|
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
1
« on: May 30, 2023, 04:12:12 am »
actually there are 4 spots where I can choose.
2
« on: May 30, 2023, 03:46:32 am »
Another interesting thing that this system appears to be doing.
I have 2 gears that are geared together and they utilize a continuously rotating force vector for the exchange.
If I use them with the input to output the same the result is a 1:1 turn, torque and velocity BUT if I use them another way, same setup gears are locked together so all things appear the same except that the force, rotation and velocity are varying. One gear almost comes to a complete stop while the other gear is almost free to rotate, then that gear will accelerate the other gear then decelerate that gear and it will almost come to a complete stop,, rinse and repeat.
There are 2 points in the interaction where I can choose which way it is going to operate and the change I think I see is in the internal direction of force transfer, that is whether it is a push or a pull transfer while maintaining the same input to output direction.
3
« on: May 29, 2023, 03:39:55 am »
I think I have got something figured out that is very interesting.
I think I can give up the distance for increased force without an increased cost to me.
If I use a setup similar to my worm-drive system.
My worm-drive system allows me to use a larger worm gear than the driven gear as well as reduce the frictional contact losses and make it a bi-directional system, that is each gear can drive the other gear.
Some may argue that my usage this way is not at all the same as my worm-drive,, but I think of it as similar.
I will print a part to test this thought and if it works then I will have a limited rotation that will then be reversed, so an oscillation. If that works then it could be made to be fully rotational.
4
« on: May 26, 2023, 03:19:20 am »
A simple view I keep in mind is a 4 quadrant conversion thing.
The quadrants are for distance and force, so in the top left quadrant you have a +,+ in the top right you have +,- in the bottom right you have -,- and the bottom left you have -,+.
We work in the top right and bottom left, so an increase in distance comes with a decrease in force and a decrease in distance comes with an increase in force. These 2 quadrants work together to give us an equal and opposite interaction.
The work transfer function uses the other 2 quadrants, so on the one side you have an increase and an increase and the other a decrease and decrease. These 2 quadrants work together to give us an equal and opposite interaction and is an internal function, or a closed system that we do not to play with.
My one part allows me to at least "see" this internal function.
5
« on: May 26, 2023, 02:53:45 am »
I think I have identified one of the things Mr. Hand is bringing to the party.
Take a pulley and tie a string to it, wrap that string around the pulley a few times CCW, pull on the string. The first thing you should imagine is that the pulley will rotate CCW, well of the pulley does not rotate then the only way the string will unwind is if the relative tangential point rotates CW,, this is what I think Mr. Hand is doing that is adding an influence to the test-bed.
The pull point creates a relative point in space away from the pulley as a tangent and the center of the pulley and that creates an angle that could be used to determine the amount of rotation force seen, or you could use the leverage ratio to find the same thing.
6
« on: May 21, 2023, 04:37:24 am »
What I am finding is that these setups are trending into a 1:1 so with the one funny setup I am expecting that there is going to be some change in height that I am not able to measure yet and that that will account for the perceived work out.
Using all the same parts I can get different force relationships, right now I can use the same 185g to create a counter force needed of 600g,, just by changing a path
7
« on: May 20, 2023, 05:55:14 am »
I did a quicky,, and I am able to stop the drop by design.
The interesting part is where this force is favorable and where it is not.
I have a partial range of motion where without the mass dropping the system moves with force one way, I go past that point further and the system moves back the other way with force to the balanced area,, apparently.
The drop condition is still the same but now it drops further.
8
« on: May 20, 2023, 05:29:15 am »
I have been using what I have and testing.
Right now I have the approx. 185g mass dropping approx. 65mm. When I raise the mass and set the system so that that is the start point and then release the mass the system will rotate CW, the system then, with how it is setup, will create an approx force equal to 300g moving approx. 38mm.
This is close enough to say that this is a 1:1, the work I put in to raise the mass is equal to the work I can recover by letting it drop the same distance.
When I break the internal path and externalize the WTF the system responds by rotating CCW with some force value, not measured yet, and the mass drops some value, not measured yet.
If the system were designed so that there would be no prop in the mass then takes care of that reset part.
So then what it looks like I can do is put in the work to lift the mass by itself with the system in the end position, then externalize the WTF and have the system move with force into the start position, internalize the WTF and release the mass and let it drop 65mm moving the system with force into the end position and recover that work into something so that I can then lift the mass.
Just for more confusion, I need to lift the mass and then move it into the horizontal position where the system would be when I am going to release the mass and let it drop, a horizontal movement has no work needed for the mass.
I will be making more little changes and testing trying to get the externalized distance so that the mass does not drop.
9
« on: May 19, 2023, 03:45:02 am »
That does not make much sense.
I am walking down a dark hallway of the unknown and I am trying to place lampposts along my path and using the light to try and see what the next step should be,, or could be.
Mr. Hand with the present test-bed setup is supplying a few things, 2 forces and 1 distance.
I can replace the forces with a mechanical system for each one that would not cost me anything leaving Mr. Hand only supplying a change in distance,, and a catch and release mechanism.
Think of it sort of like this,, a pulley with a string over it and equal masses on each end of the string, Mr. Hand is holding up the pulley, this can easily be replaced. When the system is active there is another force 90 degrees to Mr. Hand that does not move that Mr. Hand is resisting, this to can be easily replaced.
Now Mr. Hand needs to move one of the masses up and down and since there is an equal mass on the other side of the string Mr. Hand is only supplying the change in distance.
My end goal is to hopefully make an NRL, Non Rotating Lever.
I have a system that can supply an infinite distance of change, I am building a system that should be able to supply an infinite force. These 2 components are the WTF that is customarily trapped as an internal exchange of potentials but with the systems I am trying to put together this internal exchange is being allowed outside so if I place a potential of 1N and a change distance potential of 1m then the system should respond and externalize that exchange as work performed from the supplied potentials.
10
« on: May 18, 2023, 06:51:26 pm »
I printed off another part so that the 2 distance values I am looking at for this setup are the same.
With that, one force moving the same distance of change as the other force,, those are 185g and 200g.
With consideration for friction and stuff I would say that they are very close if not close enough to call them a 1:1
I have another "out" method I can use and when I use that method my input force is 185g but my distance of change is still needing to have some parts created for,, I can see the distance Mr. Hand moves but I need to measure it correctly, that distance is less than the output distance of change and when I have those parts I can then measure the output force and distance of change.
11
« on: May 12, 2023, 07:04:46 am »
These are just some crude measurements of force and distance
I have an average force of 77.5g moving a straight line distance of 95mm on one side
The average is between the relax to move backwards being 60g and the increase to 95g to start the pull forward
I have a force of 185g moving a straight line distance of 28mm on the other side
12
« on: May 09, 2023, 04:53:38 am »
I printed off a few parts to start testing using the test-bed this way.
One thing I have noticed is that the system responds differently when using what I have labeled the pull side and the push side.
It looks like, not tested yet, like my input force and distance are not the same as the output force and distance.
I will need to print off a few more parts to make testing more straight forward.
13
« on: May 02, 2023, 04:36:35 am »
I think I am identifying the causality,, not so sure on how the system translates the forces and motions and stuff but the area I am looking into does seem to create a secondary feedback that can either add, subtract or stay neutral depending on the angles of interaction and directions of forces.
I have one possible condition that is interesting. This condition is where with one direction of change of force creates a condition where the system seems to want to find balance after it has lifted a weight, reverse the direction of change and for the same change for the system the weight would be dropped twice the distance,, so I am thinking that if I designed that stage of operation so that the lift condition is converted into a force of rotation as such that the change in potential rotates the system to maintain the relative height of the mass instead of lifting it that this might provide for a reset condition where I would need to disconnect the mass from the pull string, move the system back to the start position and then reconnect the mass to the pull string and allow the system to move, with force, back to the end position.
14
« on: April 30, 2023, 03:39:14 am »
In a nutshell,
I have observed that when Mr. Hand is supplying the input force that the systems I have built CAN have a different work in than out, the question is how.
When using Mr. Hand the force is only constrained to a tension in the string which is wrapped around a pulley as such that the tension creates a tangential force which is converted into a rotary motion.
I built a pull string guide system so that the forces on\from the strings were fully constrained and in that condition the input work equaled the output work, as is predicted by standard practices.
The guide system is attached to the base system, as such the system is then closed upon itself.
The task now is to find out which of those closed constraints I need to open and in what fashion so that the system reliably shows a change in the work performed between the input and output.
15
« on: April 29, 2023, 05:57:33 am »
I built a string guide plate so that Mr. Hand has little to do with things and I turned all forces into vertical forces.
I placed an approx 500g mass on the input string to get rid of that spring scale.
I used the spring scale on the output side and tested for different spots.
For just about all static conditions the scale read approx. 500g, the scale weighs 50g.
While moving the scale could read more but I would need to keep accelerating the scale,, f=ma after all.
The arm lengths are a little interesting, the output is fixed at 125mm the input changes from 85mm down to 65mm.
Both strings are on the same 55mm radius for the pulleys.
Both strings move the same distance as each other, in sync but reverse directions.
I think I have everything adjusted fairly close to where it should be by the design,, as it is now.
At this time and this setup then this system is doing what it should and only giving a 1:1 transfer of work.
I tried playing with the push side,, things need to be adjusted for that side before I can play much with it but the little range I did have did not seem to be that much different than the pull side, things just popped much faster past the end of range.
|
Show Posts
