Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

Custom Search

[ashtweth_nihilisti]

Hi Stefan, gravitar

Your right , i neglected to say that Chas's motor/gen/flywheel is still at an R and D stage , at this point, but should none the less be experimented with and improved.

His 'Bessler wheel' is ready to go now, and i see no reason why it cannot do what he said it can, just emailing my partner now to get the wheel edits done and uploaded.

[ashtweth_nihilisti]

Guys mean time check this out for instructions of gravity powered devices

http://www.panaceauniversity.org/D21.pdf

[wattsup]

@Ash

I went to see that pdf and honestly, besides the Milkovic device, all the others are dead enders. They will never work. Nice on paper but you can see the dead ends. I will not elaborate more.

As for the Chas Perpetual Motion Wheel (CPMW) I am looking forward to seeing this and to understand how he is dealing with the lifting and transfer of weight. Hurry, hurry I can't weight! lol

As for the Chas Flywheel Generator, please keep in mind that this is not an RV device and that should you put an RV set-up there, it will not work since the PM will have reduced torque and die. Also, you  may consider then to put a bigger motor under RV but then again, this will risk breaking the present set-up of wheels, pulleys, etc.

I think it is best to leave the device alone and do the study as it is. No changes, no modifications because you risk breaking the device. What we need is the facts as they really are now, to be as complete as possible to enable replication once we learn more of the OU rates.

So whatever you do, do not touch the device or modify it. Treat it like a delicate flower that you see in nature. You can leave it alone and admire it for what it is, or you can poke at it or pluck it out of the ground and wait till it withers away. We need to make sure you are not doing the latter in the name of RV. This is not an RV. I would not have said this but your relation to RV in your other posts is getting me worried and I would only wish for you to maintain your objectivity as an OU investigator and not an RV proposer.

[helmut]

Guys mean time check this out for instructions of gravity powered devices

http://www.panaceauniversity.org/D21.pdf

Hi Ash

Thank you very much vor this Link.By reading i have learned realy something.

helmut

[ltseung888]

@Ash

As for the Chas Perpetual Motion Wheel (CPMW) I am looking forward to seeing this  and to understand how he is dealing with the lifting and transfer of weight. Hurry, hurry I can't wait! lol

As for the Chas Flywheel Generator, please keep in mind that this is not an RV device and that should you put an RV set-up there, it will not work since the PM will have reduced torque and die. Also, you  may consider then to put a bigger motor under RV but then again, this will risk breaking the present set-up of wheels, pulleys, etc.

So whatever you do, do not touch the device or modify it.....

Dear wattsup and Ash,

I do agree with wattsup on leaving the present setup as it is.  As you would have guessed, I am using the Lee-Tseung Lead Out theory.  I explain the source of energy as "Pulsed Rotation Leading Out Gravitational Energy". We are hunting for the right pulse frequency.  Any shift from the ideal or resonance setup will produce negative results.  The simple setup in my apartment taught me that.  With tuning, the rotational time of my "mechanical pulse rotational device" changed from < 1 minute to > 30 minutes.

The better approach is to have a second setup  for the additional experiments.  Hope the suggestion is useful.

Keep up the excellent work,

Lawrence Tseung

[Humbugger]

"The RV was pulsed with a prony Break, and for 500 watts gave out 1HP" ~ Ashtweth

I am at a complete loss to understand this statement.  How does one "pulse" a deProny brake?  What does the statement mean?

Humbugger

[Prophmaji]

On a Besller wheel, it seems that the number of offset mass levers need to be even, not odd. I've had far better success with even than odd. As well, one needs to use a concentrated mass, like a billiard ball, or large ball bearings. This high mass means it can get over it's 'lurch point', and toss the two 'horizontal' masses to their respective positions and opposite sides of the fulcrum..and then turn the wheel due to their uneven mass distribution on either side of the fulcrum. 12 is better than 8. 14 is better than 12, 16 is better than 14, etc, etc. BUT THE LAYOUT IS THE SAME. Opposition (perfect mirroring of positions of the opposing tube) of the tubes must be exact.

In the supplied picture, I have tried water. Water will work, but it will be a dang slow wheel! And the offset masses need to be big..and long! Shorter tubes with ball bearings are the likely way to go. I tried it today, for $40. Basically some PVC tubing, the pressure test caps, and some electrical tape. And a bit of water. When I did 8 on my bike wheel, I had one heck of a time getting the distribution corect, as the wheel has a set of NINE primary spoke sets for acting as a placement guide. When I did 8, (but the distribution/layout was not perfect)...the dang thing kept trying to take off on me! I could not get it to be perfect in the layout, in such a short time. I need the bike wheel bearing set --but a better layout grid. Like 8 or 10, but not 9. The 9 left me with too much mass on the one side and no perfection in the mirroring of the horizontal load shift point (which is GRAVITY 'effect' FREE, only FRICTION!) (well,a small amount of an incline to get the ball or water to go to the other end of the tube). I chose water due to the low friction. It will work with a bigger wheel and longer tubes. But water froths a bit and not much mass for a small concentrated area. Ball bearings or big weights work best. It's all I could come up with in side of the whole two-three hours I've spent on Bessler wheels. (I'm dead serious, this is the first time I even look at the subject of a Bessler wheel) Ball bearings, as well, don't actually 'stop' in the wheel. They are always moving. They increase in speed (aceleration) and decelerate, but never actually stop, thus, they don't have to overcome a static postion in the aether. The old speed up and then quickly stopped, then re-started dynamo trick, where it takes 10% or so less power the second time to start the dynamo, as the quick stop/restart means the ZPE is still spinning. Thus less power required to get to 'speed' the second time. (look that one up, you'll find it interesting)

If you look at the supplied photo..and see the way that the mass will distribute to the center, near the fulcrum, on the left side..and distribute to the outer ring on the right side, you can see how the seeming work is done. Tubes are 18" long,and 1.5" inner diameter. Next comes the 8-10-12 tubes and the ball bearings. Look up the operation of the Bessler Wheel, the description from observers of his time. Lots of noise! Bang those weights around!

What does science miss?

Well..work is done in the lifting and dropping, yes. But what they don't seem to remember to teach you, is that gravity has a GRADIENT..it is POLARIZED, and it is ORIENTED. In other words, it is a polarized, oriented gradient. This means that, for the larger part, only friction serves up notice of it's existence in the "horizontal mass locational shift point". Then the leveraged weighting takes over, and turns the wheel. If the intertia (edit: I meant kinetic energy as it is in motion) is high enough, after this work is done..then the next set of weights that exactly physically oppose and mirror one another reach the horizontal plane..and then....slightly beyond that point..they both shift positions.....then move to their respective ends of their tubes...and then they do their leverage thing..and on to the next pair. Etc, etc, etc...= rotation. With the caveat of enough leverage and inertia. Thus the high mass wheels work the best. Ie, a heavy pair of opposing weights will have a high mass differential, with respect to the mass the wheel components have.

It's a dang simple trick.

Like Bessler said.

(Yes, that is a ER1200 water torch in the background, there. A fun toy if there ever was one.)

[Humbugger]

Are you telling us that your wheel spins indefinitely on its own?  How about a video?

[FreeEnergy]

On a Besller wheel, it seems that the number of offset mass levers need to be even, not odd. I've had far better success with even than odd. As well, one needs to use a concentrated mass, like a billiard ball, or large ball bearings. This high mass means it can get over it's 'lurch point', and toss the two 'horizontal' masses to their respective positions and opposite sides of the fulcrum..and then turn the wheel due to their uneven mass distribution on either side of the fulcrum. 12 is better than 8. 14 is better than 12, 16 is better than 14, etc, etc. BUT THE LAYOUT IS THE SAME. Opposition (perfect mirroring of positions of the opposing tube) of the tubes must be exact.

In the supplied picture, I have tried water. Water will work, but it will be a dang slow wheel! And the offset masses need to be big..and long! Shorter tubes with ball bearings are the likely way to go. I tried it today, for $40. Basically some PVC tubing, the pressure test caps, and some electrical tape. And a bit of water. When I did 8 on my bike wheel, I had one heck of a time getting the distribution corect, as the wheel has a set of NINE primary spoke sets for acting as a placement guide. When I did 8, (but the distribution/layout was not perfect)...the dang thing kept trying to take off on me! I could not get it to be perfect in the layout, in such a short time. I need the bike wheel bearing set --but a better layout grid. Like 8 or 10, but not 9. The 9 left me with too much mass on the one side and no perfection in the mirroring of the horizontal load shift point (which is GRAVITY 'effect' FREE, only FRICTION!) (well,a small amount of an incline to get the ball or water to go to the other end of the tube). I chose water due to the low friction. It will work with a bigger wheel and longer tubes. But water froths a bit and not much mass for a small concentrated area. Ball bearings or big weights work best. It's all I could come up with in side of the whole two-three hours I've spent on Bessler wheels. (I'm dead serious, this is the first time I even look at the subject of a Bessler wheel) Ball bearings, as well, don't actually 'stop' in the wheel. They are always moving. They increase in speed (aceleration) and decelerate, but never actually stop, thus, they don't have to overcome a static postion in the aether. The old speed up and then quickly stopped, then re-started dynamo trick, where it takes 10% or so less power the second time to start the dynamo, as the quick stop/restart means the ZPE is still spinning. Thus less power required to get to 'speed' the second time. (look that one up, you'll find it interesting)

If you look at the supplied photo..and see the way that the mass will distribute to the center, near the fulcrum, on the left side..and distribute to the outer ring on the right side, you can see how the seeming work is done. Tubes are 18" long,and 1.5" inner diameter. Next comes the 8-10-12 tubes and the ball bearings. Look up the operation of the Bessler Wheel, the description from observers of his time. Lots of noise! Bang those weights around!

What does science miss?

Well..work is done in the lifting and dropping, yes. But what they don't seem to remember to teach you, is that gravity has a GRADIENT..it is POLARIZED, and it is ORIENTED. In other words, it is a polarized, oriented gradient. This means that, for the larger part, only friction serves up notice of it's existence in the "horizontal mass locational shift point". Then the leveraged weighting takes over, and turns the wheel. If the intertia is high enough, after this work is done..then the next set of weights that exactly physically oppose and mirror one another reach the horizontal plane..and then....slightly beyond that point..they both shift positions.....then move to their respective ends of their tubes...and then they do their leverage thing..and on to the next pair. Etc, etc, etc...= rotation. With the caveat of enough leverage and inertia. Thus the high mass wheels work the best. Ie, a heavy pair of opposing weights will have a high mass differential, with respect to the mass the wheel components have

It's a dang simple trick.

Like Bessler said.

(Yes, that is a ER1200 water torch in the background, there. A fun toy if there ever was one.)

hi,
so does it work on its own? please show us blueprint.

thanks

oh and welcome to overunity.com


peace

[ashtweth_nihilisti]

Hi Lawrence, Watts and Hum.

>don't put the RV set-up there, it will not work since the PM will have reduced torque and die.

@Watts

Okay, the RV will deliver .8-1.13 HP at 50 hertz, and will idle [free wheel] on POINT ONE OF AN AMP [ACA] when loaded at 1HP will deliver 94+% efficiency most 1HP induction motors barley get to 88%

The RV was vs a normal 3/4 horse power motor in a drill, (Chas motor is a 3/4 HP motor)

The 3/4 HP motor drill .idles at 2.25 ACA
The RV Drill idles at 0.4 ACA

When loaded
The 3/4 HP motor drill went to 2.28+ ACA
The RV Drill under same load went to 0.7 ACA!

Proof is here-http://video.google.com.au/videoplay?docid=8060034688864982719
The RV's torque and idle current can be improved and efficiency preserved with the FREQ drive.

BTW the RV in that test spun at 2900 RPM the motor it versed spun at 1450!!!

Okay, we will measure BOTH SET UPS, keep Laurence's idea and get his data then get his measurements and get EVERY ones requests, guys i feel the RV should be tried, don't worry we will preserve the original and get you your measurements.

Chas motor is a crappy 1430 or so motor, that eats 200 watts just to free wheel, when loaded at 3/4 HP sucks in around 1000 watts.

The RV can idle on 50 watts, [unloaded] and deliver more power on demand for 3/4 HP.

@ Hum

The proney was pulsed, as in when the Break is 'clutched' or attached to the Shaft, the weight attached to the shaft[proney]  hits the scales and the electricity power is turned off, so its a pulse., not a consistent load. its easy to try i bet it will show you mechanical OU.

@ All

we are confirmed now to get data for this circuit one of our open sourced panacea engineers is working on. Yes Laurence pulse freq ! what do you think of this idea?

"So do the flywheels begin to slow down when a load is on it? If so, yep we could use an RPM sensor but a circuit that needs to also monitor what the RPM should be.
 
 Now there is another way.

What we can do is monitor the current from the prime mover, and if this exceeds our limit have it automatically shut off the Generator. Actually this would be the easiest and simplest thing we can do. And when the current of the PM goes back to normal it activates the Gen again.
 
 Hey, got a better idea.!!

If the generator its self has a large enough flywheel, what we should do is use something like an electric clutch used on car air conditioners. So mate, what this means is that when the current exceeds our limit on the PM, the clutch disengages so the PM can build up momentum but the Gen has large enough mass in the flywheel to keep some momentum. Once the PM is back to normal the clutch engages pulling the Gen back up to speed.
 
 I think this would be the best option because the clutch and switching sequence would find there own resonance where it pulsates at a frequency depending on what the load demands are.
I mean the car air conditioner clutch has its own pulley built on it and all you have to do is fix it to a shaft. Couldn't be simpler mate.!!!-End










The RV can only be evaluated FROM THE COMPILATIONS