F.M.Chalkalis gravity system a donation!

[Cloxxki]

With an electric generator on the shaft we can measure the output load versus input power at the impulse motors.
On the video, we can see that Mr. Chalkalis has already a wheel on the shaft.
Then, just feed the motors with the power generated.

I would prefer output to be measured by means of lifting weights, but that may be semantics.
The output should IMO be fed to the input by mechanical means. Possibly a flywheel as "capacitor". A chain or Gates belt, and spring relieved one-way clutch sprockets on both ends to take up any impact of the rim on the moving drive wheel.

[Ted Ewert]

Hi Sterling, welcome to the forum.
I didn't mean to imply by my comments that this device couldn't or wouldn't work, only that I didn't understand his form of measurement. Everything in this thread is mere speculation. It very well may do what he claims, I just don't know.
Milkovics two stage oscillator takes advantage of basically the same phenomenon, only he takes power from centrifugal force developed by the extra kinetic energy. Since I built a number of his devices I can attest to his claims.
I built this monstrosity a few years ago which is a Milkovic device with an unbalanced wheel instead of a pendulum, driven like a Bedini monopole. I attempted to harvest the energy on the other end and did manage to light a couple of LEDs. It was horribly inefficient due to my poor design and sloppy craftsmanship, but it did illustrate how an unbalanced wheel can create energy that a balanced wheel cannot.
(I apologize for the picture being a little confusing. The tools in the background make it difficult to see exactly what is what.)


Through this and other devices, I have come to realize that there is an energy source developed by a rotating mass that can be tapped into. Consequently, I think the Chalkalis device is certainly worthy of replication and further study.

Cheers,

Ted

[n84dafun]

Thanks Ash, add this one too...

Here is a simple set up to test the efficiency of the Chalkalis machine. The idea here is that the flywheel will both provide impulse power and act as a repository for all recollected energy.
As you can see, the pendulum first gets a pulse of energy from the drive wheel. It then further accelerates due to gravity until it hits the recovery wheel.
If more energy is transferred to the flywheel by the recovery wheel than was expended by the drive wheel, the flywheel will increase in average speed. This in turn will also speed up the rotation of the pendulum. If less energy is transferred, then everything will slow down and eventually stop.
Both the drive wheel and the recovery wheel are the same diameter with the same pulley ratio to the flywheel. This would need to be started by a motor on the flywheel shaft, or by hand cranking everything up to speed.
If this device accelerates the flywheel, over unity will have been achieved and a generator can be attached to the flywheel shaft for output power.

From the looks of Chalkalis drawings, the two spinning tires on top pulses the spinning mass twice during a single rotation, i.e. the 1st bar, then the 2nd bar 60 degrees later. It's not pulsing the full 60 degrees, since the gap between the tires is 40mm, and the outer perimeter tube is only 22mm. In other words, the width of the start and the end of the 60 degree arc is 70mm while the in-between tube is only 22mm, so only the ends of the 60 degree arc have contact with the wheel.

However, I do see your concept of pulsing the output at the bottom. It just looks like your drive wheels are in constant contact during the 60 degrees of the rotation, which is different in that Chalkalis diagram only contacts it probably 1 degree twice during one rotation.

So in a generator situation, apply the load when the mass is near the bottom of the swing, then open the circuit when it swings away from the bottom. Hope that makes sense. You will have a pulsing output, which would be good for charging a battery bank.

-Brian

[sterlingda]

Comment from Peter Lindemann

I asked Dr. Peter A. Lindemann what he thought of the Chalkalis gravity wheel. Peter has one of the most well-known websites on free energy, Free Energy | Dr. Peter Lindemann's Website, and has been a student of the work of Johann Bessler for years, so he keeps his eyes open for technologies that might possibly harness the power of gravity and centrifugal force.

As for Chalkalis' system, Peter said that the information and video's released so far do not demonstrate any energy production, other than the fact that the machine rotates. "If Chalkalis wishes to give his technology to society, it is up to him to show us what it is and what it can do. So far, he hasn't done this."

He told me that he has traveled to Serbia and visited with Veljko Milkovic and personally witnessed that his systems produce a "tremendous work gain" by creating a gravity assist. Unfortunately, Veljko's systems are quite difficult to "close the loop" mechanically and no one has successfully done it yet.

He also referred me to some work being done by the people at the Gravity Energy Corporation and their website at Gravity Assisted Power where they are also demonstrating energy gains in a system developed by Bruce Feltenberger.

"I'm a firm believer in the idea that gravity and centrifugal force can be harnessed to produce an energy gain" he said. "The question is, has Chalkalis accomplished this yet or not?" In the absence of a demonstration of the machine driving a useful load while the input energy is metered and shown, he would not want to encourage people to spend their time and money trying to replicate it yet.

He thought that Ted Ewert's comments were very good, saying "Ted is a great thinker and an excellent model builder. His analysis is very insightful." But he goes on to say "If Chalkalis has discovered something important, he hasn't shown us what it is yet." "If the machine works, I hope he tells us more."

[Matos de Matos]

So in a generator situation, apply the load when the mass is near the bottom of the swing, then open the circuit when it swings away from the bottom. Hope that makes sense. You will have a pulsing output, which would be good for charging a battery bank.

-Brian

I agree with you.
Mr.Chalkalis can add the generator to his prototype with simple parts.
The open and close of the generator circuit on the shaft can be controlled by an infrared red switch. The pulse of the generator and load can be applied and tested during the full rotation of the triangle mass to find the best spot to apply it. I agree that shall be applied at bottom where the velocity is higher.

Other thing that I see is that he should pulse the input power to the drive wheels, again with an infrared switch. This will reduce the power consumption and apply it only when the two ends of the triangle reach the wheels.

David

[Cloxxki]

If a substantial flywheel drive the drive wheels (two sets of them), at a velocity sufficiently higher than the passing triangle sections, the drive will be pulsed anyway. The pulse will take some speed out of the flywheel. When the triangle subsequently speeds up by gravity's pull, it should freewheel to not feed the flywheel just yet. The second pass drive wheels would of course need to be turning faster still, geared higher from the same flywheel.
If the gains are greater than the input, the output can be fed back to the drive flywheel, with increases velocity to spare for the triangle on it's next rotation.
I just don't see how that could be. I've never bought the pulsing hype. IMO it's a thing promoted by disinfo agents to keep the OU community off track. Pulses may be efficient, but if they were OU, they'd be running houses by now. Sorry for the off-topic remark.

I agree that the inventor, when he wishes to donate his invention, has the task to make himself more clear. Especially if he believes it to be OU. This belief puts great responsibility to teach upon his shoulders, to distinquish this invention from the overhyped under unity devices pushed all around the world for more than they are.

[W32]

Hello world,
I respect the expertise of Dr. Lindemann but there are some things I do not understand.
1) Mr. F.M.Chalkalis shows us an Arm ( r ) of 51cm and a weight ( f ) of 50Kg that run in high speed and can increase or decrease with a controller.
Personally I have checked the calculations and I believe that since
F • r = Nm and Nm • RPM / 9550 = Kw then the only way that Mr. Chalkalis innovation doesn’t work is if that formula doesn’t work.

2) I saw the Gravity Assisted Power video many times and I compared it to F.M Chalkalis, in both cases they use Gravity acceleration and centrifugal power in order to multiply the initial energy but Mr. Chalkalis device in my opinion is far more advanced.

3) I see that GAP device has Dr.Lindemann’s recognition and acknowledgment as Mr. Sterling mentions in his post. I just don’t get it why Dr.Lindemann accepts that GAP works and discourages people from an open source project? Mr. Chalkalis told us that he can not further develop his device but he donated his work so that other people with means and knowledge could make use of it for the common well. Also he stated that he is ready to help anyone that will ask for his assistance.

In my humble opinion we should look deeper in open source innovations than rest back and wait for the Experts Only to save the world.

[Matos de Matos]

[QUOTE=sterlingda;103317]
He told me that he has traveled to Serbia and visited with Veljko Milkovic and personally witnessed that his systems produce a "tremendous work gain" by creating a gravity assist. Unfortunately, Veljko's systems are quite difficult to "close the loop" mechanically and no one has successfully done it yet. /QUOTE]

I think that Mr. Milkovic can use the proposal that I have for the Pendulum hydro pump to close the loop.

He has a prototype that pumps water and instead of air pressure he can inject the pressured water to pulse the pendulum with a impeller passing the fulcrum to the other side.
An infrared switch can pick the right timing and place to impinge the force.
It will be messy and wet but we can see if the storage tank will build up or loose pressure, after manually being pressured.
David

[Cloxxki]

When the vertical motion of the second stage is dampened (energy taken out), the first stage slows down. No method of energy extraction will overcome that, unless it's OU in itself. This is because there is no gain in the output. There is good force, but no stroke length. There is no optimal force*stroke that surpasses unity.

I hope to be proven wrong, and will then dedicate my time and resources to optimizing the principle.

In Chalkalis' design, I have trouble seeing the mentioned cetrifugal forces which would make it "like" Milkovic's designs.
Chalkalis' main axle of the spinning pendulum is fixed, as is the triangle housing the active weights? All I see, is a weight spinning an axle, with interesing weight distribution, being pulsed at specific short phases around the cycle.

[rickoff]

When I first saw the video of this device, I immediately thought about the similarity of a device that I operated with the help of a friend some 52 years ago (my first year as a teenager) at an amusement park. It consisted of a cage approximately 7 feet high and 4 feet wide that was suspended just a few inches off the ground. We entered the cage door, which was then closed and latched to keep us safely inside. With arms outstretched from our sides, we gripped bars mounted to each side of the cage at about shoulder level. Next, we began shifting our weight, in unison, from one side of the cage to the other to make the cage swing in an ever increasing pendulum motion. The cage was suspended in such a way that it always maintained a true vertical position no matter how high an arc was attained. Eventually, after expending a great deal of energy, and feeling totally wiped out, we finally made it all the way to the very top, which was about 30 feet above the ground. From that point on, it only required a minimal amount of work on our part (basically thrusting our weight against the side of the cage in the direction of rotation) to go over the top, and jumping back to the other side with a lifting effort, to maintain rotation, and only slightly more work to substantially icrease our rotational speed. So Ted is right - the optimal place to give a power assist is right after reaching the top, although the sudden weight shift and power lift just after clearing the bottom also definitely played a major role. Nice if you could mimick the weight shifting attributes in the Chalkalis device, as it would substantially add to the developed rpm and rotational power output.

Perhaps some of you have also seen this device offered as a carnival or amusement park ride. In operation, it is very similar to the Chalkalis device, except that a bit of human power, and shifting balance, is substituted for the electric motor and drive wheels. Our best performance was counted at 132 revolutions in two minutes time (after reaching the top), so just a little over 1 revolution per second. That may not sound like much, but can you imagine the power developed at that speed by a machine that size and having a rotating weight of several hundred pounds? I saw the same device at a local carnival when I was 35 years of age, and gave it another try with an equally strong helper. Although we had a definite advantage of increased strength over what my other friend and I had at 13 years of age, and although we had an increased weight that it seems would have helped us with the weight shifting/balancing aspect, it proved to be much more difficult. By the time we had given it all we had to make it over the top and do a few rotations, I felt like I was going to have a heart attack, so had to quit. I was in good physical shape, and never a smoker, so I can only conclude that our additional body weight, being about 35% more than at the earlier trial, is what made the newer attempt next to impossible. Another factor could be the weight distribution, since I had grown about 3 inches taller than I was at 13 years of age, and that is probably why the positioning of the weights in the Chalkalis device is such a critical factor.

Now there are two things that can be said of both the earlier and later attempts:
1. It took much less expended energy to maintain a full rotation than to rock back and forth in a pendulum motion.
2. While it only took a relatively small amount of work to keep the rotation going, it also took only a very small amount of anti-rotational force, such as an out-of-time or unsynchronized weight shift, to slow it to the point of non-rotation.

It would appear that factor #1 is what makes the Chalkalis device work so well. On the other hand, it would seem that factor #2 would come into play as soon as you attempt to tap into the developed power potential with anything that creates friction, drag, or alters the optimum timing or balance (or imbalance) in any way.

It will be interesting to see what some scaled down replications of the device are capable of achieving when put to quantifiable tests. I echo what Ted has said about sticking to the design as shown, and scaling all dimensions and weights accordingly. It would probably also be beneficial for all those who do construct this to agree on building their units with the same dimensions, weights, and materials. That way, whatever works for one will work the same for all. I feel this is definitely worth exploring, and would get into a build myself if I wasn't already so heavily immersed in my own project. I will keep an eye on this thread, though, and wish all who experiment with the concept the best of luck.

Rick

[Peter Lindemann]

An ordinary Flywheel

Hello world,
I respect the expertise of Dr. Lindemann but there are some things I do not understand.
1) Mr. F.M.Chalkalis shows us an Arm ( r ) of 51cm and a weight ( f ) of 50Kg that run in high speed and can increase or decrease with a controller.
Personally I have checked the calculations and I believe that since
F • r = Nm and Nm • RPM / 9550 = Kw then the only way that Mr. Chalkalis innovation doesn’t work is if that formula doesn’t work.

2) I saw the Gravity Assisted Power video many times and I compared it to F.M Chalkalis, in both cases they use Gravity acceleration and centrifugal power in order to multiply the initial energy but Mr. Chalkalis device in my opinion is far more advanced.

3) I see that GAP device has Dr.Lindemann’s recognition and acknowledgment as Mr. Sterling mentions in his post. I just don’t get it why Dr.Lindemann accepts that GAP works and discourages people from an open source project? Mr. Chalkalis told us that he can not further develop his device but he donated his work so that other people with means and knowledge could make use of it for the common well. Also he stated that he is ready to help anyone that will ask for his assistance.

In my humble opinion we should look deeper in open source innovations than rest back and wait for the Experts Only to save the world.

Dear W32,

I am not asking anyone to consider me an expert. I share what I know like everyone else. You may disregard anything I say without hurting my feelings. My comments were given to Sterling for his pages on Chalkalis. I did not know he would repost them here.

Like you, I believe that an object accelerating in a gravity field is gaining momentum and kinetic energy. The math says so, and so does common sense and observation. What makes these gains available to do work later is what is in question with Mr. Chalkalis's machine. In the case of both the Milkovic pendulum/lever system and the Feltenberger pendulum/cam system is that the output energy is harvested at 90 degrees off the primary movement. I believe these methods work because the conserved force required to keep the pendulum swinging or rotating sees the "load" only as an INDIRECT LOSS, which is a fraction of what it would be if it were a DIRECT LOSS.

Mr. Chalkalis has not shown us how he proposes to harness the energy in his system, but it is my personal belief that if he tries to simply run a generator from the central shaft of his swinging pendulum, the machine will behave like an ordinary flywheel and produce no gains. All of the work that has gone before has shown that for the gains to show up in a system like this, there must be a change in reference between the input and the output.

Now, I am not trying to discourage anyone from attempting to "replicate" a machine that someone claims works. To me, this system looks only partially developed and Ted Ewert's analysis seems more advanced than the inventor's. Regardless of theory, the question is: has F.M. Chalkalis produced a machine that demonstrates an energy gain?

Perhaps he has and perhaps he hasn't, but I have seen no evidence that he has. In that sense, I don't see anything to "replicate"........YET!

On the other hand, I think his design represents a fascinating starting place for further research. I just think that people should know the difference, and that is all I am trying to share at the moment.

Peter

[Matthew Jones]

@Rickoff

Mentioning the ride you were speaking about. You basically were pumping it like a swing accept the seating position was sideways so you through yourself side to side based on the position of the swing. Am I right?
How did you pump the machine while it was in rotation?
Or was the pumping action channeled through some sort of gearing or somthing to accelerate at the center shaft?
Thanks for that description.

@ Mr Lindemann
Have you reviewed his math been able to make any sense of it?


Thanks
Matt

[SkyWatcher]

Hi folks, Hi rickoff, I went on that very same amusement ride in Wisconsin and it was somewhat difficult to get over the top then became easier and it was a square cage at each end of a large rotor bar. Also, today I was at a birthday party and my brother in law brought something called a 'Flick Sock', basically a weight (hacky sack) but a bit heavier with a long nylon piece attached and this demonstrated very well how gravity and centrifugal force can be used to advantage. By not even swinging my arms, just slightly rotating my wrists/fingers getting it up to speed, i was able to launch that thing very high and far. I can only imagine how much more energy it would take me to do that without using gravity and the other forces, not to mention how tired I would get in comparison. That video of the full rotating pendulum that pumps water sure says something to me, though i notice there converting it to linear motion, which seems more akin to the Milkovic setup where the extraction doesn't reflect back as much to the pendulum. Just a few thoughts.
peace love light
Tyson

[Matos de Matos]

“I believe these methods work because the conserved force required to keep the pendulum swinging or rotating sees the "load" only as an INDIRECT LOSS, which is a fraction of what it would be if it were a DIRECT LOSS….

….there must be a change in reference between the input and the output.

…On the other hand, I think his design represents a fascinating starting place for further research. I just think that people should know the difference, and that is all I am trying to share at the moment.”

Peter Lindemann

Peter:
Ted´s proposal of the flywheel drive setup, splendid idea, for example to power the Feltenberger pendulum/cam system, is a result of Mr. Chalkalis courage to publish his ideas.

In my thoughts and experiments I found it too, that to harness free energy we have to use different reference frames, as you mention.
That was the reason to put the pumps on the legs of the Pendulum hydro Pump and the shake magnetic charger (flashlights) in the triangular frame of the Double Pendulum Hammer. I call then relativists devices.
I believe that same principal can be applied in heat engines. Tap the energy in a different reference than where the heat transfer occurs.
I do not see a place in Mr. Chalkalis device where we can tape an “indirect loss” for a load.

Mr. Feltenberger shall incorporate a linear generator instead of water pump and a flywheel drive, hand,solar or wind powered.
It is need in Africa to charge 12 volts car battery´s that are used all over, to power TVs and lights.
One flourish business in Africa is houses with diesel generators that charge the neighbors 12 V batteries, for a fee.
I will be a potential distributor, believe me it will be a hit.
David

[rickoff]

@Rickoff

Mentioning the ride you were speaking about. You basically were pumping it like a swing except the seating position was sideways so you threw yourself side to side based on the position of the swing. Am I right?
How did you pump the machine while it was in rotation? Or was the pumping action channeled through some sort of gearing or something to accelerate at the center shaft?

Hi Matt,

There was no seat. This was all done while standing. On a swing you are basically extending your legs out in front of you, or behind you, to shift weight. In the cage, you can move your entire body from one side to the other to shift weight. At first, you are swinging the cage in a pendulous motion, and going for height with each arc. When you get almost to the very top, and the cage is pretty much at a standstill, you throw all your weight at the side of the cage that will become the downhill outside after going over the top. After a little practice, you develop a feel for how to move your body, and precisely when to move for the best gains. Besides moving from side to side to shift weight, it also works to advantage to adjust your height by bending your knees. While the bars that you hold onto are not connected to any mechanism that would "pump" the device for gain, you work with the bars in a way that feels like you are pulling the cage downward, and then lifting it upward as you rotate. This ride was known as the Swinging Gym, and it was eventually outlawed in most places because of serious injuries resulting from people not maintaining a firm handhold, losing their balance, and getting buffeted around inside the cage. The earlier one I went on was in an amusement park in New Jersey, and was larger in scale than the later one which I found at a carnival here in Maine. Here's a video showing one of the smaller ones in action, and you can see how the cage is supported and counterweighted. The counterweights weigh less than the cage and its occupants, but help to make going over the top possible. Most people who try this never make it over the top because, like the people in this video, they fail to understand how and when to shift their weight for best advantage. When you finally get it right, you understand the principles that will make a gravity wheel rotate, but mimicking the successful human movements for rotation using mechanical devices is tricky. Not impossible - just difficult. So far I haven't found a good video showing continuous rotation of the Swinging Gym, but I'll keep looking. Close scrutiny of a successful run would reveal the necessary method, timing, and forces involved in a way that is quite difficult to put into words that one can correctly visualize.

YouTube - Dennis Barber Swinging Gyms Hanbury Steam Rally Stoke Prior Fair 19th September 2009