PopularFX
Home Help Search Login Register
Welcome,Guest. Please login or register.
OverUnity Research > Gravity-Powered Devices > Bessler's Wheel > Overbalanced wheel
2024-05-05, 18:19:32
News: Check out the Benches; a place for people to moderate their own thread and document their builds and data.
If you would like your own Bench, please PM an Admin.
Most Benches are visible only to members.

Pages: [1]
Author Topic: Overbalanced wheel  (Read 13484 times)
Topic Options img
img  Valeriy
Overbalanced wheel « on: 2012-06-17, 04:19:15 »
Jr. Member
**

Posts: 87
The book wheel is a device designed to allow one person to read a variety of heavy books in one location with ease. The books are rotated vertically much like a Ferris wheel (as opposed to a flat, rotating table surface). This device was invented by Italian military engineer Agostino Ramelli in 1588. To ensure that the books remained at a constant angle, Ramelli incorporated an epicyclical gearing arrangement, a complex device that had only previously been used in astronomical clocks.
Now, adjust all shelves horizontally and move them all to the same direction to change center of Gravity as shown:  

The question is: will this machine works continuously  as an overbalanced wheel?

More historical models at www.veproject1.org including Perpetual motion machines
« Last Edit: 2012-06-25, 20:39:55 by Valeriy »
   
img  GibbsHelmholtz
Re: Overbalanced wheel « Reply #1 on: 2012-06-18, 13:53:18 »
Group: Guest
A vision
   
img  Valeriy
Re: Overbalanced wheel « Reply #2 on: 2012-07-03, 03:56:46 »
Jr. Member
**

Posts: 87
Quote from: Valeriy on 2012-06-17, 04:19:15
The book wheel is a device designed to allow one person to read a variety of heavy books in one location with ease. The books are rotated vertically much like a Ferris wheel (as opposed to a flat, rotating table surface). This device was invented by Italian military engineer Agostino Ramelli in 1588. To ensure that the books remained at a constant angle, Ramelli incorporated an epicyclical gearing arrangement, a complex device that had only previously been used in astronomical clocks.
Now, adjust all shelves horizontally and move them all to the same direction to change center of Gravity as shown:  

The question is: will this machine works continuously  as an overbalanced wheel?

More historical models at www.veproject1.org including Perpetual motion machines

An Overbalanced Wheel Video is now available at:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jokB5D4hVyg&feature=plcp
   
img  exnihiloest
Re: Overbalanced wheel « Reply #3 on: 2012-07-03, 07:54:37 »
Group: Guest

Overbalanced wheels work very well, you just have to hide the motor  ;D.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=287qd4uI7-E
See at 3:33, 4:17 and 5:00
   
img  GibbsHelmholtz
Re: Overbalanced wheel « Reply #4 on: 2012-07-03, 13:53:45 »
Group: Guest
That is some serious skill and knowledge of gravity wheel.

I've been meditating on the concept of elastic collision.  It seems that there is something unusual.  We all know if we send a small ball hitting a much bigger mass at rest, the little ball will bounce back almost the original speed while the big ball move very little.  Momentum and energy is conserved.  However, the momentum of the big ball is reaching the limit of twice the momentum of the little ball.  You can verify it yourself here.

http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/colsta.html#c1

If we were to recover the energy of the little ball, we almost have all the energy back.  The big ball is massive but moving slow give it extremely low energy, but momentum is amble.  From here, we need a process to convert those momentum into useful energy.  We cannot do a head on collision with the small ball because it will go back to the original state.  What we can do is hit the small moving ball on the side and not so much directly.  If the small ball is moving with V, the big ball has twice the momentum, the final velocity after transferring all momentum in the tangent direction would be the vector sum of V+2V. 

   
img  exnihiloest
Re: Overbalanced wheel « Reply #5 on: 2012-07-04, 17:11:33 »
Group: Guest
Quote from: GibbsHelmholtz on 2012-07-03, 13:53:45
That is some serious skill and knowledge of gravity wheel.

It can been described by a langrangian, therefore there is no extra-energy.

Quote
I've been meditating on the concept of elastic collision.  It seems that there is something unusual.  We all know if we send a small ball hitting a much bigger mass at rest, the little ball will bounce back almost the original speed while the big ball move very little.  Momentum and energy is conserved.  However, the momentum of the big ball is reaching the limit of twice the momentum of the little ball.  You can verify it yourself here.

http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/colsta.html#c1
...

There is a very big difference between "≈" and "=".
When a big m1 hits m2<<m1, then v'1≈v1, the momentum of the big ball is almost the same but not the same, and the little ball takes the difference with a speed v'2≈2*v1. There is not the slightest anomaly here. We have always m1*v1+m2*v2=m1*v'1+m2*v'2.   All is conserved, momentum as well as energy.

   
img  GibbsHelmholtz
Re: Overbalanced wheel « Reply #6 on: 2012-07-04, 23:34:31 »
Group: Guest
Quote from: exnihiloest on 2012-07-04, 17:11:33

There is a very big difference between "≈" and "=".
When a big m1 hits m2<<m1, then v'1≈v1, the momentum of the big ball is almost the same but not the same, and the little ball takes the difference with a speed v'2≈2*v1. There is not the slightest anomaly here. We have always m1*v1+m2*v2=m1*v'1+m2*v'2.   All is conserved, momentum as well as energy.



You're not doing it all the way.  You are right that the big ball will transfer very little speed to the small moving ball, but we could change direction and hit again until all momentum is transferred.  Momentum of the big ball will completely transfer to the small moving ball regardless what speed the small ball is traveling.  Once again, this is not a linear transfer of momentum although you can treat it as linear by superimpose the small ball always at rest. 

   
img  Valeriy
Re: Overbalanced wheel « Reply #7 on: 2012-07-05, 02:14:01 »
Jr. Member
**

Posts: 87
Motors?
« Last Edit: 2012-07-05, 12:42:13 by Valeriy »
   
img  exnihiloest
Re: Overbalanced wheel « Reply #8 on: 2012-07-05, 09:22:14 »
Group: Guest
Quote from: GibbsHelmholtz on 2012-07-04, 23:34:31
...
You are right that the big ball will transfer very little speed to the small moving ball, but we could change direction and hit again until all momentum is transferred.  Momentum of the big ball will completely transfer to the small moving ball regardless what speed the small ball is traveling.  
Once again, this is not a linear transfer of momentum although you can treat it as linear by superimpose the small ball always at rest.  

Momentum and energy are referential dependent. You must choose one to describe momentum and energy, and keep the same before and after the collision.
The simplest referential frame is the own referential of one of the balls before they hit each other, because in this referential, one ball speed is null, meaning that its momentum and kinetic energy are null. So for instance, we can always consider the small ball at rest before it is hit, question of choice of the referential frame.
If you introduce a third referential frame in which the small ball move at 90°, as in your previous picture, it is of no help. We don't need it, it's a useless complication. From the viewpoint of the small ball, the big ball will hit it in the same way as if it had no speed. The small ball can be seen with any speed, just a question of viewpoint of an observer moving in respect to it: this will not change the slightest thing in the collision. Only the speed vector of one ball relative to the other at the instant of the hit is relevant.
Your mistake comes from mixing different referential frames when you analyse the problem before and after the balls collide. Neither the momentum nor the energy are conserved from one referential frame to another.
   
img  GibbsHelmholtz
Re: Overbalanced wheel « Reply #9 on: 2012-07-05, 14:13:23 »
Group: Guest
Quote from: exnihiloest on 2012-07-05, 09:22:14
Momentum and energy are referential dependent. You must choose one to describe momentum and energy, and keep the same before and after the collision.
The simplest referential frame is the own referential of one of the balls before they hit each other, because in this referential, one ball speed is null, meaning that its momentum and kinetic energy are null. So for instance, we can always consider the small ball at rest before it is hit, question of choice of the referential frame.
If you introduce a third referential frame in which the small ball move at 90°, as in your previous picture, it is of no help. We don't need it, it's a useless complication. From the viewpoint of the small ball, the big ball will hit it in the same way as if it had no speed. The small ball can be seen with any speed, just a question of viewpoint of an observer moving in respect to it: this will not change the slightest thing in the collision. Only the speed vector of one ball relative to the other at the instant of the hit is relevant.
Your mistake comes from mixing different referential frames when you analyse the problem before and after the balls collide. Neither the momentum nor the energy are conserved from one referential frame to another.



It is better to go straight to an example.  Using the website i provided.
 
Let's say we have a small ball 1kg moving at +1m/s hitting a big ball 100kg at rest. 
The small ball will bounce back at -.980m/s and the big ball will move at .0198m/s. 
The momentum of the big ball is 1.9 and the momentum of the little ball is .98. 
Now we just use the big ball to hit the side of the little ball moving at .980m/s . 
It is the same as the big ball hitting a small ball at rest by ignoring the moving part (we hit it at 90 degrees). 
The small ball is now moving at .98m/s with a side speed of .039 m/s .  The big ball is now .0194m/s
The new speed of the small ball is now  sqr(.98^2 + .039^2) = .9805 m/s . There is a slight increase in speed.
The big ball still have speed to collide again at 90 degrees (yes we change frame again).  The small ball again gain a little speed.
After the big ball exhaust all of its speed.  The small ball speed is sqr(.98^2 + 1.96^2) = 2.19 m/s

I do constantly change frame of collision.  Does that means it takes energy to do it? Yes and no.
   
img  exnihiloest
Re: Overbalanced wheel « Reply #10 on: 2012-07-06, 08:58:26 »
Group: Guest
I dont' understand the configuration and what you mean by "to collide at 90 degrees". Do you mean that the two balls rolled at 90 degrees, or that the hit from one would make move the other at 90 degrees?

Quote
I do constantly change frame of collision.  Does that means it takes energy to do it?

Of course. Imagine that you are in a spacecraft flying in space at 10,000 Km/h from the earth. Its kinetic energy is 1/2*M*(10^7)². But for you in the spacecraft, its kinetic energy is zero because you are at the same speed as it. You can't extract energy from the kinetic energy of the spacecraft. Its energy exists only in the earth referential frame and in all referential frames where the spacecraft speed is not null.
Now if you meet the terrestrial referential, then the spacecraft speed is again 10,000 Km/h relative to you, and you can extract its energy. But for moving from the spacecraft to a referential frame in which its speed is 10,000 Km/h, you have to decelerate from 10,000 Km to zero, so you spend an energy equal to the change of your own kinetic energy.
So it is false to compare a kinetic energy in a referential frame with another one in another referential, without taking into account the hidden change of kinetic energy involved by the change of referential. And the same thing applies to the momentum.
   
img  GibbsHelmholtz
Re: Overbalanced wheel « Reply #11 on: 2012-07-06, 13:49:05 »
Group: Guest
Quote from: exnihiloest on 2012-07-06, 08:58:26
I dont' understand the configuration and what you mean by "to collide at 90 degrees". Do you mean that the two balls rolled at 90 degrees, or that the hit from one would make move the other at 90 degrees?

Of course. Imagine that you are in a spacecraft flying in space at 10,000 Km/h from the earth. Its kinetic energy is 1/2*M*(10^7)². But for you in the spacecraft, its kinetic energy is zero because you are at the same speed as it. You can't extract energy from the kinetic energy of the spacecraft. Its energy exists only in the earth referential frame and in all referential frames where the spacecraft speed is not null.
Now if you meet the terrestrial referential, then the spacecraft speed is again 10,000 Km/h relative to you, and you can extract its energy. But for moving from the spacecraft to a referential frame in which its speed is 10,000 Km/h, you have to decelerate from 10,000 Km to zero, so you spend an energy equal to the change of your own kinetic energy.
So it is false to compare a kinetic energy in a referential frame with another one in another referential, without taking into account the hidden change of kinetic energy involved by the change of referential. And the same thing applies to the momentum.



Yes, it is very important to establish reference.  I would agree that changing frame require energy in your case.  That would also means changing direction require momentum.  This is where I try to get at.  When the small ball hit the big ball, it changes direction and generate/take momentum.  I would say all changes in direction require/generate momentum.   This also applies to centrifugal force.
   
Pages: [1]
« previous next »


 

Home Help Search Login Register
Theme © PopularFX | Based on PFX Ideas! | Scripts from iScript4u 2024-05-05, 18:19:32