CloudSeeder's Gravity Wheel on Fire

[CloudSeeder]

cool wish i had some time to do more on my thiny

I put a few ideas on the table in Post #510 that might help you => http://www.energeticforum.com/92466-post510.html

[protecheqp]

I don't have any trouble with my unit just not enough time to work on it

[CloudSeeder]

@protecheqp: About the only reason I see why your triangle design system wouldn't work would be all the moving parts and the cumulative friction. Maybe if you got away from using metal for the conveyor system... substitute in some of that super strong nylon rope that flexes and bends. I think you could get it to work. The nylon is very lightweight, like they make the tow ropes and boating ropes from. It's real tough too so it would run for a decade before wearing out, seems like.

You could make it as a double rope, parallel with crosspieces like a ladder and the weights attached to the "rungs". The "rope" could be round, or it could be a braid. It would still be flexible but it would bring more surface to the drums. Your system would need that to have enough grip [needed to turn the generator]. In fact, you could have the braids spotted with spots of grip feet (rubber, like they use on hospital socks for patients).

edit: You might want to start thinking along the lines of longer drums and more than one line of weights; instead staggering smaller weights. Just a thought. The weights you have are so long that when they go into the drum to flip they're sticking out into the air too far => a negative leverage force. Tell ya what, you could make them shorter by having one end telescope inside the other... but the trick there would be preventing it from sliding out as it goes around THEN popping loose after the flip! If you could do THAT you could double the force.

Yeah. I know how you could do that I think. ha HA. Let's say ya make the weights as a rectangle shape. So the side to the back has a catch on the inside, so when it flips the catch holds it from telescoping out, but when it flips the rectangle has to have a little play in it and drops off the catch (a little ledge actually).

Hmm. But then you have a problem => pushing the telescoped piece back up on the catch eh? OK, so when the weights are coming across at the bottom, between drums, there would need to be a roller or something. There wouldn't be any resistance to raising the bottom scoped piece back up onto the catch, resetting it.
....

Maybe somewhere in the above you'll find something that will save you some time then [or money].

[CloudSeeder]

Simple Solutions are sometimes both faster, cheaper & better!

@protecheqp: I think maybe one simple change might help your system just the way it is. The weight sticking out so much going over the top is putting a backwards leverage force into the system, right? But it doesn't do that on the other two rollers.

So the offending one at the top needs a little development. Perhaps using a short C-curved "bridge" shaped section of store rollers, like they slide boxes down when they unload delivery trucks. Roll the weight over the top, on its side. No flipping til it goes over the other side.

[CloudSeeder]

@All: Spent some time working with the spoked wheel today, moved the nut~lock washers stroke length settings (shorter strokes). The angle of slide definitely has to be steepened. Do that tomorrow.

Placed some weights halfways out on the non-used spokes (3 of them) to give some continuity. They helped. Each change made we learn something and the possibilities narrow down to a sharper bead.

A 3-arm device isn't likely to work => too much empty space between falling weights. There's two choices then, steepen the sliding rod angles or add sliding rods to the empty 3 arms. I will do it in just that order too.

Still keeping an eye on May 1.

[CloudSeeder]

Weights sliding down a Rod = Straight Pendulum More Force

A weight sliding down a threaded rod equals a Straight Pendulum with More Force... so when the rod is angled correctly /and more of them are attached to Chas. Campbell's bicycle wheel device i.e. wooden slats-spoked wheel = my device/ it should be more powerful than swinging pendulum energy can ever develop.

Creating a double impact per rod not just one.......

A nut-lock~washer-nut combination is used to set start & end points of the slide. Mine has the upper end of the threaded rod sliding inside a slat-attached metal guide tube a set length (stroke), plus the oblong round fishing weight on the lower end sliding between another set of nut-l~w-nut combos. So the rod has two impacts not just ONE. What I am attempting to do is set them both to the same slide length (aka "stroke") so they both impact together.

This creates a double impact per rod, not just ONE. One impact striking at the top (pulling leverage force into the slat) then the sliding weight adds to that. Both impacts strike at the point of needed leverage NOT at the bottom where Charles's bike wheel did the strike. With Mr. Campbell's bike wheel the force of impact was absorbed as vibration energy throughout the metal tube sides. What energy remained was not enough to leverage down to the bicycle axle.

More applause to Mr. Chas. Campbell's work of Australia.

[CloudSeeder]

Weights sliding down the Rod pulls a Nice Trick => Rod Weight adds to Sliding Impact

So the weights sliding down the rod pulls two very nice tricks => #1, all of the "negative" weight of the nuts, rod, washers, all adds to the Total Sliding Impact Force + #2 the full impact is slamming up at the end|top of the slat for maximum leverage.

Something important I've so far failed to make real clear is that as the wheel continues spinning the sliding weight does slide back, albeit easier, for a slight negative-to-spin impact. So the angle of the rod down towards the axle, plus its length, if the rod angle is steep enough that negative slide pulls against the axle which is quite immovable, so =>

The negative force is muted by the backwards direction pull
on the axle, NOT canceling out any forward spin force.

So the rod can be anywhere from straight out @90 degrees down to 0 degrees but that would be in line with the slat and lose forward impacting. Today I am choosing to move the rods down to about 52 degrees. Now you might think it should below 45 degrees but while that looks correct what happens if you go too far toward the axle the sliding rod+weight loses any benefit it might gain from centrifugal speed & force. So I'm pulling back a little few degrees from 45.

Steep enough slide = elimination of negative-to-spin

impact from sliding rods; this is a balancing act of forces:

just not too far <> do not give up centrifugal:

Robert Kostoff's trick.

....

[CloudSeeder]

Two Systems sharing the Same Device? I Like It!

Report: 6 hours later maybe, spoked wheel, the threaded rods still have a slight grating going back & forth inside the tube guides... but I'm holding back smearing grease all over the place. Brazing over the threads with tin or copper would probably be better. Upon spinning the wheel the rod assembly passes 7 AM, begins coming back up, then stops => no weight on opposite end.

That can be easily corrected by placing counterweights on the opposite empty ends, or by constructing 3 complete more assemblies for those empties. However, I have long toyed with the idea that a good gravity wheel that works would have more than one system at work.... so I've come up with a dynamite idea for a simple falling weight system to put on those 3 empty slat ends. Probably be Friday since I have to figure out specifics; materials, sizes, angles.

I Like It!
.

[CloudSeeder]

Gravity Wheels need BOTH push &amp; pull (from some sort of advance-pull mechanism)

It does real well but the other 3 spokes not having the sliding rods represents three dead-energy zones.

Right~Left Balance yes, but => Top~Bottom Balance also!

Yep, I added three counterweights to the 3 non-sliding-weight slats and it didn't fix it, so what we have here is CONCLUSIVE => for this type of wheel odd numbers don't make the trip. The two weighted slats go to the bottom and outweigh the one falling weight up top. I was in hopes the counterweights would negate this issue <> it does not appear to do so. There has to be not only a weight balance from left versus right side but also the bottom half versus the top half => the Inaction vs the Action.

I should've seen that coming long ago. But with the Triple-Arm Hammer Cam where each unit of 3 is both pushing down PLUS pulling itself up on the opposite side both from the one and the same falling weight... both even and odd numbers of arms should work. The Hammer Cam may be one of the few that can do that. Since the sliding weights (on the also-sliding rod-tube combination) has several problems, it will be a wise choice to move on to the Hammer Cam and spend no more time on the spoked wheel at this time.

It has shown itself to be a loser design that looks good on paper. There is a possibility that the threaded rod having the sliding weight, that you could attach a light weight monofilament fishing line down across the 2nd arm away => applying an advance-pull mechanism but today I shall not do all that. The Hammer Cam plus the earlier Scorpion designs look much better, especially the Scorpion. Setting the spoked wheel aside now, May 1 2010 back burner.

[CloudSeeder]

Fishing line + weight = Advance-Pull System worth remembering!

Just prior to unmounting the wheel over to the back burner I gave it a few last short spins and see a big problem I could fix. The fishing weights are being held back by the threads on the rods. They're sticking in the extended position. I would have to do 30+ minutes with the grinding wheel to shave off those threads but I don't want to do that to the people below my apartment.

But the rods sliding down are also sticking from the same cause, so it's entirely possible this wheel might work if I did all that grinding. Neither the Hammer Cam or the Scorpion needs that kind of noise so I will press on.

Anyway, I hate grinder noise too. I already have ringing in my ears from previous head concussions. I do NOT need to make it worse. But if I was to do the grinding down PLUS adding the fishing line advance pull rig hmm, good chance it would work. But I doubt it would make much more power than turning itself so it still has loser written all over it.

Maybe the advance pull line+weight will help somebody else........

[CloudSeeder]

Hammer Cam Gravity Wheel Solved =&gt; May 2 2010:

In the event I do not post for a while, perhaps a few weeks, it will be because of having to move on short notice. My monthly disability check appears to be delayed and the apartment people have zero tolerance for not paying on time.

I solved the Hammer Cam Gravity Wheel on May 2 2010 so I'm happy to move if it comes to that. I only wanted to do one thing before moving and that was get the wheel designed correctly, and I have that in my hip pocket, with me wherever I go.

Many other things have gone right for me in the past month, so if I get the boot it's only an inconvenience. I turned in a two-month Notice to Vacate last night anyway. hehehe Perhaps two months come faster in 2010 .

[CloudSeeder]

In the event I do not post for a while, perhaps a few weeks, it will be because of having to move on short notice. My monthly disability check appears to be delayed and the apartment people have zero tolerance for not paying on time.

I solved the Hammer Cam Gravity Wheel on May 2 2010 so I'm happy to move if it comes to that. I only wanted to do one thing before moving and that was get the wheel designed correctly, and I have that in my hip pocket, with me wherever I go.

Many other things have gone right for me in the past month, so if I get the boot it's only an inconvenience. I turned in a two-month Notice to Vacate last night anyway. hehehe Perhaps two months come faster in 2010 .

Hmm, this is very interesting. I wasn't feeling so great yesterday so I had the Date wrong. I figured out the last piece of the puzzle on May 1st, not May 2... so I actually met the Date I had set. Short of building it. I had left out one key principle that occurred to me months ago when I designed the Scorpion wheel design. Plugged it into the equation May 1.

Well, looks like my good ol reliable disability check must've been needed for the stop the crude oil effort. I finished my job here anyway. Time to strike out on a new path.

[CloudSeeder]

Sling Energy 5/08/2010 outside generated by Head Weight inside

The bottom line basics of all Gravity Wheels appears to be #1 => weight and #2 => Force. Depending on which design used, and we know there are many, the success or failure of every gravity wheel depends upon #1 where the weight is pushing down and #2 what forces it generates and their LOCATION.

Weights placed incorrectly in the wheel can kill the wheel's spinning. So can the forces.

Weight can work for the wheel but also against it too. The farther away from the gravity wheel axle the more of both, the closer to the axle the least [of the negative], so the weight needs to be close to the axle. And the Scorpion tail with a smaller weight needs to be further away from the axle to utilize the Sling Energy generated next to the axle [in the weight of the Scorpion "head"].

This configuration requires a short stroke motion of a heavier axle-hugging weight, and since it is heavier there needs to be more of them and balanced equally around the axle. This defeats creation of a negative force ~and leverage~ when the weights are employed at a further distance from the axle. You get the cream (weight) without the sugar (negative force creation).

[CloudSeeder]

Pelican! =&gt; Weight minus Weight plus Force = Force Only! 5/26/2010

The bottom line basics of all Gravity Wheels appears to be #1 => weight and #2 => Force. Depending on which design used, and we know there are many, the success or failure of every gravity wheel depends upon #1 where the weight is pushing down and #2 what forces it generates and their LOCATION.

Weights placed incorrectly in the wheel can kill the wheel's spinning. So can the forces.

Weight can work for the wheel but also against it too. The farther away from the gravity wheel axle the more of both, the closer to the axle the least [of the negative], so the weight needs to be close to the axle. And the Scorpion tail with a smaller weight needs to be further away from the axle to utilize the Sling Energy generated next to the axle [in the weight of the Scorpion "head"].

This configuration requires a short stroke motion of a heavier axle-hugging weight, and since it is heavier there needs to be more of them and balanced equally around the axle. This defeats creation of a negative force ~and leverage~ when the weights are employed at a further distance from the axle. You get the cream (weight) without the sugar (negative force creation).

My apologies for my absence. Had some pressing matters to take care of.

Do you recall the "Pelican" design? That was the two opposed arms with weights falling forward to hit a plate. It almost went into continuous spin. Well, yesterday I took a fresh look at it and I saw how to extend the arms to the other side of the hub to give a badly-needed leverage. The arms with the weights needed a counterbalance. The weights cancel each other out, leaving the force from the weights =>

Weight (leverage to hub) minus Weight (leverage opp side to hub) plus Force (that side only) = Force

This treats each Half as its own Whole (for one 180 side) & yet the two equals the overall "Whole" (360).

[CloudSeeder]

Be a couple days maybe to get it fixed. As I recall I had projected a June 1 working gravity wheel. Turns out I'm ahead of time....