|
Main Forum Page
|
The Gyroscope Forum |
23 April 2024 17:07
|
|
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: |
Glenn Hawkins |
| Subject: |
Centrifugal Force |
| Question: |
Except at the sub atomic level, the laws of mass and velocity in our part of the universe cannot be altered, not by a gyroscope or anything.
Centrifugal force, depends on the mass of the object, the speed of rotation, and the distance from the center. These conditions and the ratios related to them can not be altered, period.
There is a poorly understood condition, if understood at all, wherein combined motions create forces that oppose and overwhelm centrifuge. They do not eliminate, or lessen one iota of the force of centrifuge. . .
DEFLECTIONS BECOME STRONGER THAN CENTRIFUGE. That is all.
I cringe at the idea of trying to explain deflections. It is difficult to explain well and I do not think anybody is willing to give the tireless, redundant mental exercise required to visualize more than two motions occurring at once.
Happy Days, Oh happy days, When Jesus was, Oh yes he was, Oh happy days.
Glenn,
|
| Date: |
30 October 2012
|
| report abuse
|
|
Answers (Ordered by Date)
|
| Answer: |
Sandy Kidd - 30/10/2012 22:53:22
| | | Evening Glenn,
Recently there has been a fair bit of discussion going on related to some of the unusual behaviour displayed by gyroscopes but as usual not doing very much towards the acquisition of inertial thrust.
However Glenn you made some comments which are just not true and relate to stuff I thought we had put to bed some time ago.
You said:
“Centrifugal force, depends on the mass of the object, the speed of rotation, and the distance from the center. These conditions and the ratios related to them can not be altered, period.”
Glenn this would be true if the “object” with the mass you mention is not being rotated.
Because the bastions of credibility never ever made provision for this fact, (probably because they were just ignorant of the facts), we have forever all been led to believe the comments you have just made.
I have repeated time and time again the fact that the centrifugal force developed in any constant speed system is proportional to the rotation speed of the gyroscope, flywheel or object.
This fact is fundamental towards the production of inertial thrust.
At what I call saturation the centrifugal force cannot exist at all if forces in opposition are greater, and neither can angular momentum for the same reason.
In fact we have an opposite and inward acceleration, which is not allowed
However Ravi will subscribe to that one, as he has also produced that effect.
It does not hide trapped and waiting to pounce, at that point it no longer exists.
These are some of the cold hard facts relating to the spinning of spinning discs.
When the gyroscope, flywheel or object goes through the complete saturation action as previously described by Momentus where the rotation axis of the system is the same as that of the gyroscope, flywheel or object in the vertical plane where is the centrifugal force (and angular momentum) hiding?
Regards,
Sandy
|
| Report Abuse |
| Answer: |
Glenn Hawkins - 31/10/2012 05:04:04
| | | Hi Sandy,
I enjoy discussion with you and disagreements are so civil and fun. I finally get to go on vacation starting tomorrow. I think Luis and you have has a half dozen since I have. I 'm going to mead my honey in Florida who is a celebrity chef and world traveling wine connoisseur. I am sure to come back home fatter and drunker than when I left.
I want to correspond with you then. Wish me luck and good appetite,
Glenn,
|
| Report Abuse |
| Answer: |
Momentus - 06/11/2012 15:27:27
| | | Greetings Glen,
Hope you are enjoying your break from routine in Florida, Far away from the unpleasant weather in the north.
My Ideas around radial forces are very different from yours and maybe Sandy’s too. I posted before on this point as “Ants on a hex”
That which we engineers call centrifugal force results from the mass trying to move in a straight line and being moved in a circle by continuous centripetal force.
It is however possible to move mass without radial force, due to the orthogonal nature of the gyroscope anomaly (Dark Motion).
Imagine you are on a lawn mower where the rotary cutter has been replaced by a foot pad, when this pad is lowered the machine is lifted from the ground and rotated a few degrees to point in a different direction. Retract the pad and drive a short distance. Repeat over and over, you will travel in a circle using only tangential force.
Accelerating/decelerating gives a neutral force balance and an action that is orthogonal to the spin axis. Dark Motion.
Please note that this method of moving mass in a circle obeys “the laws of mass and velocity in our part of the universe.”
There is no radial force to be overcome.
Quote “willing to give the tireless, redundant mental exercise required to visualize more than two motions occurring at once.” your phrase sums up beautifully what is needed to understand Dark Motion. I shall plagiarise it mercilessly.
Fell free to discus and disagree…… civilly!!
Momentus
|
| Report Abuse |
| Answer: |
Glenn Hawkins - 06/11/2012 18:31:59
| | | Hello gentlemen,
WOW! I am sorry to be so long in getting back to the discussion. Hello Momentous. Hang on. I am coming to you.
Dear Sandy,
I have never changed my position on this, but I must point out my inability to do a good enough job relating my thought to this difficult little half/pint monster, the gyroscope. It is difficult to mechanicalize into clear understandings. Now then:
Sandy: “At what I call saturation the centrifugal force cannot exist at all if forces in opposition are greater, and neither can angular momentum for the same reason.”
Glenn: “There is the misunderstanding! How can anyone know that the three conditions aren't existing simultaneously? How can anyone prove that centrifuge and momentum are eliminated, rather than continuing to existing, while being overpowered by a stronger force that you named saturation? It is like this. In a tug of war ten Romans are pulling a rope along the ground easily, because there are no men attached to the other end pulling in opposition. Suddenly twenty Scotsmen jump from the bushes and begin yelling and pulling the lose end of the rope to them. The Romans are not suddenly, magically turned into air 'POOF' and eliminated. The Romans are dragged along against their will by a mightier force. I do not think anyone would try to offer a remedy whereby it could be proven that Romans, centrifuge and momentum can be made to vanish. But it is very logical to accept they are all overpowered. Where is the proof otherwise? How can it be proven otherwise? I submit there is no way. There is no reason either to make this one example an exception to all the known actions of nature in the world and beyond. Precession, horizontally and vertically work either way regardless on my purity understandings, or your steadfast understandings.
We were never very far apart on this, Sandy. You discovered Saturation. I eventually found the cause of it. How it works is very complicated and extremely difficult to visualize. Our difference is that you say the laws of nature vanish, while I say they remain there, but are overpowered by stronger forces. I would say you have an hypotheses and I have a theory, because I can enplane logically. I am looking forward to your intelligent and learned reply as you always have one. In the end we are far more in agreement than disagreement, because centrifuge in each case is not allowed to act.”
Lastly I will say to you, there is at least another other pretty smart person on here who would agree with you, not me.
With high respects,
Glenn,
|
| Report Abuse |
| Answer: |
Glenn Hawkins - 06/11/2012 18:42:30
| | | Hello Momentous,
Actually I arrived in Destin in the dark of evening, sleep two hours and returned at dawn to home exhausted, a thousand miles drive. My honey will follow me up here to keep me warm. If you are going to spend time in the blasted, accursed cold, it is much better, more beautiful and easier to tolerate in the mountains than at the sea shore. Sandy might agree. Thank you for your your good wishes!
The Ants on a hex presentation was always a work of genius for me. Thank you for using it. I like thinking about it and the radical forces going in every direction eventually, over distances traveled, like a point within a spear radiating outward in every direction.
The radial force, or forces you and I know so well that they become as complicate as making mud pies. Add water, add dirt, patty up, wait for the dry atmosphere to do it's job and there you go. Forgive me Momentous. I am trying to say in the stupidest way I know, how well we both understand. It was meant to be a complement, but I don't know what it is now. Another almost genius deduction and invention by Glenn that missed it's mark again. Oh just forget it, please.
Actually, I find nothing in your post I wish to disagree with. What is a rose by any other name is still a funny acting gyroscope. Did I get that right? I must say however, I do resent I'm going to be 'plagued' mercilessly by you in the future. Momentous, thank you very much for your kind complement.
With much respect,
Glenn,
|
| Report Abuse |
| Answer: |
Blaze - 03/01/2013 22:00:22
| | | Hi Glenn.
I used to think that there was no centrifuge force during steady state orbiting precession but I now think that may be incorrect. Certainly there is centrifuge generated from the non spinning mass (arm, frame, etc.) and perhaps the "too slow" spinning mass (balls in the ball bearings) would generate centrifuge force during steady state. I am now thinking that the spinning mass (flywheel) would also generate centrifuge just as if it were not spinning. This would certainly fit the gyroscope experiments that I have been doing with a spinning flywheel and a non spinning flywheel. In either case I can inchworm a meccano cart across the table and the distances per inchworm movement are about the same whether the flywheel is spinning or not. The propulsive force in these experiments can only be centrifugal forces pulling the cart when the flywheel isn't spinning.
I have in the past stated that the reason there is no apparent horizontal force on the pivot during slow steady state precession is because the two different motions, precession (turning through flywheel center of mass) and momentum (straight line, like in the tree house experiment), are perfectly balanced which cause a natural curving motion that is centered on the pivot. However, this lack of horizontal force on the pivot only appears to be correct at very slow steady state motion. When orbiting precession gets faster there is clearly a horizontal force on the pivot that drags the pivot around, even during steady state. I believe this is centrifugal force at play. This force would, of course, always be present, even at slow steady state orbiting precession, however, since centrifugal force is a squared function of orbiting velocity, this force doesn't make its presence obvious until the higher orbiting precession speeds are reached when the force becomes large. This force can be large enough to drag a 1.75 pound meccano cart across the table, one inchworm step at a time as in my experiment. Centrifugal force doing this is the only theory I have found that seems to fit the observations.
I don't see why the precession and momentum movements that cause a natural curving motion would automatically cancel the centrifugal effect of orbiting mass, whether it is spinning or not spinning. So therefore I have to conclude that the centrifugal force still applies.
Of course, I could be wrong, it wouldn't be the first time.
best to all,
Blaze
|
| Report Abuse |
| Answer: |
Glenn Hawkins - 04/01/2013 03:33:10
| | | Hi Blaze,
That is impressive and you are right I think. What I eventually found interesting is a visual illusion that the pivot seeks to travel in a small circle. It does not. It seek only to follow the centrifuge of the pulling, precession wheel in a straight path toward the wheel. I reason the pivot/pedestal curves creating a smaller circumference it circles in, because the wheel is always curving in precession to future points within a curve, therefore the pivot must always readjust it’s attempt to travel in a straight, direct line toward the wheel’s outward pulling centrifuge direction. This explains a once troubling question which was. . . .
Why in all examples and conditions does a gyro on a string maintain a direct alignment of the shaft to an exact center point within the larger circle? Why did the shaft remain aliened? The above explanation is I believe the answer.
Live long and prosper,
Glenn
|
| Report Abuse |
| Answer: |
Glenn Hawkins - 04/01/2013 03:53:06
| | | Dear Momentous,
This below was a slip of my mind.
I said in response to you, "I must say however, I do resent I'm going to be 'plagued' mercilessly by you in the future.”
A slip of the mind, because I did not mean it the way it sounded. I don't resent anything, but was being too cute to make good sense. Please contribute always. Your expression is welcome and sought after. I now have one foot in my mouth and the other up my . . . God! I'm getting worse. Forgive me. Just post and we will read while I keep my cups coming and hold the water.
Best regards Glenn,
|
| Report Abuse |
| Answer: |
Glenn Hawkins - 04/01/2013 04:10:23
| | | Dog gone it! Some centrifuge is missing and Sandy is right, but so are we. I think some of it is countered by deflections inward toward the pivot. Don't ask and I won't be embarrassed by failing to be able to explain myself intelligently.
Everybody’s buddy,
Glenn
|
| Report Abuse |
| Answer: |
Glenn Hawkins - 07/01/2013 16:25:28
| | | Hello Blaze and Luis,
Blaze wrote: “Certainly the magnitude of centrifugal acceleration can exceed the magnitude of gravitational acceleration.”
…...............................................................................................................
As you said about common table top toys, it is not possible with them. Still, there is a Newtonian balance that can not be broken in any situation between these comparisons. For as we know, the reaction which is centrifuge, cannot be more powerful than the action source gravity, which began it all.
This is to say the reaction force centrifuge cannot exceed the action force gravity that powered it.
As you also say, a system where the pivot hub is powered it would be easy to get the orbit velocities needed.
Thank you. I see it. Actually I see it this way. Electromagnet force can be thousands of times more powerful than gravity and so Sandy's electromagnet powered hub, overwhelms gravity as the wheel rises.
Keep the faith and the good work up. (You too Luis G.)
best to all,
Glenn,
|
| Report Abuse |
| Answer: |
Glenn Hawkins - 07/01/2013 16:34:08
| | | I should explain myself. I do not see centrifugal acceleration as precession speed; but rather that centrifuge is pulling directly outward from the center of the circle, while precession is traveling in a curve around the center point.
|
| Report Abuse |
| Answer: |
Blaze - 07/01/2013 18:45:28
| | | Glenn: "I do not see centrifugal acceleration as precession speed; but rather that centrifuge is pulling directly outward from the center of the circle, while precession is traveling in a curve around the center point."
Blaze:
Exactly correct Glenn, however, when the gyro arm is at 45 degrees above horizonatal then there are two components to the centrifugal acceleration, one downward and one outward from the center rotation of the system.
If you use centrifugal acceleration = (v^2)/r and use an r of 3.5 meter and a 20 rpm precession rate you would get a centrifugal acceleration of about 15.35 m/s/s. If this occurred at 45 degrees above horizontal you would have a downward component of about 10.86 m/s/s which is more than gravity's 9.81 m/s/s.
regards,
Blaze
|
| Report Abuse |
| Answer: |
Glenn Hawkins - 07/01/2013 23:00:42
| | | I don't think so.
Excuse me. I posed comments in the mechanical, not the mathematical.
The above prediction as I understand it, cannot be correct. Gravity is constant. At 45o we are in effect shortening the radius of precession. We shorten the shaft so to speak. This will lessen the pry leverage derived from gravity, which in turn lessens the speed of precession, which in turn lessens the force of centrifuge. Precession generated centrifuges--- progressively becomes weaker as the radius of precession decrees. Though the system of gyroscopes have variables we all know, they aren’t applicable in increasing the force from reactions to become greater than the force of the actions that caused them.
“I have previously stated: “Centrifugal force, depends on the mass of the object, the speed of rotation, and the distance from the center. These conditions and the ratios related to them can not be altered, period.”
Perhaps I have misunderstood the prediction?
regards, Glenn
|
| Report Abuse |
| Answer: |
Blaze - 08/01/2013 01:52:15
| | | Hi Glenn. Start with a radius of 4.95 meters when horizontal. When at 45 degrees above or below horizontal the radius will now be 3.5 meters. This is a big system but the precession rpm (20), flywheel diameter (29 inches) and flywheel rpm (about 2300) are not unrealistic values. Remember that it is velocity squared over radius. So even if you keep a constant precession rpm, when you get a large enough radius you will be getting some seriously large centrifugal acceleration. The only way to get some serious tangential precession speed on a gravity powered system is to get a really long arm length. However, I would not want to be the one that started that thing by dropping the flywheel end of the arm.
All gravity does is provide a force couple to cause the gyro to precess. The gyro parameters determine the precession rpm which determines the tangential precession speed which determines the centrifugal acceleration. Unless I have missed something or done the math wrong, to me it looks like a large enough gravity powered gyro would have centrifugal acceleration greater than gravitational acceleration.
regards,
Blaze
|
| Report Abuse |
| Answer: |
Glenn Hawkins - 08/01/2013 15:24:33
| | | Hi Blaze and all,
I understand you. Thank you. All this ties in with my hypothesis and tests that I need to finish. I said that it is possible to create blinding speed in precession.
You can get the same force of centrifuge by increasing the mass and, or RPMs of a much smaller gyroscope, than your big test model. I cannot agree that the angle will change anything of significance, except as it is related to shortening, or increasing the radius of precession. What the extended length of shaft does is by the use of leverage, increase, or decrease the torque derived from gravity. You can likewise increase the torque downward by using an electric motor with gearing and some mechanical innovations. I believe you pointed this fact out using Sandy Kidd's machine as a perfect example. You can get blinding speed this way. The trick will be to produce blinding precession speed, while also extending the time of gyro is tilting. (Increase precession speed; while decreasing tilt speed. Oddly, almost beyond known logic, I think this is possible. We shall see. I certainly do not claim it is possible at this point.
I find the things you are currently researching are different than the direction I chose to go. Good luck with your work. We must get on board together eventually with something else. Wish me luck today. I have a helper for a few days.
Regards,
Glenn
|
| Report Abuse |
| Answer: |
Glenn Hawkins - 09/01/2013 13:46:03
| | | Hi Blaze and all.
Pardon me I must add though you must know. The tremendous centrifugal force you excellent mechanism produces will produce slow tilt speed and slow precession speed with a short shaft to pivot. With a long shaft however; though it will produce fast precession, it also produces fast tilt speed. In this scenario, if precession were blindingly fast, it would only precess perhaps I/4 of a revolution or there about before the gyro tilts down from 45o to 180o-- very fast and finished tilt. It seems you get the same mess when the toy is rotating slowly. This is what I am trying to circumvent. I want to increase precession speed, while delaying/slowing tilt time and degrees decay. It may be impossible.
Best of luck all,
|
| Report Abuse |
| Add an Answer >> |
|
