|
Main Forum Page
|
The Gyroscope Forum |
19 April 2024 22:15
|
|
Welcome to the gyroscope forum. If you have a question about gyroscopes in general,
want to know how they work, or what they can be used for then you can leave your question here for others to answer.
You may also be able to help others by answering some of the questions on the site.
|
Question |
| Asked by: |
Blaze |
| Subject: |
Has anyone seen or know of a really big gyro system? |
| Question: |
The biggest gyro I have seen is the 50 pound wheel in the heretic video. This gyro still moves fairly slowly, precessing once in about 3 to 4 seconds as it is being raised by the professor. Has anyone ever seen or built anything bigger and/or heavier?
I am developing a theory and want to check if there is anything out there that might already be an answer to what I am theorizing.
Blaze |
| Date: |
24 May 2012
|
| report abuse
|
|
Answers (Ordered by Date)
|
| Answer: |
Glenn Hawkins - 24/05/2012 04:40:04
| | | The moon. : ) Hi Blaze.
|
| Report Abuse |
| Answer: |
Blaze - 24/05/2012 04:47:09
| | | I don't think anyone would appreciate me crashing the moon to a halt in it's orbit just to prove a theory on gyroscopes. :-(
Blaze
|
| Report Abuse |
| Answer: |
Glenn Hawkins - 24/05/2012 05:05:37
| | | I'm just teasing. I like people, Blaze. Take it easy. The Swedes use a huge wheel to recapture momentum in a bus from down hill to up hill. Also there are records of a single-rail train built in England and kept upright by a gyroscope. I doubt they'll help, but they are big. Also ship's stabilizer are worth a glance. There are others.
No. But no. So far as I know there is nothing you are looking for.
Glenn,
|
| Report Abuse |
| Answer: |
Blaze - 24/05/2012 06:12:21
| | | Thanks anyway Glenn, but you are correct Not what I am looking for. I may just have to build one out of a 16 or 17 inch rim and tire on a axle hub and shaft.
Blaze
|
| Report Abuse |
| Answer: |
Blaze - 26/05/2012 01:34:34
| | | So......
For those of you who are interested, I am building a large gyro out of a 16 inch car rim and tire. The outside diameter of the tire is 26 inches. It will have an adjustable arm length varying between 24 and 48 inches. I don't know the exact weight of the rim/tire assembly yet as I haven't weighed it yet but it should be around 40 pounds. This should theoretically (my theory) give me a stopping force of between 7 and 30 pounds depending on setup and stopping times. Stopping times will be between a half and a full second. If I "crash" this to a stop, say in 1/100 of a second, then the stopping force could be as high as 700 to 1500 pounds.
Blaze
|
| Report Abuse |
| Answer: |
Nitro - 26/05/2012 16:44:29
| | | Dear Blaze (Brace yourself, my letters can be a bit (a bit!?) waffly),
Although my “Oposite but not equal post” on the 20th May (should have been “opposite”, I know. Summerhill was great on teaching the important things like the difference between “Freedom, and licence” but, having come late to its teachings, I wasted my time and became slightly dyslexic – or “thick” as it was then known.) did not receive the squeals of delight for its wit and erudition that it (quite clearly ) deserved, I do urge you to try and wade through it as it has relevance to what you are trying to achieve. Rather sadly I only got a mistaken identity response from Glen but at least Harry K found humour in it as he thinks “Nitro’s Laws” make a good comic book. Nitro’s 1st. law, in case you didn’t know, is:- A gyro will precess every force applied to alter its axial angle – including those forces you haven’t thought of. Any other “Nitro’s laws”, and I can’t for the life of me recall any, can’t be very important compared to that first law.
I digress, and why not? It’s a nice weekend for digressing with a malt (a cool beer in the USofA, I have discovered, but a lovely soft whiskey in UK, Glen). You will, if you read the “Oposite” and the “Equal but not opposite” posts, see that (in my ever so humble opinion) a precessing gyro acts as if it has no mass and also (disregarding it’s spin up) is not sent into precession by energy but only by a force. Ram has locked horns over these but they can be easily observed with a simple gimbled gyro and a gyro pendulum and a properly counterbalanced air table test. When a gyro, precessing under gravity, has its axis meet an obstruction, the force of it striking the obstruction is precessed into the original gravity drop (or should that be; original attempted drop – as it doesn’t drop?!).
What this will mean in your trying to get a large impact from stopping your giant gyros precession (assuming it is not spinning too slowly and/or carrying so much weight as described in the “Oposite” post as the “third state”) is an impact less than or equal to the gyro’s weight (I’ll be interested to know which). Anything greater will be caused by the non spinning, non gyrodynamic mass of the support arm.
All credit to you for “making and doing” and if I am shown to be wrong (Fat chance! Hey! What do you mean “Fat head, Harry?”) I shall be delighted to find out as at least my knowledge base will be increased by a rare, real test.
Kind regards
NM
PS Be careful with the big beast when you run it up.
|
| Report Abuse |
| Answer: |
Blaze - 26/05/2012 18:39:48
| | | Thanks for your input Nitro. By the way, I thought your “Opposite but not equal post” was hilarious.
I do expect a stopping force that is less than the gyro wheel weight. From my calculations it is difficult to get more than the weight of the gyro in stopping force, however, if one uses additional down force one can easily achieve more stopping force than the weight of the gyro. It is kind of like supercharging the gyro system.
I have now weighed the wheel, rim and hub assembly and it comes out to almost exactly 50 pounds of spinning mass. There should be less than 15 pounds of non-spinning mass in the arm and attachment to the hub. Based on the measured weights of both live and dead mass, I calculate between 10 and 16 pounds of stopping force when stopped over a time of one second. Stopping in 1/2 second would be double those numbers. This should be enough to prove that there is mass and momentum in a precessing gyro.
I will be spinning the wheel up to somewhere between 19 and 54 miles per hour and those speeds should be well out of the 3rd state of motion you described. I will be building in at least one safety mechanism for this gyro because of the energies involved.
Well back to building,
Wish me luck
Blaze
|
| Report Abuse |
| Answer: |
Nitro - 26/05/2012 19:09:09
| | | Dear Blaze,
Preventing a large gyro precessing might be expected to release a large amount of energy if it exhibited mass?
Hallo again and sorry everyone.
I didn’t intend to monopolise the forum but I have just remembered a test I did to satisfy myself that a precessing gyro exhibits no mass. Picture, if you will, your bog standard Tedco gyro, spun up and placed at a non vertical axial angle on its little Eiffel tower. Disregard that the slightest display of mass effect would topple the little eiffel tower due to the centrifugal force the mass of the gyro, should it exist, would engender. Do regard, however, that such centrifugaled (another new verb!) mass would (in the case of a precessional coning angle of, say, 75 degrees) add to the effect of the force of gravity that is causing precession. This would cause different precessing forces and therefore different precessional speeds dependant on the gyro’s axial angle to the vertical and horizontal. The negative (downward) coning angle to horizontal was the “Killer Konfirmer” for me. Perhaps someone would like to check for themselves, with a real gyro first (then math if you must) to see if there is a change in processional speed. Be careful to ensure all the parameters (gyro spin speed especially ) remain the same.
Kind regards
and a happy rest of the weekend
NM
|
| Report Abuse |
| Answer: |
Glenn Hawkins - 27/05/2012 01:51:18
| | | Dear Nitro,
You wrote, "Rather sadly I only got a mistaken identity response from Glen."
Please excuse me Crocodile Dundee. I am very sorry. In truth, I absolutely loved the humor and wit in your post, even more than the interesting technical 'thick' stuff, but I liked it too. Keep it up!
Cheers, Glenn
|
| Report Abuse |
| Answer: |
Ram Firestone - 27/05/2012 02:02:42
| | | "Disregard that the slightest display of mass effect would topple the little eiffel tower due to the centrifugal force the mass of the gyro"
I don’t think this is true. Precession is typically slow. However if you make the base of the tower small enough or your precession fast enough your tower will topple or the gyroscope will push itself off the tower. You guys like to just blow off every single air table or other low friction tests that clearly shows a precessing gyroscope is indeed exhibiting mass. Even Laithwaite’s tests showed it although his claim was that it was less than expected hence his “mass transfer” theory.
|
| Report Abuse |
| Answer: |
Blaze - 27/05/2012 05:52:31
| | | Well, I got a good chunk of work done today. I worked till 10 PM. That was long enough for one day. I need to tweak my pivot stand a bit and build the connection from the pivot to the gyro arm and then it will be done. The dead mass is coming out heavier that I would like (about 25 pounds) because I opted for strength rather than taking a chance and building too light. This thing is just too big to take chances. I don't know when I will get a chance to work on it again, maybe tomorrow, maybe next Saturday.
Blaze
|
| Report Abuse |
| Answer: |
Harry K. - 27/05/2012 12:28:07
| | | Hello Nitro,
You started with unobjective comments addressed to me so you should not wonder about unobjective replies. Let's come back to objective statements.
You wrote: "Picture, if you will, your bog standard Tedco gyro, spun up and placed at a non vertical axial angle on its little Eiffel tower. Disregard that the slightest display of mass effect would topple the little eiffel tower due to the centrifugal force the mass of the gyro, should it exist, would engender. "
You make the mistake (sorry) to seperate the acting forces instead of considering the outcome of all involved actions or better reactions.
The only reason why the Eiffel tower does not topple is the fact that precession torque is bigger than the generated centrifugal force from precession velocity. I know you don´t like maths but it could be easily calculated. Give me all parameters of your gyro system and I will calculate for you if you want, however please use SI base units.
You are right that precession forces and thus precession velocity will be increased during downward dropping of the gyroscope but anyway centrifugal force will not overcome precession torque.
Here are rules, not my rules but physical accepted rules:
1. Precession torque is equal to the tilting torque caused by gravity, independent if the gyroscope is an overhung system or not.
2. Precession torque is equal to a "forced" (e.g. rotation around a hub) tilting torque, independent if the gyroscope is an overhung system or not.
3. A gyroscope tries always to precess around its centre of spinning mass because the centre of spinning mass is the origin of its action and reaction. (Hope you are happy with centre ;-) )
4. Additional dead weight mass of the overhung gyro system as well as any kind of friction which defines the degree of freedom are the reasons that the overhung gyro precesses around the pivot and not around its centre of mass. Again, nature always takes the path of lowest resistance!
5. Precession velocity will cause centrifugal force and angular momentum which is stored in the form of rotation energy in precession plane. This rotation energy causes the inital drop when the gyroscope begins to precess. If precession will stop, e.g. by removing the tilting torque, the gyroscope will rise due to the stored rotation energy in precession plane.
Blaze, you should consider that a big sized gyroscope will need much energy to accelerate from zero to precession speed, i.e. the gyroscope will drop accordant to the value of precession speed. Also I do not see any advantages by using a big gyroscope because the precession torque will always be equal to the applied tilting torque, indepentent of the size of the gyroscope (refer to my statements above).
Regards,
Harry
|
| Report Abuse |
| Answer: |
Nitro - 27/05/2012 14:24:12
| | | Dear Blaze,
Fantastic to read how you have progressed.
I have almost given up with Ram ever understanding the basics of the anomalies of precession. I have given him several different, simple ways to demonstrate for himself the lack of effective mass in a precessing gyro and even shown him how to correctly demonstrate this using his precious air table but he has shown a singular fixation with the (bad) air table tests so far shown on line and appears unable to read about (let alone try) ways that might prove he is wrong. Sorry Blaze that was not for you but has relevance to your project so please bare with me........
Here is Emma Wilsons air test again for you, Ram, as another attempt at getting you to try and understand:
http://www2.eng.cam.ac.uk/~hemh/gyroscopes/icegyro.html
You might even pluck up the courage to dare to look, without air table bias, at the first and third video on Professor Huge’s gyro page here:
http://www2.eng.cam.ac.uk/~hemh/gyroscopes/videoseven.html
Wonder at the fact that a static gyro locked horizontal hangs over nine measure lines (their strange measure, not mine) out over the edge of a table whereas a precessing gyro with all of its supposed momentum hangs over only – er –um - exactly the same amount. Well I never!
Harry you may wish to look at the apparently (to me at least) misplaced centre of rotation and then at the apparently (to me at least) missing rotating mass effect of the overhung gyro. You can use math if you like. ;-))) (that's double chins!)
It is clear in the air table test that the centaur (I’ll never get the hang of English) of mass rotation is way too far from the gyro to have been caused by its large mass and must surely therefor (unless you can see some other reason for its centre of rotation to be in entirely the wrong place – like, maybe, a depleted uranium base) be caused by the smaller non gyrodynamic component that has not been isolated and removed from the test - as it must be to obtain any serious results. To be a viable test, the effects of non gyrodynamic mass (shaft, cage etc.) should have been counterbalanced to isolate and remove it from the effects of the gyrodynamic mass. Then, and only then, math comes into its own. The overhung gyro also shows an effective (note I always use “effective”) lack of centrifugal force.
Blaze, your monster gyro test can serve you better, too, if you isolate the gyrodynamic component from the non gyrodynamic by adding to it what should have been part of the air table test that Emma Wilson put up as part of her (much flawed IMHO) thesis. In your test, the to be spinning mass of the gyro should be removed, then the non spinning mass should be counter balanced by extending the gyro axis on the other side of the vertical pivot point and adding weight to balance that of the gyro arm with the gyro removed. Then you need to replace the gyro and carry out two of your impact tests. Once with the gyro spun up and precession allowed to do its job. Then, for the second test, the gyro should remain unspun, the arm locked horizontal and the assembly rotated (by hand, motor etc.) around its vertical axis at the same speed as was caused by precession. This will allow you to calculate the true net impact effect of just the gyro’s precession. Your test will give much needed insight – and hopefully not destroy your “shed”. Be careful.
I hope this is of some help.
Good luck and
Kind regards
NM
|
| Report Abuse |
| Answer: |
Blaze - 27/05/2012 16:51:45
| | | Thanks for your responses guys.
Harry, the point is the large mass of the large gyro, not the amount of tilting torque or precession torque. Most table top gyros are too small to really see much if any momentum or stopping force. That won't be an issue with this gyro.
Nitro, thanks for the suggestions. I was actually planning to start off at 24 inches and counterbalance the gyro to reduce the precession speed, mostly as a way of testing the integrity of the apparatus but I will be testing using your suggestions as well. Thank you. However, I don't really see how counter balancing will eliminate the unwanted force from the dead mass. To my mind it actually increases the dead mass that has to be stopped. In either case I can calculate what the stopping force is and subtract that from the total effect.
cheers,
Blaze
|
| Report Abuse |
| Answer: |
Nitro - 27/05/2012 19:00:09
| | | Dear Blaze,
OMG (see I can speak text!). I am sorry. Must be suffering from brain up Rs disease caused by looking at too many bloody air tables. You are, of course, right. There is no need to counterbalance for your test. Just lock the arm and repeat with a still gyro.
Kind regards
NM
|
| Report Abuse |
| Answer: |
Blaze - 30/05/2012 05:16:26
| | | I worked on GG (giant gyro) until 10:00 PM tonight and I got some good news and some bad news.
Good News: I got it precessing.
Bad News: I JUST BARELY got it precessing and that was with the arm adjusted to one foot in length.
The hub I am using is from a front wheel drive car which uses sealed bearings and the hub has way to much friction. The wheel doesn't maintain its speed for very long.....at all. I also can only spin it up to about 403 rpm with what I currently have available. I may have to change my hub to one from the back axle of a front wheel drive car as those use tapered roller bearings and I can wash out the grease and use oil instead. That should substantially reduce the friction of the hub.
As an alternative, I also have a 20 pound motorcycle wheel and hub left over from another project and I may be able to use that as well but that would require another arm be built. So, in either case, more work before I can do any testing.
Blaze
|
| Report Abuse |
| Answer: |
Glenn Hawkins - 30/05/2012 16:39:39
| | | Nitro, air tables don't really exist. I am informed by an authoritative source, that they are UFOs. I was told the first swamp gas appeared when to buzzards bumped asses and the alleged air table fell out and setting on it, riding his way down was a man preparing an argument that what you see is not what you get. I have not meet anyone like that, have you?
Glenn
|
| Report Abuse |
| Answer: |
Glenn Hawkins - 30/05/2012 16:46:12
| | | You need extra hands and sweat more than advice. I wish I could help you and I am hesitant to suggest to another man what he should do, while I set picking my teeth, half a sleep, comfortable in my preach from my warm peanut gallery. But I mean well.
That is dangerous. The dangers to intelligent men is less foreseeable and always unexpected. I believe you should scratch your apparatus and start over. When you are finished with a new one, you might keep it a long time and test it in new ways you may conceive gradually. So an elaborate construction would not seem wasteful. Also ever older contributor here can tell you his constructions are never built as good as he the the tester needed.
Before I go further look at this again. I believe it is capable of giving you all the information you need. You can then use mathematics to construct an exacting, theoretical model of any great size and mass you wish. As you know, if your math is correct, the magnitudes it determines will be correct. I think you could not do better than this.
Watch #8 and #12
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9WbbfzMH2to
For a while, just suspend the concerns and discussions of live weight verses dead weight. Ignore that. Now I have something new to consider.
After touch down the gyroscope keeps rolling, but that doesn’t indicate the full measure of momentum released. As it rolls, still spinning, it resist each forward degree that alters its alinement of rotating particles. This happens when the tilt force ends and as you know the coasting ends. Bending this alined inertia after the wheel touches down and begins rolling in a curve uses energy and the energy acts likes breaks. You and I call the breaks deflections. The point is that although there is obvious momentum that keeps the wheel rolling, there is actually much more than is apparent. The 'Kick' or your 'Axle Breaking' could reveal that the full measure of momentum that is supposed to be, is there.
Since these cannot be done easily, we need only to collide the rim guard into a backdrop at near the exact point of touch down. You will have proof of your theory (mine too). Then you can apply the math and find your huge impact force.
Good luck however you go. We are all with you.
Glenn,
|
| Report Abuse |
| Answer: |
Nitro - 30/05/2012 23:06:18
| | | Dear Blaze
We have all been there (well the nutters in sheds like me who have actually made things, have). Prototyping is a right bar steward! Rarely will the first prototype be any good and therefor will rarely be the last prototype.
Invention has to start with a belief that something is possible (or why bother?). Then, based on previous experience (or teaching, though that's usually not as good) something has to be made to confirm (or otherwise) the belief (or why bother?). Trouble is that real originality means that there is nothing existing out there to compare with and base a test rig on. Should it be just a piddly small “Tedco” (bless their little cotton socks; there have been Tedco gyros since about 1927. I actually received one for my birthday when I was six. No! You cheeky sods, that was not in 1927!) gyro which may not be large enough to clearly display the effects that are sought? Or should it be a socking great monster truck wheel with a V8 drive, that still may not give the results that are sought and may destroy your garage if things go wrong?
Think on this:- It is going to be as hard as hell to convince anyone with a scientific background (No, that should really read just “anyone.”) that your machine works. That, however, is as of nothing compared to the difficulty you will have convincing a) the local constabulary that the reason your garage wall has collapsed and the doors are missing is due to an act of God (or Newton, or whoever is in charge these days) and b) your insurance company that they should pay to rebuild your garage wall and refit the doors (and fund your hospitalisation should that be needed) precisely because it is NOT an act of God (or Darwin, or whoever is in charge these days).
My feeling are, as I have expressed before, that, 1) you are to be congratulated for getting your finger out and actually making something to confirm your belief that a precessing gyro exhibits mass that can be used in some way (if I have understood aright). 2) you and Harry and Ram are wrong in some of your beliefs (is it true Harry, as I extrapolated from Momentus’s post, that a religious belief may be influencing your dedication to Newtonian math and its application to gyros? Surely not! Newton was a Mason and a dabbler in some very non Christian practices) And 3) Blaze, if you must scale up from a “Tedco” for your test, a bicycle wheel would be an easier thing to scale up to. It is comparatively light but, as its diameter is large and most of its mass in the rim, it has great gyrodynamic potential. It also has excellent bearings exhibiting extremely low friction and 4) last but by no means least; it won’t blow the walls out or the bleedin’ doors orf! (that last bit should be spoken with a Michael Cane, Cockney accent – not to be confused with the worst Cockney accent of all time – that of Dick van Dyke in Mary Poppins – “Ow! (Oh) Now (no), Mary poppins, ain’ (aren’t) yew (you) a wan (one) an’ (and) aw! (all).
Have any of you others noticed that the all the French are Cockneys? They similarly drop off their aitches (hello = ‘allo) at the beginning of words and the last consonant of a word is missing (not half = no tarf). This, (turning into Cockneys) is, I suppose, to be expected due to the French having bumped off all their clever people in the revolution and then burnt all their books. Now, if you are looking for a good night’s sleep in France you are directed to the Hotel de Ville (Otel de Vee)(no aitch, and other bits missing, you’ll notice). Nice building, usually in the middle of the town and you may even get to meet the Mayor. And, if you put some one out of their misery in France you administer the coup (coo) (the “P” remaining silent as in bath or swimming) de grace (grar). Add this fact to the Cockney’s predilection for jellied eels and the French ability to also see anything that moves as food (if it doesn’t move – push it around a bit! If it still doesn’t move push it around and put some sauce on it) et, voila! LE FRENCHNEY!
You can tell I’m off work with screaming gout and am bored *hitless, can’t you?
Kind regards
Love and laughter
NM
PS Yes, yes, Momentus, I know! I should get a dog so I can go back to talking to it, too.
|
| Report Abuse |
| Answer: |
Glenn Hawkins - 31/05/2012 00:09:06
| | | Dear Nitro,
Hello old sport. It is my duty and honor to gently correct your insinuation.
You wrote: “Newton was a Mason and a dabbler in some very non Christian practices.”
For whatever mean and absurd reason people attack masons, an organization consecrated to God and to God's saints, brought into being by a practice of brotherhood, love, kindness, patriotism and compassion. It is scientific in it methods. In our countries, yours and mine and the European countries our genetics sprang from, the religious beliefs are christian. A man must believe in the Great Creator, or he will not be accepted into the order. The Masonic investigation committee consisting of three or more capable people in his community were not fooled. They have ways of learning things. If the committee and all masons gathered recommended Newton, then Newton was a believer. Newton believed in God, period. He was a christian.
You should take my word for it as I an an expert. I suppose only Sandy knew. I am a 32 degree master mason and a Shriner.
Cordially yours,
Glenn
|
| Report Abuse |
| Answer: |
Glenn Hawkins - 31/05/2012 00:12:58
| | | Watch #8 and #12
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9WbbfzMH2to
For a while, just suspend the concerns and discussions of live weight verses dead weight. Ignore that. Now I have something new to consider.
After touch down the gyroscope keeps rolling, but that doesn’t indicate the full measure of momentum released. As it rolls, still spinning, it resist each forward degree that alters its alinement of rotating particles. This happens when the tilt force ends and as you know the coasting ends. Bending this alined inertia after the wheel touches down and begins rolling in a curve uses energy and the energy acts likes breaks. You and I call the breaks deflections. The point is that although there is obvious momentum that keeps the wheel rolling, there is actually much more than is apparent. The 'Kick' or your 'Axle Breaking' could reveal that the full measure of momentum that is supposed to be, is there. Also colliding the supper precision gyro into a backdrop at the moment of toutch down would proof beyond doubt.
|
| Report Abuse |
| Answer: |
Blaze - 31/05/2012 02:56:22
| | | Well, partial success today. I used a 26 inch 10 speed bike wheel on a 24 inch arm and had it precessing at 360 degrees every 2 seconds. That works out to about 12 feet per second, some serious speed. It was a beautiful thing to see. I could only spin it up twice before what I had "jury rigged" to spin it up started coming apart. The bike wheel doesn't have the mass I want but until I can get everything worked out it is what I will use to try to prove/disprove what I want or until I can get everything working so I can use a more massive wheel.
The biggest problem I face right now is getting these large wheels up to speed. I need a faster power drill (mine only goes to 1050 rpm) and larger wheel to spin with the drill. I am going to do some shopping over the next several days and get/build the stuff I need to get the wheel up to the proper speed.
Blazing on,
Blaze
|
| Report Abuse |
| Answer: |
Blaze - 31/05/2012 02:58:09
| | | make that precessing at about 6 feet per second, not 12.
Blaze
|
| Report Abuse |
| Answer: |
Momentus - 31/05/2012 11:23:34
| | | Hi Blaze,
Some thoughts on your proposed experiment.
As I understand it you are looking to measure the momentum of an offset gyroscope mass. But (always a but) the method of running the mass into a brick wall measures acceleration. Cars have crumple zones to reduce the force of impact.
Your experiment will tell you that a mass was brought abruptly to a halt and the force required but unless you can measure the time with extreme accuracy will not tell you how much mass!!!
Force = mass x acceleration. Acceleration is a function of time.
Momentum is best measured by momentum transfer, as in Newton’s cradle. Let your spinning gyroscope impact with an inert mass, and compare the resulting Mass x velocity. Use an air table of course to give the inert mass freedom of movement LOL.
An alternative is to fit a bearing on the outside of the gyroscope shaft. Arrange a very shallow ramp for this bearing to run up as the apparatus rotates. The distance travelled will give a measure of the momentum in the gyroscope mass.
Both of these experiments can be done with a more manageable size of gyroscope, keeping you and your excellent approach to the study of the anomaly alive and well.
Yes I do know the outcome of both experiments and I am sure you will get the same results.
It is not important to you to convince others of your results. It is important to you that they are accurate to serve as an anvil to hammer your theories against.
May I also add my congratulations? Nitro has posted some excellent advice.
Dog was most loquacious this morning as she took me on my walk, I hope that I have done her thoughts justice in this post.
Momentus.
|
| Report Abuse |
| Answer: |
Blaze - 01/06/2012 00:48:51
| | | First of all guys, thanks for the support. I don't give up easily so the problems I am having are really just minor setbacks. I got a 2700 rpm drill now, so I can get the large wheels up to the speeds I need. Of course I still have to fabricate something to spin up these wheels but that will come. Patience, patience.
Nitro: "you and Harry and Ram are wrong in some of your beliefs",
Blaze: I can't speak for the others. For myself, maybe, maybe not, that is what I intend to prove/disprove. One can only theorize so much before one has to try to prove or disprove that theory. I feel my theories are correct based on science as I understand it. We shall see.
Momentus: you are correct that force is time dependent. I am using F=mv/t for my calculations. If I can get my 50 pound wheel up to the proper speed all I have to do is slow it to a stop over a set distance while measuring the force to stop it. That will be good enough to prove what I want to prove. It has to be accurate enough to prove beyond a doubt but that means that it doesn't have to be extremely accurate. If I have enough mass and velocity (as I plan to) that requires me to apply a good force by hand to stop it, I will already know what I want to know but I will attempt to measure anyway. By the way, what are the results of your experiments that you referred to?
Blaze
|
| Report Abuse |
| Answer: |
Blaze - 01/06/2012 04:33:42
| | | Success tonight. Well a little success anyway. I got my new 2700 rpm drill connected to a 10 inch wheel that I use to spin up the 27 inch (outside diameter) bicycle wheel. That gives me about 1000 rpm on the bicycle wheel which is like riding your bicycle at 77 mph. The total weight of the wheel and arm is 7 pounds. The arm is a 1.5 inch wooden dowel which weighs 1.5 pounds. I have a handle on the wheel that weighs 1/2 pound, so that makes 5 pounds of live weight and 2 pounds of dead weight. The handle is on the “outside” of the wheel and I use it to catch the wheel (I am standing outside of the circle the precessing wheel makes).
When spinning at 1000 rpm this giant gyro gives me a precession period of between 5 and 6 seconds. I have only caught it by hand so far so no real measurements just yet but when it gets down to 4 seconds or less and I stop it by leaving the handle “crash” into by hand, I can certainly feel it tug, not a huge tug like it is going to knock me off balance, but still a noticeable tug. I have done this about a dozen times tonight and there is definitely some force there when stopping it. Interesting, but again, no measurements just yet.
That is it for tonight.
Best to all,
Blaze
|
| Report Abuse |
| Answer: |
Glenn Hawkins - 01/06/2012 15:12:32
| | | Hi Blaze
Congratulations. I did the math. I did the physical tests. I found nothing you did not, or should not already know. At that very low precession speed caring only a little weight, you could no more than squeeze a marshmallow half flat. If you felt even a light tug, you succeeded. I work in high speed.
Add one hundred pounds to the handle and you will get a quick drop and a precession of a few inches and a heavy blow. All this was always evident. What the problem to work on is what you were working on, before you feel off the no mass, no momentum, no centrifuge wagon, which is 'the action of the inside pivot'
It will, I predict, react equally and oppositely to the tilt acceleration, and that the precession will never be faster than the first graduation into deflections. That is the problem to solve, not proving the laws of motion are correct. There is a chance that the inside pivot reaction can remain in the system of rotation where it was created, while the wheel is caused to react linearly.
Take care, Good Show!
Glenn,
|
| Report Abuse |
| Answer: |
Luis Gonzalez - 01/06/2012 21:26:40
| | | Hi Blaze,
We look forward to your results.
Regards,
Luis G
|
| Report Abuse |
| Answer: |
Glenn Hawkins - 02/06/2012 00:48:59
| | | Luis, why?
|
| Report Abuse |
| Answer: |
Blaze - 02/06/2012 04:03:39
| | | I did a few more tests tonight with GG precessing at about 2 to 3 seconds and stopped it as suddenly as possible with my hand. I got a pretty good bang out of it. The handle smacked my hand pretty good and the pivot assembly even clanged a little. The wheel mass is definitely there and it generates a pretty good force when stopped suddenly. This is with only a 5 pound wheel but because I am stopping it in a small fraction of a second and within an inch or two of travel, I calculate that I am feeling of stopping force of over 10 pounds and likely more. I am happy with the results even though I haven't used an exact measuring device, which I have been thinking would be somewhat difficult to set up, not impossible, but difficult. An exact measurement really may not be required with the results I am getting. I would only be needed to verify the magnitude, not the effect and I am not concerned with the magnitude at this time. The stopping force I felt proves what I wanted to prove but I may still try the 20 pound motorcycle wheel to test a wheel with larger mass and therefore a larger effect.
Blazing onward,
Blaze
|
| Report Abuse |
| Answer: |
Luis Gonzalez - 02/06/2012 22:27:21
| | | Hi Blaze,
I like Momentus’ idea to fit a bearing at the end of the shaft (or whatever component is tracing the arc of precession), and then let it roll up a ramp as the stopping agent.
The ramp slope and distance traveled will provide all the quantifiable information you need.
Best Regards,
Luis G
|
| Report Abuse |
| Answer: |
Blaze - 03/06/2012 00:58:16
| | | Well, guys, in my mind there is no need for measurement except to verify that the math accurately predicts what happens in reality and I am confident that it does.
I mounted a 24 inch, 20 pound motorcycle wheel on my giant gyro. I mounted a handle on the axle on the outside of the wheel so I could catch it (just like the bicycle wheel). I started with a 36 inch arm but that was just too scary to see it moving at that speed so I changed to a 24 inch arm. Then I got this thing precessing with a period of about 2.5 to 3 seconds and let it "crash" into my hand. Wow man, what a ride! Good thing I was bracing myself. That thing has quite a kick when stopping it suddenly. I would say I was experiencing well over 30 pounds of force and possibly over 40 pounds. Like I said, it was quite a kick. When I crash it into my hand I stop it in about an inch or two at the most. The math would say that this would generate a force of WELL OVER 40 pounds. I don't even want to try stopping the 50 pound car tire abruptly by hand. It may actually be for the best that it didn't work out the first time as I wouldn't have been prepared for the kick.
If you guys want to measure the forces on something like this to be comfortable yourself that the mass is still in the wheel, then go right ahead and build one. They really are quite easy to build, especially if you are using a bicycle wheel. For myself, I don't need to measure the forces, my sore hand and arm are indication enough that those forces are very significant.
So that makes one more major experiment done and only one more major experiment to go. We will see if the next experiment works as I predict as well. Unfortunately the next experiment won't be nearly as easy as this one was to build.
Best to all,
Blaze
|
| Report Abuse |
| Answer: |
Glenn Hawkins - 03/06/2012 01:57:43
| | | Beautiful Blaze! I am so proud of you!
|
| Report Abuse |
| Answer: |
Luis Gonzalez - 03/06/2012 14:33:51
| | | Blaze,
Congratulations on your experiment confirming that force and/or momentum exists in precession.
Also, the ramp will not work as I stated.
At best it will be extremely inaccurate and it may not even work to provide a measurement.
I am sure you and others will know why.
The transfer of momentum method, also mentioned by Momentus is more likely to provide best results.
Sorry for my error.
Best Regards,
Luis G
|
| Report Abuse |
| Answer: |
Blaze - 06/06/2012 00:47:25
| | | So I was thinking that maybe I could attempt to measure the actual force exerted when stopping the giant gyro by using a large diameter tension spring (about 1 to 2 inch diameter) vertically mounted to the floor with a thick dowel or light aluminum tubing mounted to the spring. That way I could measure the force required to deflect the spring/dowel at a given height. When the gyro handle crashes into the dowel it at that given height it would deflect the spring/dowel and that deflection would take a measured amount of force to accomplish. I could adjust the height where the gyro handle contacts the dowel which would vary the amount of force it takes to deflect the spring/dowel. For each of these various heights I would measure the force (with a spring scale) required for the deflection. This should be a reasonably repeatable test. The variants that have to be controlled would be the precession speed and height.
Blaze
|
| Report Abuse |
| Answer: |
Blaze - 12/06/2012 01:42:58
| | | So I spun up the old motorcycle wheel gyro a few more times and stopped it quickly by hand, just to make sure I wasn't imagining things. I wasn't imagining things, it takes a lot of force to stop it quickly or even not so quickly. When I get done with my "velocity" experiment I will come back to this one a break a few dowels to see get an idea of the forces involved.
best to all,
Blaze
|
| Report Abuse |
| Add an Answer >> |
|
