enough to explain this test.

Have somebody already made some replication to get some more input on the subject.

Until now i get no usable practical results.

But ofcourse i have only 2 weights with not so good oneway bearings and no kicking wheel. So my results are to be taken with a certain distance.

Thank's for understanding and further proposal.

And back to shop

And good luck at all

Laurent

[soundiceuk]

I think we are talking apples and oranges here. I am suggesting getting a dynamic simulation made but you are asking for a quote for getting manufacturing drawings made.

A dynamic simulation would be an indisputable validation.

I think we both wanted the same outcome, a CAD model / simulation that can be played with using free software.

The expense we should try to avoid if possible.

I will see what I can cook up.

[soundiceuk]

Have somebody already made some replication to get some more input on the subject.

You are not alone Woopy, there are other replications underway.

The next two weeks should be very interesting.

Mikhail always takes a break at weekends.


This may be something or nothing.

Have you considered customising a vehicle alternator as a motor / generator?

I'm fairly certain most of them have 3 sets of stator windings and a 3 phase bridge rectifier.

[iflewmyown]

Hello Woopy,
I have experimented with the same type wheel as yours with five pendulums but no one way bearings. Two days ago I did discover a very interesting effect. If you would turn a bicycle upside down. The front tire needs to be balanced and spin very freely. Then using a gloved hand spin the wheel as hard as you can with one finger. Let it spin until it stops. Then repeat two more times. Notice the force you apply with your finger. Now spin the wheel again for the forth time as fast as you can like before, only this time grab the wheel with your gloved hand and stop it as fast as you can. As soon as the wheel is stopped immediately spin it again. Try that several times and see what you see. If you will report the same as I felt I will tell you the secret of free energy and how many different devices work. ( This was discovered, published and lost many years ago and I had read the words but now understood until now). This is a very subjective test and requires an open mind and a deft touch. Have fun!
Garry