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

[purelyprimitives]

thanks

I ask myself why Mikhail's model doesn’t need the weights to slide back in and if the simple kicking out is sufficient. This is really interesting to see all the various options being explored which are trying to reach the same conclusion.

Somewhere in this thread is the suggestion to do just that. At some slight frictional loss but clearly more increase in torque, you could add a second small wheel at around 7:00 or so. This wheel wouldn't even need to be powered but simply act as a passive rolling interference to push the weights in toward the center of the large wheel. Once pushed in, the one-way bearings would hold them in and increase the overall over-balance of the larger wheel.

[Regster]

I wrote a piece of software today to replicate this device using an open source physics engine. I got stuck on replicating the one-way bearing, but the interesting thing is that strange things happen with just the wheel and weights when enough inertia is applied to the wheel once the number of weights exceeds a certain (unknown) number. The longer the "pendulum" the better... or worse, depending on what way you want to look at things.

In terms of real world simulation, the engine suffers from having non-(absolutely)-rigid joints. So say the wheel would be made of really, really hard rubber, as opposed to inherently inflexible steel.

If anyone wants it, I can give it to you with a couple of wheel/weights situations ready to rock.

It does beg the question though that this project, seeing as it does not break the laws of physics, could do with a more software/virtual approach to replication.

[purelyprimitives]

Regster,

I would be interested. I have started a replication and instead of one-way bearings I am using a mechanical "sprag" type stop to prevent counter-rotation. My rotor is only 4' in diameter so I was unable to fit the 32 weight sets that Mikhail has and mine only has 24. So if your program is flexible enough, this may help me immensely to determine how this will react.
Thanks in advance. Please send me a PM or email @ purelyprimitives@charter.net

[Regster]

Sure thing, here it is....

<deleted>

... it only has 4 models in it. I only got as far as seeing the unpredictability of the models with increasing number of divisions so the kicking wheel isn't implemented and the physics engine needs a one way bearing joint hacked into it to go further anyway. Just click on a component and throw it around.

edit: sorry, here's one with 24 vs 33 too... both (nearly) equally weird....

<link deleted> the frame keeps ripping apart in the demo.

[purelyprimitives]

Hi Regster,

Thanks for the links. Unfortunately for some reason I can open the extracted app. Will this run on Windows 7 64 bit?

[drak]

I have started a replication and instead of one-way bearings I am using a mechanical "sprag" type stop to prevent counter-rotation. My rotor is only 4' in diameter so I was unable to fit the 32 weight sets that Mikhail has and mine only has 24.

Mine is 4' also, I just used the appropriate weight size so I could fit 32 on there. 24 should work though, I don't see why it wouldn't.

[Regster]

Hi Regster,

Thanks for the links. Unfortunately for some reason I can open the extracted app. Will this run on Windows 7 64 bit?

That's my fault, it was a little debug file I linked to... I have edited the post so the link points to a setup.exe file now. Sorry.

[woopy]

Hi paul and all

Just received my oneway bearings. The shaft must be very precise or they will not work. I had to lathe precisely to get the oneway actuation.

So i made some first test, and ofcourse the fulcrum work very differently as when they are free to swing. And ofcourse no perpetual motion

Than i decided to motorise the skateboard wheel with a hand driller, to simulate the motor/generator.

And i got interesting results, as if the prime mover (motor ) gives some power at the system during a certain time in the revolution and than it get back some power and it become a generato during another part of the revolution.A kind of alternating motor/generator per each revolution.

What is very strange, is when i redo the same experiment but this time without the oneway bearing, i got about the same result.

But the back energy (generator ) seems to happen at arround 3 'clock when the oneway bearing are in action, and around 12 and/or 6 o'clock when the oneway bearings are not in action (weights are free to swing ). Also in this case(no oneway ) the effect seems slightly stronger but much less regular. I wonder if it would work with more than 2 weights, without becoming heratic ??

Very puzzling indeed.

Anyway it seems that the effect is happening only when the motor is connected to the wheel. So perhaps my requested video to Mikhail is not a so good idea ??

I think that the motor/generator is acting as a speed regulator?? And is necessary to the system because the speed seems to be very important to get the right deflection, too low speed and nothing happen and too high speed and the deflection become heratic

Than if the effect seems to happen 2 time per revolution (with 2 opposite weights) , will it be increased by multiplying the number of weights, And what is the minimum quantity to get more generator than motor.??

Yep very interesting machine and a lot to digest. OK back to workshop.

Thank's to all for sharing

good luck at all

Laurent

Mikhail wheel second exercise - YouTube

[Michael John Nunnerley]

Thanks for the video Laurent, very clear at my end

I will be drawing this out to show on paper what is happening "where the gain is and where it is not, and to show that the sooner the weight is extended at 12 o'clock the better it will work. The weight is not fully extended until exactly 3 o'clock, therefore the maximum benifit is from 3 till 6 albeit it starts coming slowly at 1.5+-.

I agree that with a full house of weights the results will be very good, the pulse you are getting will be of a higher frequency and smooth out to a point that you will not notice it, "but it will still be there".

If the weight can be extended fully at 1.5 without shooting past the full extention "straight line of arm and weight", the gain will be greater and I think that is what the inventor was trying to do with the inflated wheel.

Mike

[Michael John Nunnerley]

Drawing



Sorry for the hand drawing but I think this explains it well

Regards

Mike

[Michael John Nunnerley]

Loss area

The area of loss is a heavy loss area

Mike

[Michael John Nunnerley]

Laurent, the 6 o'clock position is the point of highest loss, it is like falling off a cliff, very abrupt, and as so you would notice this on the drill movement. just thinking aloud

Mike

[5150]

[ATTACH]12297[/ATTACH]

Sorry for the hand drawing but I think this explains it well

Regards

Mike

thanks for the drawing

this is what I am working or or asking myself, does the loss negate any gains or are the gains able to achieve enough gain over the loss to make it work efficiently

[woopy]

[ATTACH]12297[/ATTACH]

Sorry for the hand drawing but I think this explains it well

Regards

Mike

Hi Mike and all

Thank's for your explanation and drawing, but please look at the attached video.

http://youtu.be/yc8EtnFXjDc

It seewms that the acceleration of the main wheel occures between 11 and 2 or 3 o'clock.
Probably due to a Milkovic pendulum effect. Than the unbalanced wheel helps to finish the revolution.
If i am right this wheel seems to be more a dynamic (centrifugal force ) than a gravity machine.

What do you think?

Will try to mount a better demonstration motor to better grasp the idea.

good luck at all

Laurent

[Michael John Nunnerley]

Hi Mike and all

Thank's for your explanation and drawing, but please look at the attached video.

Mihkail wheel second exercise bis - YouTube

It seewms that the acceleration of the main wheel occures between 11 and 2 or 3 o'clock.
Probably due to a Milkovic pendulum effect. Than the unbalanced wheel helps to finish the revolution.
If i am right this wheel seems to be more a dynamic (centrifugal force ) than a gravity machine.

What do you think?

Will try to mount a better demonstration motor to better grasp the idea.

good luck at all

Laurent

Hi Laurent

I have just looked at the video which now shows the other half of the wheel. You may be right, it is difficult to tell powering it like you are. If it was a direct drive we could plot the amp change to the motor in relation to where the wheel is, if you see what I mean. That would give us a graph exactly between the power gain and the power loss, and what you are saying would show up as a spike "kick" in what should be a type of sine wave for the rest of the 360 degrees.

Tomorrow I will look at it again, 1.00 in the morning here and going to bed

regards

Mike