The sling effect...and many other questions.

[navigator]

Ted: What I find interesting about electrons and planets is they rotate around their own axis, while at the same time, the axis of the system their in. Also, the path they travel orbiting the main axis is always eliptical or not circular. To be honest with you, I know that only about planets, the electrons behavior is purely speculation on my part so please correct me if I am wrong.

I never had any idea the amount of mechanical parameters that affect the performance of this type of device. On my setup a half turn on a screw or nut can change everything and can create a snowball of other adjustments. I spend more time preparing by, tightening, loosening all important connections to make sure it spins freely than anything else. Anyway, I agree that Milkovic's system has developed free mechanical energy by using the forces of nature and the effects they have on objects or any matter in motion.

It seems to me that the torque will be directly proportianate to the weight at the end of the pendulum?

[navigator]

This point where it binds is the place you can reverse the sling arm's rotation. Just move the arm a little in the opposite direction as the mechanism passes this point. Then when it's running the sling arm will always point in the same direction, producing a different effect.

I see what your saying, but when I did that I lost the small second loop and required turning the output flywheel. If I manually turn the input side it follows the original path. Also the mass end of the pendulum is much further from the main axis on the down side and comes much closer to the main axis on the up side, which is the same. Very interesting, my mind is racing.

I am still looking for a new motor. Not ready to spend 50$ for another erector set just for the motor. I am debating making a generator similar to the "hamster wheel" but I'm sure there are more efficient ideas out there...

[Electrotek]

I am still looking for a new motor. Not ready to spend 50$ for another erector set just for the motor. I am debating making a generator similar to the "hamster wheel" but I'm sure there are more efficient ideas out there...

I've found a lot of really good motors in vacuum cleaners, especially associated with the beater bar. Also, there's a really good small motor, including gear train, in the little mini food processor, as well as the Salad Shooter.

And I just received a good tip from Ghst over on the Gray Tube Replication thread about a handy little generator. The small synchronous motor which drives the turntable in a junk Microwave Oven puts out around 300 VAC when spun by hand. I checked my stockpile of these motors and found one which is rated at 6 RPM, rather than the usual 2.5, and this one spins really easy by hand. It puts out a really good zap even at a very slow speed.

[navigator]

Electrotek: Very cool!!! Thanks for the tip, I was actually thinking DC, but I bet I can find a microwave at Goodwill for $10. Are their any paticular elec. specs I should look for or just any microwave with the turntable?

My knowledge of electricity is lacking at best, please bear with me...

The experiments I have done involved measuring voltage usage on a timed run. Is it going to be more beneficial to stick with the 6 volt dc input motor? When I spin the meccano motor by hand I only get 1.4-1.5 volts, are you spinning your motor that much harder to get 300VAC?

[Electrotek]

Navigator: The 6 RPM motor spins really easy by hand, but most of them are rated at a lower speed and turn harder. However, with a crank arm it would be easier.

I've also tried ganging two battery drills together with a driver bit. The driven motor acts as a generator, but only puts out about half the voltage driving the motor drill. With additional gearing to increase the speed this would go up. These drills are cheap at some outlets, around $15 to $20, even less at the thrift store when they have them. The motor comes right out with the chuck intack, and a shaft can be clamped into the chuck. I like to use these because they'll spin a 4 oz. weight on a 5" spoke at 400 to 600 RPM. There's quite a bit of torque. And the speed is adjustable.

[Ted Ewert]

Ted: What I find interesting about electrons and planets is they rotate around their own axis, while at the same time, the axis of the system their in. Also, the path they travel orbiting the main axis is always eliptical or not circular. To be honest with you, I know that only about planets, the electrons behavior is purely speculation on my part so please correct me if I am wrong.

I never had any idea the amount of mechanical parameters that affect the performance of this type of device. On my setup a half turn on a screw or nut can change everything and can create a snowball of other adjustments. I spend more time preparing by, tightening, loosening all important connections to make sure it spins freely than anything else. Anyway, I agree that Milkovic's system has developed free mechanical energy by using the forces of nature and the effects they have on objects or any matter in motion.

It seems to me that the torque will be directly proportianate to the weight at the end of the pendulum?

Yes, the more weight the more torque. However, the more weight, the stronger you have to make everything. A 5 lb weight swinging around on a 6" lever puts a tremendous amount of strain on the nuts holding it to the shaft. You almost have to weld everything together (which makes adjustment difficult).
A metal lathe and a milling machine would come in real handy, but I just have the basic stuff. It's enough to prove a concept, but that's about it.
Milkovic has found the key, of that I have no doubt. The challenge is going to be putting those principals into a self running rotational mechanism of which the compound pendulum is most likely going to be a part.

Ted

[Electrotek]

Skateboard?

Naigator: I wonder if you've considered putting your device on a skateboard? You said that with gravity speeding up the right side and slowing the left side it tends to vibrate to the right. A skateboard would make the effect more pronounced, and if it could roll up the slightest incline that would be pretty conclusive.

edit: Also, I've modified my unit and it no longer matches the basic operation shown in the animation. However, I still have an interest in following your experiments.

[navigator]

Electrotek: I haven't done much with it in the last week. I did pickup a electric screwdriver at garage sale for $1 with a 6v 120 rpm motor. The next step is to couple it to a pulley.

I do have a question I have been meaning to ask, How do I, or can I, measure watts with a basic ohmeter/voltage meter?

[Electrotek]

Electrotek: I haven't done much with it in the last week. I did pickup a electric screwdriver at garage sale for $1 with a 6v 120 rpm motor. The next step is to couple it to a pulley.

I do have a question I have been meaning to ask, How do I, or can I, measure watts with a basic ohmeter/voltage meter?

Here's a very good site which provides a simple answear:

How to measure current and power using a current sense resistor

[navigator]

I haven't considered putting it on a skateboard, but have thought about mounting it, to some plywood with four caster wheels, horizontally instead of vertically.

I have set the end with the small loop on the edge of a table so the rest of the frame is cantelevered off the table and hung the other end from a spring with pretty good results in range of motion.

There is another aspect of this system we haven't really discussed. If you look at the original animation the distance between the blue/input and red/output center axis and the distance they are mounted the the sling arm must be eqaul. But increasing the distance will increase the speed differential between the two ie more acceleration and decceleration ie more torque. But as with the orbit of the mass, there is a point that is too far and it seems to be before the center point of the sling arm, but almost there.

That is why I feel like there is a lever action in the beginning of the small loop. The output arm is used by the mass as the fulcrum and pushes the input up. Also somewhere in this area the momentum of the output flywheel is slowing down and catches up to the already decreased speed of the output arm and input is needed.

[Electrotek]

>There is another aspect of this system we haven't really discussed. If you look at the original animation the distance between the blue/input and red/output center axis and the distance they are mounted on the sling arm must be eqaul. But increasing the distance will increase the speed differential between the two ie more acceleration and decceleration ie more torque. But as with the orbit of the mass, there is a point that is too far and it seems to be before the center point of the sling arm, but almost there.

Thanks. I have found that changing either of these distances converts the device into something else. Then, even the red arm and blue arm don't have to be the same length.

That is why I feel like there is a lever action in the beginning of the small loop. The output arm is used by the mass as the fulcrum and pushes the input up. Also somewhere in this area the momentum of the output flywheel is slowing down and catches up to the already decreased speed of the output arm and input is needed.

I have thought some about using a free wheeling flywheel, coupled to the device with a spring. Your one way bearing accomplishes the same thing, and is much simpler.

I have set the end with the small loop on the edge of a table so the rest of the frame is cantelevered off the table and hung the other end from a spring with pretty good results in range of motion.

This is a very good test. As you probably noticed, the movement is strictly up and down, with no horizontal centrifugal force. This is because the centrifugal force is acting against the point where the spring is anchored, rather than the central shaft. So the reaction forces are all perpendicular to the desired direction of horizontal thrust. This is true as long as the central shaft is moving against the spring. If a frame stop is placed above the device, so that it can't travel its full distance in that direction, centrifugal force will momentarily transfer back to the shaft, while it is stationary, pulling it in the 3 O'clock direction. Once downwards force starts stretching the spring, and the central shaft starts moving downwards, horizontal CF disappears again. And there never is any CF in the 9 O'clock direction.

Another interesting observation is that the device will start moving upwards once the weight has passed the very bottom position, and starts moving upwards, rather than after it's moved up past the horizontal. This is because downwards CF against the spring increases until the weight is at it's farthest position, with maximum force against the spring. Once it passes this point the spring starts relaxing, pulling the device upwards as soon as the weight itself begins moving upwards. And the CF is always based on the weight's position. Regardless of the shape or configuration of the spoke, the force is directed along a line which passes through both the center and the weight. With the center being either the spring's anchor point, or the stationary shaft.

I haven't considered putting it on a skateboard, but have thought about mounting it, to some plywood with four caster wheels, horizontally instead of vertically.

You can also generate thrust with this configuration. The device will have to slide back and forth sideways on the plywood, between two springs. (With the vertical setup, gravity provided the downwards pull.) If you want, the back (the left hand side in the animation) can pivot, or the whole mechansim can reciprocate between the springs. When the central shaft is moving, the weight's trajectory is elongated. The Law of Conservation of Angular Momentum requires the velocity to decrease, so the springs have a dampening effect on the rotation, slowing it down. This is something you can use to your advantage. As the springs are active, decrease the power to the motor, then increase it again as soon as the frame stop is engaged and the CF appears in the desired direction.

You can make a speed control for a small DC motor by wiring a light dimmer into a cheap extension cord, then plugging a battery charger into the cord, with the charger running the motor. A small screwdriver like you have will buzz pretty good at 9V and may even work at 12V. Or set the dimmer so the motor turns slower than normal while the machine is reciprocating, then turn the speed up to normal at the point where you can get unidirectional thrust - while the frame stop is engaged. One of the wires on the cord is perfectly smooth and this is the hot wire. edit: The wires on the dimmer aren't polarized and can go to either wire on the cord.

[CloudSeeder]

This thread & comments has been very educational. In Post #1 you asked had you missed something. The weight on the end of the sling arm (I think you began calling it later) when it is being pushed away from the hub it's no problem but as it comes back toward the hub it's fighting against the centrifugal force

which is transmitting a push force back
into the blue rod like a brake.

I would:

#1 lengthen the blue rod ever so slightly
#2 reduce the swinging weight and
#3 have the weight in a center-arm slide similar to Robert Kostoff used, so that as it
begins coming back up past 7+ PM it won't be acting as a brake back through the blue rod connection.

With those changes you will likely need a lighter flywheel but the gain in rpm's should increase & more than compensate. Gravity or Centrifugal Wheels need to be dynamic, multi-position devices that use positives optimally and defeat negatives at every turn; instead we try to design miniature assembly lines. I think with some tweaking your device is a real winner circle contender. You were right about the fulcrum distance being critical but the position of the red arm looked spot on. Let the weight slide back toward the red arm instead and you should be able to get the best of both worlds.

A final idea: With the above changes the weight won't be getting quite the effect coming down past 1 AM (which is a bit preliminary anyway) so you may need to bend the weight arm inward from out past the red arm "fulcrum" connection into a curve... that should result in an impact about 3-5 AM.

Good work! Good supporting posts! Liked the drill motor ideas!

[navigator]

The weight on the end of my sling arm weighs maybe 5 grams. When it is spinning though, that 5 grams develops alot of force. You don't want to accidentally stick your finger in there, I learned this the hard way. I agree about proving a concept, as I only have the basic tools myself. The Erector set simplifies things in many mays, there are drawbacks, but those are only limited to my imagination.

I am coming to the conclusion that the compound pendulum must a part of another similar system, either in the orbit of another set of rotating mechanics or the other set of rotating mechanics attached to the end of the pendulum/sling arm.

My goal is for the system to run itself, using rechargeable batteries, and a 6v bulb.

[navigator]

Thanks. I have found that changing either of these distances converts the device into something else. Then, even the red arm and blue arm don't have to be the same length.

Is the change in the lenth of the arms proportionate to the change in the distance of the two axis?

I have thought some about using a free wheeling flywheel, coupled to the device with a spring. Your one way bearing accomplishes the same thing, and is much simpler.

Hey thanks.

This is a very good test. As you probably noticed, the movement is strictly up and down, with no horizontal centrifugal force. This is because the centrifugal force is acting against the point where the spring is anchored, rather than the central shaft. So the reaction forces are all perpendicular to the desired direction of horizontal thrust. This is true as long as the central shaft is moving against the spring. If a frame stop is placed above the device, so that it can't travel its full distance in that direction, centrifugal force will momentarily transfer back to the shaft, while it is stationary, pulling it in the 3 O'clock direction. Once downwards force starts stretching the spring, and the central shaft starts moving downwards, horizontal CF disappears again. And there never is any CF in the 9 O'clock direction.

Another interesting observation is that the device will start moving upwards once the weight has passed the very bottom position, and starts moving upwards, rather than after it's moved up past the horizontal. This is because downwards CF against the spring increases until the weight is at it's farthest position, with maximum force against the spring. Once it passes this point the spring starts relaxing, pulling the device upwards as soon as the weight itself begins moving upwards. And the CF is always based on the weight's position. Regardless of the shape or configuration of the spoke, the force is directed along a line which passes through both the center and the weight. With the center being either the spring's anchor point, or the stationary shaft.

My thought was instead of the spring, loop the rope over a pulley and connect it to the opposite side. Then put the fulcrum in the middle of the frame so it can "seesaw". The pulley at the top would need to have the same diameter as the distance between the connecting points of the rope on the frame. The pulley would be connected to the shaft by another one-way bearing. On the other end of the shaft would be a smaller pulley that connected directly to the generator or the output shaft, not sure which would be better???

You can also generate thrust with this configuration. The device will have to slide back and forth sideways on the plywood, between two springs. (With the vertical setup, gravity provided the downwards pull.) If you want, the back (the left hand side in the animation) can pivot, or the whole mechansim can reciprocate between the springs. When the central shaft is moving, the weight's trajectory is elongated. The Law of Conservation of Angular Momentum requires the velocity to decrease, so the springs have a dampening effect on the rotation, slowing it down. This is something you can use to your advantage. As the springs are active, decrease the power to the motor, then increase it again as soon as the frame stop is engaged and the CF appears in the desired direction.

Very interesting idea, hadn't thought about that only how to transfer those forces into torque.

You can make a speed control for a small DC motor by wiring a light dimmer into a cheap extension cord, then plugging a battery charger into the cord, with the charger running the motor. A small screwdriver like you have will buzz pretty good at 9V and may even work at 12V. Or set the dimmer so the motor turns slower than normal while the machine is reciprocating, then turn the speed up to normal at the point where you can get unidirectional thrust - while the frame stop is engaged. One of the wires on the cord is perfectly smooth and this is the hot wire. edit: The wires on the dimmer aren't polarized and can go to either wire on the cord.

What is the dimmer switch controlling, the voltage, watts, combination???

[navigator]

This thread & comments has been very educational. In Post #1 you asked had you missed something. The weight on the end of the sling arm (I think you began calling it later) when it is being pushed away from the hub it's no problem but as it comes back toward the hub it's fighting against the centrifugal force

which is transmitting a push force back
into the blue rod like a brake.

I would:

#1 lengthen the blue rod ever so slightly
#2 reduce the swinging weight and
#3 have the weight in a center-arm slide similar to Robert Kostoff used, so that as it
begins coming back up past 7+ PM it won't be acting as a brake back through the blue rod connection.

With those changes you will likely need a lighter flywheel but the gain in rpm's should increase & more than compensate. Gravity or Centrifugal Wheels need to be dynamic, multi-position devices that use positives optimally and defeat negatives at every turn; instead we try to design miniature assembly lines. I think with some tweaking your device is a real winner circle contender. You were right about the fulcrum distance being critical but the position of the red arm looked spot on. Let the weight slide back toward the red arm instead and you should be able to get the best of both worlds.

A final idea: With the above changes the weight won't be getting quite the effect coming down past 1 AM (which is a bit preliminary anyway) so you may need to bend the weight arm inward from out past the red arm "fulcrum" connection into a curve... that should result in an impact about 3-5 AM.

Good work! Good supporting posts! Liked the drill motor ideas!

Thanks CloudSeeder!

I think I understand, but I have some questions. Won't the centrifugal force in the mass keep it at the sling arms outer point of the slide between 7:00 and 9:00?

If not, at the 9:00-10:00 position it looks like the weight in the slide would drop back to the outer most position giving the same effect at the 1:00 position??