|
This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.
Messages - webby2
Pages: 1 ... 23 24 [25] 26
361
« on: April 26, 2018, 09:53:19 pm »
I think then with what I have shown so far it is reasonable to say that "I" as the operator have put in the energy to compress the spring and spin the system up to speed. This energy is now stored within the system. This energy is in a constant state of exchange, it is oscillating between momentum of the arms\masses and compression of the spring and is seen by the torque required from the wheel motor.
There is a potential that some may not consider. The red arm on the dual interconnected pic that connects the two arms together creates a closed system between those two arms, this then also means that the momentum of those arms can be conserved.
What if I were to take the relative momentum of one of those arms\masses and transfer it to the other one?
Would the other one then need to accelerate to store that momentum?
What other forces would change with that transfer change of momentum?
What is observing all of this?
How would that point of observation change?
I have provided the data for at least 3 different ways of interacting, one where I control the rate of change of the arms\masses relative to the wheel and each other, one where I control the wheel rate of rotation and one where I control both.
I have asked myself these questions and I have come up with my own answers and then used those answers to try and make the system act the way I want it to.
This concept can be used in other ways, I am sure of that, as well as I am sure there are better ways of doing it mechanically than what I came up with.
We understand all that is around us mainly by what we see, the mechanical universe if you will,, so if we can see that universe in a slightly different way we might be able to create new things and gain a higher level of understanding of what we see.
362
« on: April 26, 2018, 09:49:52 pm »
After the first run I increased the circle mass from 0.768kg to 2kg and the system ran at a loss and since the motor and wheel are at a fixed RPM something must be getting accelerated.
Since the only thing that can be accelerating is the arm\mass parts then if I let it run for a while they should come to an equilibrium of sorts and things should drop to a net zero.
-4.7J is close enough for now.
Now there is all this motion, all this force and it all is not really hard linked together, if it was then the acceleration would of been instant, that is the arms\masses would of been at speed with the wheel motor period, but there is a dynamic link between them.
What force is compressing the spring? What force is the spring creating when it expands? Simple questions.
Where and how is this force exchanged?
What if "I" could control that exchange?
What if "I" put something in the middle of that conservative exchange?
In my other data dumps I have shared, that is what I am doing. I have put a "control" system in the middle and am using the conservative exchange of potentials in such a way as to not stop the exchange.
I am conserving Momentum, or I at least I should say I am allowing Momentum to be conserved but through my control device, like a dam on a river.
363
« on: April 26, 2018, 09:44:45 pm »
I decided to share this even tho I figure there will be,, well stuff.
I guess that there will be:
Those that take it and present it elsewhere as there own idea
Those that will "protect" it using the law
Those that will claim it is either there idea or a knock off of there idea
Those that will simply say it does not work
Those that will use this to justify what they are doing
but most of all, the thing that bothers me the most is that there will be those that will stop with only this version of it, maybe going so far as to say you can't do it any other way or use any other force\motion or whatever.
so the numbers showed that the system, just as simply setup as I have shown, produces approx. 36J in those 3 full negative cycles.
364
« on: April 26, 2018, 09:44:09 pm »
I myself prefer to run with 2 sets on the same pivot and have those sets interconnected.
I colored the systems to make it easy to see.
Then for starters you can add a motor and a spring and start the motion correctly.
365
« on: April 26, 2018, 09:41:56 pm »
Now you could connect the two clacker parts together  This is how I have done it. There is more stuff but this is where I started getting some of the stuff I am getting, and this is not the first time I have played with this setup or shared it, I did not "use" it the way I am now. Those previous times were ITRW, as in testbed. This also is not setup to use gravity. Motion makes motion and force makes force. Give it motion.
366
« on: April 26, 2018, 09:40:47 pm »
I have in simulation a mechanical gain device. https://www.amazon.com/Plastic-Clackers-Klakkers-Makers-Favors/dp/B003415LOMhttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ClackersThis toy can be very inspirational,, as well as a Newtons cradle since they are basically the same thing. I started with a basic change to the toy. This does not include any of the other stuff and is only a change to start with. This simple mod can itself be "tweaked" and change the behavior of the system. I would also point out that going from this simple starting point I supplied numbers from the sim interacting with the whole system in at least 2 different ways. What I am trying to point out is that I might of found a method but it is in no way the only method and is most likely not even the best method. <TIC> Those that are skilled in the production of mechanical gain devices might be able to infer what all the missing parts are and how they interact
367
« on: August 06, 2017, 09:57:21 am »
Strange thought.
If I have a round tank of water and a plunger in the center and I run the plunger as such that I create a standing wave.
If the sides of the tank can move, make the diameter larger or smaller,, then as this standing wave pushes on the sides they move out lowering the water level so the plunger moves down to accommodate.
The frequency of the plunger would also need to change but the effect of a standing wave stays constant.
As the tank grows in diameter the waves would change and I think the standing wave would get shorter and then the pressure on the sides of the tank would get smaller but the surface area they are pushing on gets larger due to the increase in diameter.
In essence then the tank has stored the change in frequency,, if it is a resonant system and you are creating a standing wave the input energy stays the same but the frequency changes and the resonant growth is zero so the cost does not increase either,, meaning if there were no other losses the input cost would only be the increase in frequency and the resonant relationship would give back the energy costs to drive the system so the input then would be the same as if you just expanded the diameter,, so it is like you push the water down and expand 2 steps and the water gives back one step and then your next push is 2 steps,,
I know it is stupid,, but you have just made a resonant system that has a changing frequency,,, and as the frequency goes up the input cost per cycle goes down,, less push distance per stroke, less return distance,, blah blah blah,,
368
« on: July 10, 2017, 06:47:17 am »
This pic also shows the error in my assumptions,, that is I used the wrong conditions of counter torque for the output conditions of the generator. When I use the correct conditions, as the numbers in the pic show, then the generator is a net zero gain.
369
« on: July 10, 2017, 06:44:36 am »
I found that I was not using the information from my spreadsheet correctly for the generator torques,, when I do use the information correctly the generator shows to be a net zero condition.
The calculated output matches with what I see from the testbed but the required torque I was expecting was for the wrong setup.
370
« on: July 07, 2017, 12:59:27 pm »
This pic is of some "calculated" numbers and this is one of the reasons I thought of using this as a motor.
With the system setup as a net zero I should be able to take the low side out, add in energy and feed it over to the high side,, turning the high side into a drive coil.
Since the low side to high side are at a fixed relationship and are setup so that the low side energy equals the high side energy I can transform the low side into what is needed for the high side and then while doing that I add in extra energy,, that add would not care about the actual voltages involved but would create an imbalance between the 2 sides with the drive side being stronger.
371
« on: July 07, 2017, 08:39:48 am »
I was thinking about this because to me a capacitor is a variable resistor to the induction process of a coil, or the flow of charge.
When the cap has no charge and the coil is induced by a changing magnetic flux there is a maximum flow of current,, aka amps,, but as the cap charges up there is a growing resistance to current flow created by the growing voltage on the cap,, and then when the cap is at the full voltage potential of the induced charge in the coil no more current can flow.
So I was thinking that if a variable cap were used then you could maintain a higher voltage on the cap reducing the current flow rate,, aka reduce the amps and therefore the amp-turns of the coil and it is this amp-turns that builds the counter force.
While that is happening the capacitor plates being charged bodies of opposite polarities attract to each other and if allowed to move they will with force.
A variable cap as such is an electrostatic motor,, the higher the voltage on the same plates the more force of attraction you have.
372
« on: July 07, 2017, 08:31:38 am »
While playing with my testbeds I had a thought
Why not combine an electrostatic motor with a generator?
An electrostatic motor is a variable capacitor,, so if you made it very large and then combined that with a high voltage induction coil\PM generator,,
So the motor plates are connected to the coil so that when the PM is far away the plates have very little overlap, low capacitance, then as the PM moves towards the coil core the plates also move to a higher overlap, higher capacitance, then when the plates are at full overlap and the PM is over the core you dump the charge out of the plates.
The low capacitance will limit the flow of charge thus reduce the amp-turns from the coil, the plates will maintain a voltage between them and the coil will fill in the charge needed as they move to a higher overlap or higher capacitance, also the plates will attract,, and so as they charge up they will offset some of the counter force from induction presented by the coil to the PM.
373
« on: July 06, 2017, 07:08:15 am »
I have still been playing ,, and lately I have been trying to turn this into a motor,, one that maybe would have unlimited RPM,,, well within physical limits.
374
« on: June 21, 2017, 09:36:41 am »
I blew up the rotor last week,,
I sort of patched it back together and am still running tests with it.
So far the tests are looking alright, nothing really unexpected with what I am looking for from the testbed.
I am however, also looking into a different way of controlling the output and how I use the input and output.
375
« on: June 14, 2017, 10:33:05 pm »
I have 2 points of interaction that I need to happen as expected, I have reliably demonstrated one of those points but the second one is returning varying results.
This is after a tear-down and reassembly of the testbed,
Further testing is needed.
Pages: 1 ... 23 24 [25] 26
|
Show Posts