F.M.Chalkalis gravity system a donation!

[ashtweth]

YouTube - F.M.CHALKALIS ENERGY MULTIPLIER

F.M.CHALKALIS ENERGY MULTIPLIER A DONATION FOR A BETTER WORLD...We all know about the inexhaustible energy produced by gravity. Through the years a lot of people have tried and are still trying to make use of it, especially nowadays that the energy problems are so serious.As far as I know, a lot of inventions have been made regarding this resource but none has been exploitable.

After 28 years of hard work, many disappointments, personal expenses and the valuable help of my son in the last couple of years, I have recently ended up with the conclusion of something unbelievably simple. So simple that many people could build it on their own.

Just by making use of common known natural phenomena such as the earth's attraction (gravitational force), centrifugal power, the lever, the flywheel etc
It is about a mechanism that multiplies any kind of kinetic energy by 800% to 1100% and functions with speed regulation as a common motor.The referred data are based on an already existing prototype that has been constructed with simple materials.It could also be auto supplied (run on its own power) with the appropriate technical means which unfortunately I do not have. It is absolutely friendly to the environment, its functionality and performance are not affected by weather conditions and it has a low cost of construction.
For greater needs, more than one mechanism can be connected by freewheels and work independently transmitting their power to a single drive shaft.

Before the presentation of the video and the designs that are attached regarding its construction, I must conclude by saying that if people lived in harmony with nature and paid more attention to its laws and the way it works without "abusing" it, a lot of our problems would have been solved.
This innovation is donated to humanity and I'm hoping for your help to make it known and useful to all.

Yours Sincerely
F.M.Chalkalis.

[Joit]

I only wonder, why he do not use a balanced Wheel.
just because of the Gravity Effect?
This way you need to have really good Screws.
I remember some Magnetmotor setups, where some play also around with some Coils to come over the Sticky Point.

[SkyWatcher]

Hi folks, Hi Ash, great post and great thread. This is somewhat similar to the gravity motor plans shown by Creative Science & Research. Though this invention uses extra physics principles like leverage and the clever weight placement geometry and efficient and simple drive pulse method. Small models of this would be good, that way many more people would replicate. At this size, very few if any would replicate, though that would be good. Great find, thanks.
peace love light
Tyson

[HairBear]

Donation accepted! Thank you! And you too Ash.

[tsakou]

Lee Tseung's lead-out theory proof

The machine as I saw it in the video is a proof of Lee Tseung's Lead Out theory, because power is given to the "wheel" only for about 30 degrees (a rough estimation viewing the video) of one turn. So the pulsed power makes the extra energy to be Lead-Out.

Too bad, I couldn't find info how to contact Mr. Chalkalis, because I live in Greece, and it's easy for me to visit him at his site.

[ashtweth]

Hi ALL

He contacted Panacea am sending you all his thank you's ATM. Will forward your details

Ash

[Ted Ewert]

Very interesting device. I was just thinking the other day how much easier it is to accelerate a car going down hill, and how that increased velocity adds substantially to the car's total kinetic energy. It looks like Mr. Chalkalis may be taking advantage of this principal as part of his configuration.
It would be easy enough to substitute a coil and several magnets for the double wheel drive mechanism. That would make replication much simpler.
This is a lot like a Milkovic oscillator. They are obviously two different beasts, but I think the power is coming from the same place in both machines. Milkovic also says that it's best to accelerate the pendulum at the start of the downward stroke.
Congratulations to Mr Chalkalis for not only developing an elegantly simple device, but also for donating it to the world.

[Sputins]

Almost frightening!

Wow, thanks Ash for the fantastic post & link.

Mr Chalkalis, congratulations that you give it away for free to your fellow human beings.

It is Probably his life's obsession ...and he shares it for free..

Very impressive device!

The noise it makes is almost frightening! LOL. - You wouldn't want to get hit by the thing, it would make a mess!

I'll be showing this one on the big screen next Friday @ Astro SA!

[Ted Ewert]

Having built and experimented with these types of devices in the past, I feel that one crucial point needs to be clarified. Mr. Chalkalis has presented some calculations based on power estimated to be contained within the system:

Central weight F 45,69Kg = 448,2Ν ∙ r 0,51m = 228.58Nm ∙ 160 RPM ÷ 9550 = 3,829Κw
Additional weight F 4,5Kg = 44,145Ν ∙ r 1,12m = 49.44Nm ∙ 160 RPM ÷ 9550 = 0,828Κw
Tot. 4,657Κw

Correct me if I am wrong, but this appears to me to be potential energy, and not net energy generated. To accurately asses the COP, measurements would have to be taken of continuous output energy minus input energy while the machine remains at a constant RPM.
What is not mentioned is how much energy is consumed by the pendulum traveling from the bottom of the arc to the top. This is where the majority of the potential energy would be consumed. Potential energy is valid for a balanced wheel, but not for a pendulum which has to work against gravity.
The key point here is how much energy is generated by the combination of gravity and the pulse provided by the motor. Is this more than merely the sum of the two?
I'm not trying to throw cold water on this, but it would be nice if Mr. Chalkalis could provide us with some comprehensive performance data rather than hypothetical energy calculations.

Cheers,

Ted

[ewizard]

I'm trying to understand where the extra energy is coming from. You have gravity plus inertia on the way down (weights) and gravity plus inertia on the way up. You have a set power pulse coming from the motor that is easy enough to measure. I can't quite see this as being the same as lead out energy as proposed by Ltseung. I could certainly be wrong but it's just a feel for what I'm seeing. However it would seem to be easy enough to prove OU here. All that would be needed is a small generator running off the existing shaft of the device that either powers the motor once it's running (with battery removed) or charges the battery once it's started. If it keeps running (without the battery) then you have OU. If it charges the battery (with the battery still there) and it doesn't quit then it's OU. Seems simple enough to prove. A PM generator or even a treadmill motor might easily work to prove this.

[marseye]

Still too few people are worth it ! So : a giant "Thank You" !

What is unbelievable is that this concept is spontaneously offered for free, after certainly much considerable time and money invested ! Mankind can only be gratefull for such generous and altruistic behaviours. I just hope now that Mr CHALKALIS will have lots of followers of the manner. God bless you, and everyone of your kind, Dear Sir.

And : Thanks, Ash, for the tons of incredible informations that you (and your mates at PANACEA BOCAF) have already been relaying so far. You too are of our best friends ever to each of us all.

[Matthew Jones]

That pretty fantastic. I am sure that can be insanely modified to do more.

Thanks
Matt

[ashtweth]

Guys ill try and invite him here to iron out any bugs

[Matthew Jones]

That would be good. I am looking at the numbers and having a hard time with them. Don't get me wrong I am just wondering about the practical end of it for something like power production. Increased RPM's via gearing are going to lower the torque.
The biggest problem I see is the RPM's on the main shaft. And the power used to drive the apparatus.

If your drive wheels are consuming say 24v at 32 amp 788 watts. Thats 2 motors at 16 amp a piece.
You develop 150 rpm at 120 lbs on a 3" shaft you end up with about 1 horsepower which is close to your initial input.
But maybe you don't want to calculate it that way like flywheel. Maybe the radius of the outer band is what counts and you have to factor in the leverage produced. I am not much of a mechanical engineer.

I see his formula in the paper I am just not understanding what it is he is doing to calculate.

At minimum could you get us some breakdown on the math. Or if someone else understand his math could you post.

Thanks
Matt

[dragon]

The numbers seem a bit decieving, it appears to have lots of torque and energy. But.. If you push it over the top manually without any power addition to the pendulum it would travel 180 degrees with gravitational force, and upward again almost to it's original starting place minus any losses. If you draw energy from it you won't get close to it's original starting point. The energy gain on the down swing is used up in the up swing so the maximum energy you could draw from it would be the energy put in by the motors or a little less to offset losses. It seems to me it would be a wash on the pendulum and you could simply put an alternator on the motor and come out about the same....
________