|
91
« Last post by webby2 on July 16, 2023, 07:22:00 am »
Another simple observation.
Work performed does not care if it is "taken" out of the system and used or if it is "taken" out as losses, it is all the same.
92
« Last post by webby2 on July 16, 2023, 02:55:35 am »
I am going to share an extremely simplified observation.
If I evaluate a simple lever system and supply the input side with a force of 1N at a distance of 2m from the pivot and then I also supply a force of 1N at a distance of 1m from the pivot in the same direction as the first force I am sure that everyone will quickly see that the lever reacts with a value of 3Nm of torque.
93
« Last post by webby2 on June 27, 2023, 03:08:00 am »
that last one was actually for a 2:1, I was looking at the smear.
94
« Last post by webby2 on June 26, 2023, 06:44:49 pm »
This is an alternate visualization for the exact same condition.
95
« Last post by webby2 on June 25, 2023, 06:51:02 pm »
here is one at 30
96
« Last post by webby2 on June 23, 2023, 06:45:50 pm »
here it is
97
« Last post by webby2 on June 19, 2023, 12:37:50 pm »
This is a visualization of the path a point on a flywheel takes when the axis of rotation is rotated 90 degrees at a 1 to 1 ratio.
The one on the right is a single path, the one on the left is multiple simultaneous paths
This is the simplest visualization for the force vector rotation as all this is happening. You could then imagine that the if flywheel is rotating many times faster than the axis is being rotated that would "smear" the path taken in space fairly quickly so as not to be overly discernible.
If the angle of change is not at 90 then the path is shortened and the rotating force vectors are also changed.
What is interesting, and what I am trying to play with, is that for an angle that is not 90 you can have 2 different paths with the same total change covering the same range of change, so opposition may take a different path than causality with a different vector rotation value.
I seem to be having issues with uploading attachments right now.
98
« Last post by webby2 on June 14, 2023, 12:56:50 pm »
still working through these funny almost virtual relationships,,
99
« Last post by webby2 on June 14, 2023, 12:56:07 pm »
I played with ways of turning coils on and off a while ago and had one method that I remember was interesting.
I tried to turn it into a motor and a generator but I kept frying my contacts so I shelved the idea for a while.
Any way it goes it started niggling at me again as to whether or not it was working like I thought so I grabbed some coils and wire and a couple of meters and a magnet to test for an electromagnetic field.
So I did a quick test with the coils hooked up like I wanted and fired them up and then used my "switching method" to turn off a coil or 2 depending on how it is configured, I get this done without opening the circuit or shorting a coil. I could use this setup to move the electromagnetic field around without the need to actually physically move the coils.
100
« Last post by webby2 on June 10, 2023, 03:00:07 am »
I think I have a crude conceptual understanding of what is happening.
The system I have is basically converting a reciprocating motion into a rotary motion, however the two main parts each think they are rotating. This sets up a continuously rotating force vector between both parts and this rotation is the conversion of force and distance, so as the force goes up the distance goes down and vice-versa. Each system is seeing their own conversion and the resultant is the throughput, which is in my case a 1:1 but can be any ratio desired.
All of this sets up, or creates, a third virtual conversion reference frame that mixes the two others together. This is a work transfer function and it is this part that I am now interacting with.
One of the things that is interesting with what I am playing with is my input force needs to be in the same direction whether the point of observation is moving up or down, using up and down as the direction of reference then my force is always down or always up even though the motion externally is changing between up and down. Doing it this way the assist is itself rotating, so I get a 90 degree rotation where it is adding to the throughput and then I get a 90 degree rotation where it goes from some assist to zero assist and then back to some assist and this happens as the relative up or down is changing direction. This means in simple terms that I would not want to have the assist in play during that part of rotation, I could but it would just be easier to turn it off through that portion and if I were using gravity it would almost turn itself off naturally.
The other thing that is interesting is that with all of the constraints built in I would not notice much except for a shift in the phase of the two main interactions, they could go a little out of sync with each other until the physical constraint is reached of the designed system. The assist is actually the force required to keep the systems in sync and held against one side of the physical constraint.
|
Recent Posts