Question |
| Asked by: |
Blaze |
| Subject: |
Is It Real? - a running progress update |
| Question: |
This posting is a running update of progress on the building and testing of one of my designs that I think may have a distinct possibility of providing sustained propulsion. No design details will be revealed in this posting, only information on the progress of building, testing and the eventual results of those tests.
Background:
I invited a few engineer friends over, expressly to blow holes in the theory and/or math for this design. These gentlemen have an open mind and are very familiar with the the unusual behavior of gyros (not just the "classical" understanding that you might expect from scientists/technical people). After going over my solution for about 3 hours they couldn't find anything that wouldn't work. They walked away convinced it will work. We will see....
So, for the last several months I have been collecting. fabricating, and assembling parts to build the thing to see IF (and that is a mighty BIG "if") what I have theorized and proved mathematically and experimentally is actually possible. Unfortunately this thing is a mechanical nightmare so it is quite possible that I may have missed something and it won't work. Time will tell. Due to the complex nature of the device and the fine tuning that is required, I "guestimate" it will take me about 6+ months (target date is by Christmas, 2013) and at least $1000 to build the darn thing just to see if it will work.
regards,
Blaze
|
| Date: |
14 September 2013
|
| report abuse
|
|
Answers (Ordered by Date)
|
| Answer: |
Blaze - 14/09/2013 01:06:11
|
| | First update:
The design consists of two major components with a complicated "transmission" to connect and time the two components correctly. Testing for propulsion will not be possible until both components and the transmission are all connected, adjusted and timed properly. A single component performing correctly will not provide propulsion.
- I finished the first component about 1.5 months ago. This component is mounted on wheels and eventually will form the platform that will allow linear movement.
- Maximum gyro arm speeds achieved during testing was 225 rpm but most of the testing was done between about 90 and 140 rpm.
- I videoed the motions and movements at 15 frames per second (the fastest speed of my old digital camera).
- Motions are as I predicted but the 15 fps camera leaves a lot of information out of view (not to mention that the moving parts are quite blurred) so I got a new camera that does 240 fps. It is amazing what you can see at 240 fps that you simply cannot see at 15 fps. The faster camera also confirmed that the motions are as expected and predicted.
- Due to the forces (up to 9 g's) on some parts of the device (and the fact that almost the entire thing is built out of Meccano), there was considerable flexing happening when testing. Braces will be required.
- I recently finished the second component (duplicate of the first except not on wheels) and after about 1 hour of adjustments, ran it to verify it works properly and it does.
- I installed braces on the first component and found out that even though it stiffened it quite a bit, the remaining flexing is actually in the axles of the platform. The axles are 8 inches long but only 4 mm in diameter. I don't think it will be a problem but if it is I may have to go with larger diameter axles.
- I did more work on the transmission movements because the initial transmission design did not quite produce the correct movements. I figured it out and now the movement is exactly what I need. Now all I have to do is build the entire transmission and connect it to the two components and adjust for the correct timing. This will not be as easy as it might sound.
- I had to order gears to get the correct sizes and a few other parts for the transmission and those parts won't be in for about 2 weeks so that means that progress will stall until I get the parts. I figure that it will take about 3 to 5 long days to build the transmission, connect it up to the two components, and adjust everything to get the movements correct. Then I can actually test the propulsion idea. This is quicker than I thought it would be before. However, the transmission build will have to be on evenings and weekends so that will take at least a few weekends to complete.
- I predict that I will need quite a bit more flywheel weight (about triple of what I have now - which is just under 1/2 pound) to get the propulsion I am looking for which is 1 pound of thrust. The entire device should weigh in at about 10 pounds.
- I wrote up a description in a Word document of how my idea works so that I have a better record than notes I jotted down in my journal much earlier this year when I came up with the idea that is related to what I am building now. That related idea would also work but would provide less propulsion than the one I am building now, however the two ideas are closely related.
That's it for now.
cheers,
Blaze
|
| Report Abuse |
| Answer: |
Ted Pittman - 14/09/2013 03:07:38
|
| | Good luck, Blaze.
Build it and test it !
We need more like you.
|
| Report Abuse |
| Answer: |
Nitro - 19/09/2013 20:29:14
|
| | Hi Blaze
Glad to hear you are making progress. Well done on that.
I am staggered that what you propose will cost $1,000. I am obviously living up to the image of the mean Scot (I will vote “no” next year – how about you Sandy?) as I intend to spend no more than twenty five quid ($40 at today’s rate) on my latest. Admittedly I am going to leach components from the detritus of earlier tests – some on “Jogglevision” some not – that have taught and irritated me almost equally. I have actually started hacking earlier things apart in preparation, so watch out.
Hopefully one of us will bring this to a successful conclusion (preferably me, but failing that I will cheer on any winner) so we can go on to waste what remains of our time on the next “impossible dream”.
Patent the thing to hell, Blaze – but expect some B**stard corporation to infringe you to bits.
Love to hear how you are doing when safe to do so.
regards
Nitro
|
| Report Abuse |
| Answer: |
Blaze - 20/09/2013 01:52:43
|
| | Thanks for your comments gentlemen.
Nitro, I have elected to use Meccano for this build because I am only building a small version (aiming for 1 pound of thrust) and also because it should reduce the amount of custom fabrication that is required. In the end using Meccano may not be any less expensive than custom fabrication but is certainly is easier to make changes without additional cost. The "catch 22" is that I had to buy a fair bit of Meccano to get what I need to have the flexibility of making those "easier changes".
Update 2:
- Some of the parts I have been waiting for have arrived (gears mostly), but I am still waiting on a few key pieces before I can build the transmission.
- I did some more running tests on the components I have already built. I did the tests at 2400 rpm instead of 2000 rpm and also at a higher arm rpm to test the accuracy of my spreadsheet calculations. I found my spreadsheet was close enough to the experimental results that I can use it for predicting the forces, speeds, etc. when varying the gyro parameters. Just a bit of a hint when doing your calculations: the mass in the numerator of the standard gyro precession equation IS important. It is NOT the same as the mass of the flywheel because it also represents the deadweight moving mass which will increase the precession speed and that can be a substantial amount depending on the ratio of deadweight to spinning weight. When adding in the deadweight moving mass into the equation for my system, my spreadsheet calculations are quite accurate.
- I am using a live axle in my design. In other words the flywheel is clamped to the axle and the whole assembly spins. This is to try to reduce the deadweight to a minimum.
- I derived a minor but important refinement to my design from reviewing the videos at the faster speeds for what I have already built. This will cause the "usual" result, an increase in complexity for the required input forces and motions to make things work correctly (if they will work at all). However, it is not an insurmountable problem.
That's it for now.
Cheers to all,
Blaze
|
| Report Abuse |
| Answer: |
Nitro - 20/09/2013 09:31:02
|
| | Hi again Blaze,
What camcorder have you got that can take 250 frames a second?
Regards
Nitro
|
| Report Abuse |
| Answer: |
Blaze - 21/09/2013 02:11:13
|
| | Hi Nitro. I don't use a camcorder. I bought a digital camera. It is an Olympus brand, Stylus Tough TG-830 model. Maximum fps is 240 but is will shoot at 30, 60 and 120 fps as well with better resolution.
Just a bit of a clarification on what I am trying to build which might explain the elevated estimated cost.
What I am building is one quadrant of the entire engine which I can use to test for propulsion on Earth. This design would require all 4 quadrants to work properly in space. The reason I can get away with one quadrant on Earth is because the Earth and gravity prevent rotations about the two horizontal axes (axis from front to back and axis from left side to right side). I am using a "railway system" to prevent rotation about the vertical axis. In space I don't have those luxuries so I would have to have 4 of what I am building to counteract all the unwanted rotations. However, the one quadrant that I am building will be a complete quadrant, even if it is a bit crude. As a complete quadrant it will be able to consistently and repeatedly produce propulsion (if it works) when power is applied to the motors on the device. In other words this device is not just to test the various motions and forces required for propulsion but rather to be able to repeatedly demonstrate propulsion. I am however, testing for the various motions, forces, and theory along the way as I am building the components. The plan was that if I would find a show stopper along the way then I would stop work. So far I have tested one critical bit of theory as well as a few other bits of less critical theory. Everything checks out very nicely with what my theories have predicted should be happening. I won't be able to test the last bit of critical theory until I have the entire thing built, tuned and timed.
The next thing to do will be to build the transmission and connect it to one of the two main components and test for the correct movements. If that checks out I will mount the second component on the rolling platform of the first component and connect the transmission to both components and run the entire device. Then, and only then will I be able to tell if what I have predicted will produce propulsion of any kind.
regards,
Blaze
|
| Report Abuse |
| Answer: |
Nitro - 21/09/2013 18:25:33
|
| | Hi Blaze,
Nice one. That TG-830 looks a good piece of very usable kit. Amazing what the new cameras can do. I have a Panasonic camcorder that has a viewfinder that saves having to raise and lower my glasses to see the subject and then the screen. It also takes good stills, so I don't have to carry two cameras and being a camcorder means that the zoom is terrific for videos, stills and ultra close ups. I have just had my original 1960s Nikon F Photomic rebuilt by Sover Wong (he is the best Nikon man around) and it is loaded and I’ve just started reusing it. Its just for Old Lang Syne and although it is a b*st**d to have to remember all my old f. numbers, shutter speeds and depths of fields all over again I am actually enjoying having to think before shooting. The Nikon F is a fantastic piece of engineering and their lenses are so good that I couldn’t just let it die.
We seem to be on similar paths though, as mine only requires one extra opposing quadrant action instead of your four to function in space, I am hopeful that our paths, though parallel, are different. Good luck with the Mecanno, I thought they had gone out of business years ago but, now I think about it, it was the Hornby model train company that went bust. Meccano, that was invented by Frank Hornby (British) in the early 1900s, must have survived on its own .
I’m gong to try aluminium (that’s “al you min eeum” by the way not “aloo minum” – you colonials please note! :-) ) welding, which my brother makes look so easy but which I know I’ll most likely make a pigs ear out of. Still, worth a try, to keep the non reactive mass to a minimum (that’s min.......no! Better not push my luck with other people’s sense of humour.).
Kind regards
Nitro
|
| Report Abuse |
| Answer: |
Blaze - 21/09/2013 21:34:21
|
| | Hi Nitro. You are wrong about one thing. It is definitely “aloo minum”. ;-)
Meccano did go out of business many years ago but there is a big following so used parts are plentiful, unfortunately they aren't cheap. There are also several businesses that make new compatible parts which are, of course, even more expensive than the used parts. Interestingly, nearly all of my Meccano purchases are from England, which I believe is your area of the world.
I left out one important word from my previous posting. Instead of "...it will be able to consistently and repeatedly produce propulsion (if it works) when power is applied to the motors on the device."
I should have said "...it will be able to consistently and repeatedly produce continuous propulsion (if it works) when power is applied to the motors on the device." An important difference and one that creates a lot of extra costs.
cheers,
Blaze
|
| Report Abuse |
| Answer: |
Blaze - 24/09/2013 02:02:45
|
| | Well the last few parts I was waiting for have arrived so I am back in hardware mode. Hopefully be the end of this week I will have built enough of the transmission to do some powered movement tests on one of the major components.
cheers,
Blaze
|
| Report Abuse |
| Answer: |
RS - 24/09/2013 02:39:29
|
| | I hope you are successful.............
|
| Report Abuse |
| Answer: |
Blaze - 28/09/2013 00:27:04
|
| | Intermediate update:
Well after building a good part of the transmission and connecting it to the one of the major components it became blatantly obvious that it will not produce the kind of motion that I actually need. I should have known better as the transmission I built was actually a "compromise" (read that as "shortcut") because it would be far simpler to build it that way than the way I really need it. I was hoping it would be close enough to work but it isn't.
So after reviewing an interesting website called 507movements.com I found something that will produce the correct movement that is far simpler than anything I had come up with on my own. The bad news is that I will need different gears than I now have. The good news is that it is nothing that money can't fix, so I ordered the gears that I need a few days ago and they are already on their way from Jolly Old England. When I build the transmission this time, I will have the motion I require without any compromises. Unfortunately, due the the nature of the motion, it will come with its own set of problems, which is why I tried the "shortcut" to begin with. However after working on the problem for a a few days now, I believe that I can mitigate the unwanted characteristics without compromising the wanted motion. It will just have to be very precise to work correctly.
So I am back to "army mode" which is "hurry up and wait".
I will report again later when I get my new gears and have something actually built and tested.
regards,
Blaze
|
| Report Abuse |
| Answer: |
Nitro - 29/09/2013 21:07:27
|
| | Dear Blaze,
Welcome to the two steps forward one step back club.
I have managed, as predicted, to make a pigs ear of aloominum welding and mucked up the main and cross shafts. I seem to have aluminium stock that has a lower melting point than the ally welding rod. I think I will try an interference fit and shaft lock instead, on my next attempt. I wanted it to be a bit more professional this time but, as it only has to last long enough to prove a point, I am not going to be too fussy.
Generally it has not been a good day. It started with me lighting a fire to burn a load of old private papers in a log burning fireplace. Having placed a guard in front of the fire I stood back swiftly as the chimney made some funny echoed noises followed shortly after by a massive fall of soot largely, but by no means completely, held back by the fire guard. As I still had lots of paper left to burn I decided that I would carry on to finish burning the paper and then get my drum vacuum cleaner to vacuum up the mess after the fire had cooled.
We had had the most tremendous rain storm complete with thunder and lightning that occurred simultaneously, so it was bloody close. Due to crap builders, back in the sixties when our bathroom and rear entrance extension were built, the outside path is only half an inch lower than the entrance threshold step. This means that in times of sharp rainstorms the puddles that form can be an inch higher than the threshold. Water, I have noticed, doesn’t stay uphill!
Curious about the gurgling noise by the back door I opened it to find the source of the noise and a small lake came in. This is my lucky day, I thought, as the drum vacuum cleaner, after removal of the dust bag, can be used to suck up spills. I decided to vacuum up all the soot first because to suck up the water over the floor first would involve an overnight wait for the vacuum cleaner to dry or risk it getting clogged up. There was no rush to start on the lake as it had stopped raining and the water would wait until I was ready to deal with it so.... I sensibly decided to take the entire log grate out, remove the chimney damping plate and actuating mechanism and make a proper job of cleaning it. Having thoroughly cleaned everything into a heap on the hearth I set to with the vacuum cleaner.
It was when I was concentrating on getting at the soot from around the body of a slightly overcooked and very dead pigeon sitting in the flue path, which must have dropped down the chimney during the storm, that I missed the importance of a subtle change in tone of the cleaner’s noise. Some minutes later, with my head still halfway in the fireplace vacuuming feathers, I noticed a black cloud that had made the circuit to the far end of the room only to appear from behind me between my legs. At this point I realised that I should have paid more attention to the subtle change in tone of the cleaner’s noise as it had been caused by the paper dust bag splitting, leaving a clear path for the soot to go in the in port and straight out the out port of the cleaner. Cleaner was no longer a good job description of what the, now, soot spreader had been doing for the past several minutes.
I shall be cleaning up the soot and dust that has coated every surface of every piece of furniture in my lounge for the next few days. Still, it will take my mind of my crap aloominum welding and give me something to pass the time while I await the delivery of some more aloominum tube from England!
Regards and laughter
NM
|
| Report Abuse |
| Answer: |
Blaze - 30/09/2013 02:40:07
|
| | Sounds like you have a real mess on your hands Nitro. Sure hope you get it all cleaned up ok.
regards,
Blaze
|
| Report Abuse |
| Answer: |
Glenn Hawkins - 30/09/2013 18:59:02
|
| | Where were Larry and Currey when you needed them most? A lovely post it was, Nitro. Hang in there.
Regards,
Glenn
|
| Report Abuse |
| Answer: |
Blaze - 06/10/2013 23:37:30
|
| | Hello to all who are interested.
Update 3:
- After several more transmission redesigns since the last update, I finally got something together that provides some kind of motion that is similar to what I want and connected it to one of the major components.
- At first I was fairly certain it wouldn't work very well, but after rapidly moving the transmission by hand, it appeared that, although the motion was not ideal for my design, it may work to some degree. So I added a motor to the transmission to try it. The motor used on the first attempt didn't have the power needed, so I rebuilt the transmission with a stronger motor. The second motor has adequate power.
- Tests were done with constant gyro arm speeds of about 70 rpm and 100 rpm.
- High speed videos of the powered movement showed a much better movement than expected and better than the math would seem to indicate.
- I will try using this transmission design for both components. Again it isn't ideal and that may come back to haunt me later, but it does work better than expected and well enough to make it worth a try for the whole apparatus.
- Next step is to build duplicate transmission for the second component and mount the second component on the rolling platform of the first component. Then I have to connect the two transmissions and time and tune the two components. At this point in time I am a little concerned that the extra load on the gears by driving both components at once may cause the gears to slip on the shafts but that can be handled if and when it happens.
- I plan on using only one motor to power both transmissions.
- Current weight of both components is about 8 pounds. Final weight is expected to be about 10 pounds.
There is still a lot of work ahead and I know there will likely be many problems to overcome yet, but getting a powered motion is a major step in the right direction. The potential outcome certainly does look promising at this time.
That is all for now.
regards,
Blaze
|
| Report Abuse |
| Answer: |
Blaze - 15/10/2013 02:31:02
|
| | Hello to all.
Update 4:
- I built and mounted a duplicate of the transmission used on the first component for the second component.
- Mounted the second component on the rolling platform of the first component; it took a bit of bracing to make it solid.
- Connected the two transmissions and timed the two components. As I feared, the extra load on the gears from driving both components at once caused the gears to slip on the shafts and also jump teeth so I changed out the gears to stronger ones and made some minor changes to eliminate the problem.
- Using only one motor to power both transmissions seems to work OK and even has some advantages.
- Final weight of the entire apparatus is just a little under 10 pounds.
- As I feared, the less than ideal movement of the transmissions did indeed come back to haunt me. There were also some issues with the amount of free play that the stock Meccano parts allow. This will have to be rectified by building custom parts that don't have any free play. Fortunately I can build those custom parts myself. I have also contacted about 1/2 dozen custom gear cutters about building the highly unusual gears that I need for a proper transmission design. These will be expensive and that is why I have tried to avoid using them, however, it appears there is no way around it. I am investigating one last way that I can create these gears myself by modifying some Meccano gears. Only time will tell if I am successful.
- Although the motion the transmissions did provide was not ideal, reviewing the videos did give some proof that another aspect of my theory, which until now I could not test, is correct. So it was not a totally wasted effort.
I am still aiming for getting this proved out one way or the other by Christmas and things are coming along fairly well but time is running out. My theory still looks plausible and the additional proof from the last tests makes the final outcome continue to look promising. I still have a long way to go to get this working correctly to find out if this will provide the continuous propulsion that my theory predicts, but I will get there, one step at a time.
best regards to all,
Blaze
|
| Report Abuse |
| Answer: |
Blaze - 15/10/2013 02:32:12
|
| | Hello to all.
Update 4:
- I built and mounted a duplicate of the transmission used on the first component for the second component.
- Mounted the second component on the rolling platform of the first component; it took a bit of bracing to make it solid.
- Connected the two transmissions and timed the two components. As I feared, the extra load on the gears from driving both components at once caused the gears to slip on the shafts and also jump teeth so I changed out the gears to stronger ones and made some minor changes to eliminate the problem.
- Using only one motor to power both transmissions seems to work OK and even has some advantages.
- Final weight of the entire apparatus is just a little under 10 pounds.
- As I feared, the less than ideal movement of the transmissions did indeed come back to haunt me. There were also some issues with the amount of free play that the stock Meccano parts allow. This will have to be rectified by building custom parts that don't have any free play. Fortunately I can build those custom parts myself. I have also contacted about 1/2 dozen custom gear cutters about building the highly unusual gears that I need for a proper transmission design. These will be expensive and that is why I have tried to avoid using them, however, it appears there is no way around it. I am investigating one last way that I can create these gears myself by modifying some Meccano gears. Only time will tell if I am successful.
- Although the motion the transmissions did provide was not ideal, reviewing the videos did give some proof that another aspect of my theory, which until now I could not test, is correct. So it was not a totally wasted effort.
I am still aiming for getting this proved out one way or the other by Christmas and things are coming along fairly well but time is running out. My theory still looks plausible and the additional proof from the last tests makes the final outcome continue to look promising. I still have a long way to go to get this working correctly to find out if this will provide the continuous propulsion that my theory predicts, but I will get there, one step at a time.
best regards to all,
Blaze
|
| Report Abuse |
| Answer: |
Blaze - 15/10/2013 02:33:55
|
| | sorry for the duplicate posting, there was a "server error" and I resent it incorrectly thinking the first posting didn't get through.
Blaze
|
| Report Abuse |
| Answer: |
Ted Pittman - 19/10/2013 14:28:15
|
| | Any photos or videos to share?
|
| Report Abuse |
| Answer: |
Blaze - 19/10/2013 15:45:41
|
| | Hi Ted. Although I have many videos of the apparatus in motion for the various stages of completion, I have nothing to show anyone else yet. I am having a lot of difficulty getting the unusual gears that I need. These have to be custom made and they are different than anything most people have ever seen. That is not to say this type of gear has never been made before because it has. However, it is difficult finding anyone who can make them. Until I get the right gears I will not be able to get the correct motion and if I can't get the correct motion, then there is nothing worthwhile to see.
I am trying to source someone or some company who can make the sort of gear described in the following link.
http://507movements.com/mm_371.html
Anyone got any ideas?
regards,
Blaze
|
| Report Abuse |
| Answer: |
Nitro - 19/10/2013 18:53:03
|
| | Hi Blaze,
Looks like you are searching for a means of producing a movement that reciprocates over a large percentage of a circle. Would this not be better achieved with a crank to give the reciprocation with an overdriven gear or toothed belt on the output to give you the degrees of reciprocation arc you need. More components but they are standard and easier to obtain.
kind regards
NM
|
| Report Abuse |
| Answer: |
Blaze - 19/10/2013 19:01:03
|
| | Hi Nitro. The problem is that a crank or crankshaft produces a sinusoidal speed reciprocating movement. I need a constant speed movement. The mangle gear will give me a constant speed for all of the movement except for the small area where it changes from side to side.
cheers,
Blaze
|
| Report Abuse |
| Answer: |
Glenn Hawkins - 20/10/2013 00:07:54
|
| | Hello Blaze,
Your gear is interesting. You might try emachine shop and while you are at it, I found the genera gear right for me, though perhaps not for you. In any case, good luck in all events.
Glenn
|
| Report Abuse |
| Answer: |
Nitro - 20/10/2013 06:25:26
|
| | Hi Blaze,
Reverse polarity to drive motor with a cam actuated switch?
Nitro
|
| Report Abuse |
| Answer: |
Blaze - 21/10/2013 02:38:32
|
| | Glenn, thanks for the tip but after looking at emachineshop and working with their program for a while it became obvious that they cannot produce this gear and I find them to be really expensive as well.
Nitro, I thought of the cam/switch to reverse the motor, however there is more than one component to control and they have to be synced and stay synced to each other. The motions of the two components are not uniform throughout their travel so it is not as simple as one might think.
Intermediate Update:
It looks like I will have to go to Plan B which is to use a micro controller, position sensors and PWM motor speed controllers. This will work but will require a lot of additional work to write a properly working program. I will also need two motors (one for each component) instead of just one motor if I used gears and I will have to rework how the motors connect to the driven parts. The micro controller and the motor speed controllers aren't expensive but the rotary position sensors are about $50 each, and of course, I need two of them. Same old, same old. It is nothing that time and money can't fix. I have started looking for the parts required for Plan B but am still keeping an eye out for the possibility of getting the gears made.
It is really frustrating to be this close to either proving or disproving my theory and being stalled like this. I have everything built and tested except for the "synchronizing" part which will either be by gearing or by Plan B.
regards,
Blaze
|
| Report Abuse |
| Answer: |
Nitro - 27/10/2013 16:10:06
|
| | Hi Blaze,
having read through some of the earlier posts again I may be using the same type of reversing reciprocal drive that you are trying to create.
At the risk of helping you to the finish post first:- to save money (always a priority with us Scots eh, Sandy?) I am using a high torque model car/boat/plane servo (like Futaba - about £7 on e-bay) powered by a 6 volt power supply (about £ 2.50) and actuated via a tiny servo tester (about £4). The tester has three settings that allow selection of manual movement of the servo arm by turning an inbuilt pot (potentiometer, variable resistance – I don’t know what they are called in the US. Basically there is a knob you can turn that moves the servo actuator proportionally to the pot’s movement) and the third setting, which gives exactly what I was looking for, that moves the servo’s arm from one end of its movement to the other repeatedly (like a windscreen wiper). The tester can drive up to three servos at once in synchrony so may do what you are looking for.
I don’t know if this is suitable for where you are going but if it is it will save so much time and money.
It looks like we on my tiny island are going to get the kind of weather that is not uncommon in your Midwest as we are going to get smacked with 90 to 100 mile per hour winds tonight from a left over storm from new Mexico helped on its way by the jet stream. (No doubt the “Greens” will all be saying it is caused by global warming even though there has been none for the last sixteen or seventeen years – they seem to believe we are all wicked sinners for the original sin of breathing out carbon dioxide.) So it’s batten down the hatches tonight and then go down the road to look for the roof tiles tomorrow. Keep you fingers crossed for us.
Kind regards
NM
|
| Report Abuse |
| Answer: |
Blaze - 27/10/2013 19:16:33
|
| | Thanks for the tip Nitro. I will look into it.
Good luck with the weather.
cheers,
Blaze
|
| Report Abuse |
| Answer: |
Sandy Kidd - 27/10/2013 21:21:58
|
| | Hello Nitro and all.
Your posting brought back some memories of a few years ago when I had an awkward control problem
The device you mentioned can be bought from Giantshark (used to be Giantcod) for just over £5, that is the expensive one with a metal case and well made.
They are brilliant. I have a pair of them.
3 servos or 3 ESCs or a mix of either, can be used on one of those things,
It is known as a GT Power RC 1-3 servo tester and I think it is made by Turnigy.
One problem I found was that the full sweep from one end to the other is the full stroke of the servo or ESC, and is not readily variable.
What I did was I acquired a toothed pulley which must have been about 12 tooth and it slid nicely over the little manual control pot shaft.
That way I could control the servo or ESC action via the manual function with the aid of a wooden eccentric or cam..
Oops forgot to mention I acquired a length of toothed timing belt that was epoxied on to a bit of spruce spar, to make a toothed rack.
This was oscillated back and forward via the wooden cam, to actuate the toothed wheel on the servo tester.
I had two servo testers operating together at different throws with a pair of eccentrics driven from the same Tamiya geared motor.
It was good to watch if nothing else.
That is as crude as you can get, easily modified, and it was consistent, worked well, and served its purpose.
Many years ago Nitro my bog standard Futaba S148 servos were about £28 each.
You can get 4 for about £20 on Ebay now.
I got a 14Kg servo same size as an S148, a good bit heavier with metal gears but a beast with real torque for £11 from the then Giantcod a couple of years ago
It was so good I bought another pair.
.
You guys if you have not already done so should look at HPI Savage or whatever transmission parts from their model cars.
I have the equipment and it is no problem to make suitable stuff but the time it saves buying it (or as this Scotsman does Nitro) I salvage a hell of a lot from scrapped vehicles.
There are more than one or two of them lying around but can mostly be found in the local model-shop with a lot of good stuff there.
There are complete diffs, dog-bone or universal drives and cups, and a choice of quality metal gears, (many of hardened steel) and a multitude of ball and needle bearings, one way bearings, and all sorts of other goodies.
The stuff is well made and none of it has ever failed with me.
You get a multitude of options with this stuff.
Just a thought
Sandy
|
| Report Abuse |
| Answer: |
Blaze - 09/11/2013 01:33:38
|
| | Update 5:
Well, I have some good news and some bad news.
First the good news.
- I invited another engineer friend over to do a critical review of my design. This person is the “fully” skeptical kind but he very good at what he does and always provides straight answers.
- After about 2 hours going over theory several times, he said that although all of his training tells him this can’t work, he couldn’t see any reason why it wouldn’t work.
So if that is the good news, the bad news really can’t be all that bad and here it is.
- I will have to go with Plan B which is the microcontroller control system route because I can’t get the gear I need.
- I ordered almost all the parts for the control system, some have arrived already.
- You know the old saying “you don’t really know something until you can teach it”? Well I was trying to develop the microcontroller code (teach the computer) and realized there was some math that I hadn’t completed which I need for the code. It was pretty complex math and it took a whole day to develop it and crunch it out the first time but I got through it and of course, it will necessitate a change in some of the critical dimensions of my device. This means a total rebuild of what I have already built.
- Between the rebuild and the control system that I have to develop, it will likely add about another 6 months (mostly because I can only work on this part time) to get to the point where I can test for propulsion. That puts me at about the middle of May, 2014, give or take a bit. Of course I am a little disappointed but not really surprised because that is just the nature of prototype design and development. I also would not be surprised if I find that I have to do another partial rebuild when I get the next version built and tested in May.
That is all for now.
Regards,
Blaze
|
| Report Abuse |
| Answer: |
Nitro - 14/11/2013 20:10:02
|
| | Dear Blaze,
Ah! The old rebuild of the rebuilt rebuild syndrome! Many’s the time I have suffered from that. Indeed, I still suffer from the syndrome. The latest incarnation of “The machine” contains many, but by no means all, of my earlier endeavours’ parts. When I recently undertook the Herculean task of tidying the workshop/shed – actually not a Herculean task as the “Aegean stables” would have been what you USAists call a “cinch” by comparison – I stood back and looked at the neatly sorted boxes of “bits” and I found that by far the largest was a box of short but “possibly usable” (read totally useless!) drilled offcuts of aluminium (we won’t start on the crap USA pronunciation of that one again!) together with a huge pile of carefully machined swarf.
Rather sad really, to find that most of one’s endeavours over the years have been dedicated to the carefully thought out and incredibly time consuming manufacture of very expensive aloominum offcuts and swarf.
Still! What the Hell! A man has to have something to do to pass the time between doing the pointless tasks “her indoors” sets him – what on Earth is a “pelmet” actually for anyway!
My rebuild of the etc. etc. is progressing well judging by the amount of offcuts and swarf I’m producing though, as it is getting cold in the “shed” and the house is cosy warm, I may end up creating more pelmet than precession through the winter.
Kind regards and laughter
NM
|
| Report Abuse |
| Answer: |
Blaze - 24/12/2013 00:27:33
|
| | Update 6:
I have been working on the mathematical model for propulsion based on my design and have finally completed it. Certainly not an easy task as it involves spherical, ellipsoidal, centrifugal, circular sector, trigonometry, calculus, iterative and various other types of mathematics to describe all the variables properly and how they all interact with each other. Change one thing and most if not all the other variables change as well so the whole thing has to be recalculated. I have always said that there is no magic here, just a lack of understanding of what is happening.
I am happy to say that, at least mathematically, propulsion appears to be possible without breaking Newton’s laws as they are currently written. Of course I could still be wrong but it would appear from the mathematical model that propulsion is in fact possible.
How much propulsion? One version of my design (and it is a very complicated design) with a 0.63 pound flywheel precessing at about 283 rpm will provide an average of 5.7 newtons of thrust (about 1.28 pounds of thrust).
However the most interesting discovery was that Newton’s laws are not being broken but rather that there are things happening that are not described in Newton’s laws. Those things not described in Newton’s laws DO in fact follow Newton’s laws and those things are unique to spinning mass.
Although what I recently built has the wrong dimensions to produce any propulsion, it did prove several key points of theory that helped in the understanding of what is happening and in solving the mathematics.
Next step is to actually build a device that has the correct dimensions to produce propulsion.
Merry Christmas to all those that celebrate Christmas and Happy Holidays to all those that don’t.
Blaze
|
| Report Abuse |
| Answer: |
Nitro - 25/12/2013 00:18:32
|
| | Hi and Happy Christmas Blaze and all others,
Please beware of long bracketed sequences due to Christmas presents of Glenmorangie being opened too early
Glad your maths (or math if you are American. Yes, yes! I know you are a Canadiadianist and not of the US, Blaze, and thus able to cope with the cold and most of the English language)(speaking of the US; strange to think that Noo York is further south than warm Barcelona in Spain and yet has colder weather than London in the winter. Like us in Guernsey, England is warmed by the Gulf Stream that bathes us in warm water from the south and usually keeps us above freezing. The Galapagos where my wife, who wants to force me on long haul planes all the time, arranged for us to visit, despite being on the Equator is not roasting hot but a lovely comfortable 72 deg. Fahrenheit almost all the year due to being kept cool by the Humboldt current – I would love to live there but I fear I am too old to adapt) confirms the possibility of what we all aim for. Hey! We have finally escaped from those bloody brackets!
While I know that what your maths predicts is, indeed, possible, I don’t think that what your maths predicts is possible without Newton’s laws being seriously buggered up (engineers term!) as his first law has been shown to be in need of, at the very least, rewording by my simple gyro pendulum demonstration (see Jogglevision on u-tube) and the third law would be totally contravened (scientific term!) by a device that moves in one direction without something of equal mass/acceleration being moved in the opposite direction. The biggest correction of understanding is not to one of Newton's laws, but to the unjustified acceptance by the scientific community that linier and axial momentum are separately conserved – they need not be when more that two axes of mass rotation are involved.
Your are right that there are many variables that alter with any change of parameter, this is why it has taken so long and left so many by the way side. Good luck with converting the maths into mechanics. Mine (machine and brain) rests until after Christmas.
I have to admire your Christmas political correctness to those that don’t celebrate Christmas, Blaze, though I fear that if one bends backwards too far to accommodate others quirks risks falling on your back while destroying the very fairness you seek to promote. Whatever, have a good holiday everyone.
Love and laughter to you all
NM
|
| Report Abuse |
| Answer: |
Glenn Hawkins - 26/12/2013 23:04:29
|
| | Dear Nitro,
Thank you for the most interesting information. The more I looked into you island, the more fascinated I became. I had not known anything about it and it seems so beautiful; quaint and neighborly and yet sprawling all at the same time. As I looked it over, I searched for boats in the water and finally saw a couple of dozen grouped near one small, perhaps indented cove. Then I wondered how they got in the water in the first place. Perhaps you drop the off the cliffs and those that float drift around the island to rest and anchor at the same place; either that, or pirates must bring them from the mainland and forget them. Anyway, at least you have boats if you can get to one without drowning. You live in a most lovely place and I would love to spend time there, and you have a beautiful mind and beautiful hand. George Bernard Shaw relates to your hand as closely for me as I can reason, but of course there are differences as is always true. Anyway I was pleased.
Glenn,
Blasé Dear,
Because you state unapologetic you would be insulted to be called an American, a insult against another man’s country that I would never do; I have decided to give you the straight of your effort to produce propulsion against the simply stated laws of inertia--- without breaking them.
I am an American and I think Canadians are swell and an excellent people and I like their history and I am glad to have them beside my northern boarder. I know they are not all good guys, probably one of them is not very polite, but we who share this small planet know about individuals—they are what they are and it is what it is. Generally though, as a people I admire your countrymen very much. Also I have laid a dozen smiling snowbirds most enthusiastically on beach blankets under palm trees at the edge of night in the Florida Keys. How could I not love Canadians?
To belabor the statement of the inertial law: If an object is internally powered, without the connection to gravity, or magnet attraction, or repulsion, then it must eject mass in the opposite direction in order to move its center of gravity; whether in space or earth bound.
How it might be done in mathematical conception has no bearing in the fact you would be breaking those laws of nature you state you believe.
Would you like to apologize to me? Rather, would you like me to spank you?
Glenn,
Always hello to you, Sandy. It is fun knowing you.
|
| Report Abuse |
| Answer: |
Blaze - 27/12/2013 19:18:16
|
| | Merry Christmas to you Glenn and happy New Year.
As I said before in the posting you seem to find so offensive, "No offense intended to USA citizens". I am a proud Canadian, always have been and always will be. I very much doubt that proud Americans would want to be called citizens of other countries either. I don't see how clarifying one's country of origin is an insult to another country. But enough of that, I will not comment on this matter further.
By the way, I know a lot of good decent Americans. You have a beautiful country which I have only seen a small part of but plan to see more of as the years go by.
As for the actual topic of this thread, I stand by what I have said, "propulsion appears to be possible without breaking Newton’s laws as they are currently written." This is based on the mathematical analysis of my design. It is one design that appears to work but that does not mean it is the only design that will work.
The ONLY reason that propulsion appears to be possible is because of the discovery that "there are things happening that are not described in Newton’s laws. Those things not described in Newton’s laws DO in fact follow Newton’s laws and those things are unique to spinning mass." Without elaborating further it would be difficult if not impossible to really understand that statement or interpret what the "things happening that are not described in Newton’s laws" actually are and why they are important and I will not elaborate further at this time. However, based on the experiments I did to prove some theories, that is the way it is. In time, I will have my next physical model built and we will see if the math proves out. Time will tell.
best to all,
Blaze
|
| Report Abuse |
| Answer: |
Glenn Hawkins - 27/12/2013 23:48:43
|
| | Dear Blaze, no harm done. I laugh about it. I have the personality to fight with my brother one day and love him to death the next. We were like that growing up and I hope you are a little like that. Some people hold a grudge forever and over nothing. We once had a fellow on here like that. We can be pals, I am open to that, but to finish the subject, ‘it was what it was’.
I reread what you said, “. . . No offense intended to USA citizens, but calling a Canadian an American is like calling a Scotsman an Englishman.”
Dear Blaze, a few centuries ago the Scots so hated the English, which are my blood line-- the English, that if a Scott were compared to an Englishman he would have taken it as a great, fighting insult.
You also wrote, “Canadian Provinces are also quite large. Large enough in fact to make the average American State look like some Canadian's back yard by comparison. Well, maybe I am exaggerating a bit. ;-)”
Actually Blaze, the population of several of America’s fifty states, say warm California for instance, is greater than that all of all Canada.
What does it matter, except I am the one who calls it quits. I will not respond, but I remain a fan for life of the red oak leaf.
Your machine building: We here have, and some of us still are, fighting the fight you fight. I swear to God I wish I could cut some parts for you and of course precisely. The building these apparatuses is so difficult and it takes so long when you are alone. I know you do not ask, but I stay so far behind several varied efforts I sometimes hate them. My saving grace is that I love people. Good luck to you then and happiness and success.
Glenn,
An Englishman, an Irishman and a Scotsman were sitting in a bar, drinking, and discussing how stupid their wives were. The Englishman says, "I tell you, my wife is so stupid. Last week she went to the supermarket and bought £250 worth of meat because it was on sale, and we don't even have a fridge to keep it in." The Scotsman agrees that she sounds pretty thick, but says his wife is thicker. "Just last week, she went out and spent £17,000 on a new car," he laments, "and she doesn't even know how to drive!" The Irishman nods sagely, and agrees that these two woman sound like they both walked through the stupid forest and got hit by every branch. However, he still thinks his wife is dumber. "Ah, it kills me every toime oi tink of it," he chuckles. "Moy woife just left to go on a holiday in Greece. Oy watched her packing her bag, and she must have put about 100 condoms in there. And she doesn't even have a penis!"
An Englishman, a Scotsman and an Irishman were without tickets for the opening ceremonies of the summer Olympics but hoped to be able to talk their way in at the gate. Security was very tight, however, and each of their attempts was met with a stern refusal. While wandering around outside the stadium, the Englishman came upon construction site, which gave him an idea. Grabbing a length of scaffolding, he presented himself at the gate and said, "Johnson, the pole vault," and was admitted. The Scotsman, overhearing this, went at once to search the site. When he came up with a sledge hammer, he presented himself at the gate and said, "McTavish, the hammer." He was also admitted. The Irishman combed the site for an hour and was nearly ready to give up when he spotted his ticket in. Seizing a roll of barbed wire, he presented himself at the gate and announced, "O'Sullivan, fencing."
|
| Report Abuse |
| Answer: |
Blaze - 12/01/2014 03:20:36
|
| | Update 7:
- went through all the math again (big job) and made a few "tweaks" to increase accuracy. The math still looks good. I bounced some of the "juicier bits" off of some fellow engineers to make sure I was getting it right.
- finalized the the version of my design I will be building. It will use a 0.63 pound flywheel precessing at a maximum of about 300 rpm which will provide an average of 4.64 newtons of thrust (about 1.04 pounds of thrust). One pound of thrust is what I have been aiming for.
- worked out the math for the motor power and torque required for my design
- searched out motors for the design and finally found something that will work from a robotics site in India for a reasonable price. They should be here in about 15 days. Unfortunately these are 12 volt motors so the current requirements will be quite high.
- still have to order rotary position sensors and a few other parts (all expensive unfortunately)
- theoretically, my design will require a little less than 25 watts to produce 1 newton of thrust (at least for the design I am building); this sounds low to me so it will be interesting to see if that is reasonably accurate or not
that is all for now
cheers,
Blaze
|
| Report Abuse |
| Answer: |
Blaze - 08/02/2014 00:52:36
|
| | Intermediate update:
All the parts have arrived for my device with the exception of some gears that were supplied incorrectly from the vendor, however I will have that sorted out before I need use them.
So this weekend it will be like the old saying,
"Gentlemen, start your engines"
cheers,
Blaze
|
| Report Abuse |
| Answer: |
Blaze - 20/03/2014 02:04:30
|
| | Another Intermediate Update:
It has been a tremendous amount of work but this is where I am presently at with this project:
- mechanical build it 75% complete
- micro controller programming code is 95% complete
- still have to build the control panel to house the motor controllers, micro controller, wiring, speed controls, switches, dials, etc.
- projected date for having everything connected together is end of May or June
- testing and debugging the programming code will start at that time with thrust tests (if there is any thrust) to start immediately after.
regards,
Blaze
|
| Report Abuse |
| Answer: |
Blaze - 22/04/2014 03:04:20
|
| | For those of you who are still interested.
Update 8:
- mechanical build it 99.9% complete.
- micro controller programming code is 100% complete but not tested or debugged yet. I can't test it until I get everything finished and connected.
- Built as much of the control panel as possible. Still waiting on some switches and a relay board for the microcontroller. The first relay board was non-functional so I had to order another one.
- Switches and relay board should all be here by the end of next week.
- Now projecting date for having everything connected together is mid May.
- Depending on software debugging time and mechanical tuning issues, I could possibly be seeing success (or failure) by the end of May.
I lost 2 weeks in early April with a very painful inflamed shoulder where I couldn't do anything. Now unfortunately, I will lose nearly another 2 weeks waiting on parts even though I ordered them some time ago. I certainly have put a lot of time, effort and money into this thing so I am looking forward to seeing if it works. At least I am getting close. Hopefully the next update will be with some results, good or bad.
regards,
Blaze
|
| Report Abuse |
| Answer: |
Glenn Hawkins - 23/04/2014 12:32:33
|
| | Hello Blaze,
It is good to hear your update. Good luck and success to you.
Regards, Glenn
|
| Report Abuse |
| Answer: |
Blaze - 23/04/2014 20:12:35
|
| | Thanks Glenn.
Blaze
|
| Report Abuse |
| Answer: |
Blaze - 14/05/2014 02:05:55
|
| | Short intermediate update:
- Started debugging software/hardware systems on the weekend. Feels good to finally be at this point in the project.
- I immediately ran into a motor controller issue (part of the hardware systems) that needs a work around but I have that figured out now. Unfortunately I won't get time to work on this again until the weekend.
cheers
Blaze
|
| Report Abuse |
| Answer: |
Blaze - 22/05/2014 01:52:55
|
| | Another intermediate update:
- got the basic controller program functioning
- still have to do some fine tuning of the motor control parameters before attempting propulsion
- if tuning goes ok I should be able to test for propulsion in the next week or two, hopefully the darn thing won't blow up the first time I fire it up
Is there a betting pool out there yet on whether this thing will work or not?
Cheers,
Blaze
|
| Report Abuse |
| Answer: |
Harry K. - 22/05/2014 09:00:30
|
| | Good luck Blaze! Although it is difficult to support your progresses because I have no idea on what you are working at all.
Anyway I keep my fingers crossed for you!
Regards,
Harald
|
| Report Abuse |
| Answer: |
Nitro - 22/05/2014 16:39:04
|
| | Hi and good luck Blaze,
Watch out for the missing "opposite".
Kind regards
Nitro
|
| Report Abuse |
| Answer: |
Nitro - 22/05/2014 16:39:12
|
| | Hi and good luck Blaze,
Watch out for the missing "opposite".
Kind regards
Nitro
|
| Report Abuse |
| Answer: |
Blaze - 27/05/2014 03:09:44
|
| | Well, I ran into an interesting problem with my design. It is something I never considered. I am using a motor to power the gyro pivot and to put it simply, I can't slow the motor down quickly enough.
I am using a 12 volt permanent magnet DC gear head motor with 2.17 foot pounds of torque (at stall) that runs at a maximum of 300 rpm at the output shaft. I want to be able to slow the output shaft from 300 rpm to 0 rpm in 30 degrees of rotation of the output shaft without using a mechanical brake. It can't be done with the motor I am using. I don't know if it can be done with any motor. About the best I can get is 40 or 50 rpm to zero in 30 degrees of rotation and that is with no load on the motor, except the motor itself and its gear head. I am using a PWM motor controller with a brake function (basically shorts the motor) and even with the brake function activated I can't do any better.
Either I have to try a servo or stepper motor or use something like an eddy current brake to provide the additional stopping power required. It seems to be difficult if not impossible to get a servo with the correct combination of speed and torque and I would like to stay away from steppers for the moment, so I will eventually have to try the eddy current brake. In the meantime I will try what I have at the maximum speed I can get and see if it works but it will seriously curtail the thrust output (assuming the device works and there is any thrust).
If anyone has any ideas, I am open to suggestions.
regards,
Blaze
|
| Report Abuse |
| Answer: |
Glenn Hawkins - 27/05/2014 03:53:04
|
| | by eddy current brake do you mean reversing the polarity of the motor? With a toggle switch?
|
| Report Abuse |
| Answer: |
Blaze - 27/05/2014 04:02:28
|
| | No, not reversing motor polarity, that would actually make the motor slow down less quickly. Check out the link below.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eddy_current_brake
regards,
Blaze
|
| Report Abuse |
| Answer: |
Glenn Hawkins - 27/05/2014 06:28:59
|
| | Hi Blaze,
We all must be tired. I want to study your suggestion.
For now I have partially designed a homopolar motor, but more complicated than the toy-like deals on youtube. You can change current terminals for input/output. This way the acceleration into rotation can be reversed with a toggle switch. The power of the breaks is equal to the power of the motor. But excuse me. No such motor exist yet.
Cheers,
Glenn
|
| Report Abuse |
| Answer: |
Nate - 27/05/2014 15:43:18
|
| | There's a photo of Dr. Spartak M. Poliakov's device at the bottom of the Propulsion page of this blog. His gyros pivoted outward/inward while spinning around a central axis. A 86-page report about his work is available (translated) "Introuction to Experimental Gravitonics". It has detailed photos, equations and his theory of gravitonics.
He had to power the gyros OFF for 120 degrees of their rotation to generate a lifting force.
I used stepper motors. Their torque is less, but they can be controlled more precisely.
|
| Report Abuse |
| Answer: |
Nate - 27/05/2014 16:00:30
|
| | At 8 mins 25 seconds into this video you can see Poliakov's gyro device:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6K5r5RjGAVY
|
| Report Abuse |
| Answer: |
Glenn Hawkins - 27/05/2014 16:57:39
|
| | Bless you Nate and don’t take this personal as I am not talking about you, but that such videos are even posted.
I am getting tired of this baloney. If it don't hover unattached, F$%*&$ it! If any of this s%^(^$ worked the space agencies would eat it up in bucket fulls. As for the Royal Academe of Science, they knew baloney was being suggested during the demonstrated. And were they right? Of course they were right.
You don't see a closed spears hovering over cornfields do you? But with infrared light you might see a couple of idiots dragging down cornstalks at night in crop-circles. It’s the same mentality as the idiot Massey crap.
Too bad that many intelligent people along with the other kind have been diligently investing brain cells for so long in an honest attempt to defy physics.
I love you all, but I have had enough of such as this eight minutes of baloney I just clicked off.
Glenn,
|
| Report Abuse |
| Answer: |
Blaze - 01/06/2014 19:54:28
|
| | Still working on hardware adjustments. I had some partial success with getting one of the major components to run correctly for a brief period of time. It will take both components running correctly to produce propulsion (if there is any). Based on what I have seen to date it will take a fair bit of time to get everything coordinated well enough for the whole device to function as a unit. I am making progress, even if it is slower than I would like (isn't progress ALWAYS slower than one would like?) So, I keep on keeping on.
regards to all,
Blaze
|
| Report Abuse |
| Answer: |
Harry K. - 01/06/2014 20:28:17
|
| | Wish you good luck, Blaze!
Harald
|
| Report Abuse |
| Answer: |
Glenn Hawkins - 02/06/2014 02:17:29
|
| | Hi Blaze,
I knew if you had a chance, it was going to be a slow and difficult journey. We understand the complications even though we don't know the designs each has.
I have been pulling for you all along. Good luck.
regards,
Glenn
|
| Report Abuse |
| Answer: |
Blaze - 21/06/2014 22:18:48
|
| | Hello to all that are interested.
I have been plugging away here and making some progress but it is slow going, especially now that summer is here. With family and friends visiting as well as the usual summer activities and some delays due to medical issues, it has really put a kink into my schedule. I had hoped to be testing for propulsion by the end of this month but that may have to slip by a couple of weeks. I am taking most of July off work and that will give me some time to catch up and hopefully prove this thing one way or the other.
- I managed to get both main components running together, but not synchronized.
- Maximum running speed was 56 rpm when the pair were running together.
- The algorithm I am using for synchronization is complicated and needs to be modified for the software to perform correctly. I am in the process of doing that now.
- Some of the parts were carefully cut by hand which has produced some inconsistencies (no matter how careful one is, it is still not like getting it machined). This resulted in the matching components being a bit less of a match but the dimensional differences are small enough that it shouldn't have any real affect on the thrust produced (if there is any thrust).
- The inconsistencies in the matching parts is the cause of the complexity in the modification of the synchronization algorithm.
So even though it sounds like I haven't made much progress, I actually have. I have seen everything running even if it isn't synchronized, and that is a major accomplishment in itself.
More later when there is more.
regards to all,
Blaze
|
| Report Abuse |
| Answer: |
Blaze - 03/07/2014 04:11:56
|
| | Update 9:
- got all the synchronization algorithms reworked. That was a ton of work! There are 8 synchronization algorithms. They are all complicated and they are all different and they all have to be correct for this device to work properly.
- the device runs much smoother now with less of the unnecessary torquing that was happening before uploading the revised programming code.
- maximum speed reached was 95 rpm. Maximum design speed is theoretically 300 rpm but I don't think that can be achieved with what I built by hand. Accurate and identically machined parts would be necessary to achieve 300 rpm. Probably the best I can do with what I have is in the 120 to 150 rpm range.
- synchronization is quite good between the main components for 3 out of four critical places. For some unknown reason one of the critical places is out by a few degrees. I would estimate about 5 degrees out, based on the videos I took. However, this should still be close enough to give it a try. Although synchronization is critical, where the timing is out is where it will have the least effect on the thrust.
- most important is that the revised synchronization algorithms allowed me to test the final bit of crucial theory before actually testing for thrust. That final bit of theory proved out very well indeed, exactly as predicted and I am very pleased.
- I should be able to test for thrust tomorrow. Although I am anticipating there may be a few "set up" issues that will have to be resolved to prove thrust is there, I am hoping to get enough time on the project to get an answer tomorrow. We will see.
cheers,
Blaze
|
| Report Abuse |
| Answer: |
Blaze - 04/07/2014 00:25:51
|
| | Update 10:
Success, sort of.
The max design speed for this device is 300 rpm but is likely not achievable with what I actually built. At 300 rpm the device would generate about 5.4 Newtons of thrust. The speed I am running the device at is about 90 rpm which generates about 1/2 Newton of thrust (thrust output in not linear with rpm). Unfortunately the amount of friction that has to be overcome to get the device moving is also about 1/2 Newton so you can see that there is going to be a problem. That being said the device does move, just barely, and it does move in both directions. I have turned the device 180 degrees and ran it to make sure that there wasn't an issue with a non level platform that it is moving on. The device creeps along in either direction but doesn't accelerate. So, success, but very limited success.
The platform I am using has aluminum rails (aluminum angles bolted to a board). I am using good quality ball bearings for the wheels. Because the device torques about a vertical axis, I have to also use flanges that run against the sides of the rails to prevent the device from slipping off the rails. That is where most of the friction comes from. If I could get this device running at 130 rpm I would be generating about 1 Newton which would be enough to overcome the wheel friction and should get some acceleration going besides.
The next steps are to see if I can increase the rpm the device is running at to increase thrust without shaking everything apart and also to figure out a way of reducing the wheel flange friction.
Some high speed videos of the device running will likely be required to fine tune the algorithms and increase rpm. When the device reaches about 95 rpm it is not running nearly as smoothly as it does at the lower speeds. If I can manage to fine tune the device a bit more, I should be able increase the rpm which will increase the thrust. Even a small increase in rpm would help a lot.
regards,
Blaze
|
| Report Abuse |
| Answer: |
Nitro - 04/07/2014 17:56:08
|
| | Hi Blaze,
Success, even “sort of” is better than failure. What you describe is typical of the struggle we all (well, all the ones that do the practical) have with the monster of gyrodynamics. Normally, in engineering, all you have to worry about with a rotating devices is :- can its strength sustain the centrifugal and torsional load. Chuck in a ninety degree displaced, often unexpected, unbalanced load and watch out while you do the gyro tango. Known as the Tarantula shed dance. Or - trying to avoid a dangerous, spinning, mass that is hopping around the place and seems to take forever to loose its kinetic energy, as it is also known.
It is always the way, that we need a little more power to give a little more rotational speed and a little more gyrodynamic mass with a little less non gyrodynanic mass. I am simplifying mine for the start tests (to reduce the non gyrodynamic mass) to the kind of “one shot” demonstrations I have put up for you all before. These are really “half shot” demonstrations. Two of them have been put up in the last video and will be understood by the cognoscenti as one complete cycle.
You can clearly see that it works. Hope yours does, too, Blaze.
Kind regards
NM
|
| Report Abuse |
| Answer: |
Glenn Hawkins - 07/07/2014 12:30:00
|
| | Hi Blaze,
Wouldn't it help if the rails and guides, were both vertical and horizontal magnetically repulsed? The output of thrust however much is not nearly so important as acceleration. Acceleration is everything and you know it well.
I am glad you have achieved this much. Good look in continuing. Someday everyone hopes to see your machine.
Yours,
Glenn
|
| Report Abuse |
| Answer: |
Blaze - 13/07/2014 19:24:55
|
| | Update 11:
- reworked the programming code to provide a bit smoother operation at 95 rpm which is the typical speed I have been testing at.
- resolved the wheel flange friction problem for the most part by using a much smaller flange. As is turns out, I need some flange but not much of a flange to keep it on the rails.
- movement is about 14 to 16 inches per minute, so like I said before, it is slow. Since the device is about 14 inches long, this means that it moves beyond its own dimensions in about a minute.
- made a lot of videos of the tests and varied parameters to try to improve performance.
- the videos revealed why there is no acceleration. The device stops during part of the cycle. That part of the cycle starts with a 50/50 mix of Newtonian and gyrodynamic forces and ends with 100% Newtonian forces. There is no movement during that part of the cycle, which was unexpected because that should be the part of the cycle that works best. When I figure out the solution to the problem (if there is in fact a solution) then the device should accelerate as there will always be forces propelling it during every part of the cycle.
regards,
Blaze
|
| Report Abuse |
| Answer: |
Blaze - 10/09/2014 01:43:25
|
| | I took some time off over the summer so I didn't have a chance to do much with the project but here is a brief update.
I discovered the reason the device stops during part of the cycle. It is because the timing is still not correct. The timing is out by as much as 5 to 15 degrees at times and it is not overly consistent. This leads me to thinking that the issue may be with the motor response. The motors may not be keeping up to the demand placed upon them and they lag behind during a part of the cycle. It always appears to be a lagging issue, never a leading issue. It is critical that the timing is correct for this device to work properly. I have some ideas on how to correct the problem through programming changes but in the end it may take a rebuild of the device to get rid of all the issues that are causing the problem.
regards to all,
Blaze
|
| Report Abuse |
| Answer: |
Blaze - 19/12/2014 01:44:12
|
| | Well it has been some time since my last update. Besides taking some time off to enjoy life over the summer and do some major work around the house I did manage to get a few things done on my project.
- Finished working out the physics behind my idea and unless I have made a grave error somewhere, it looks good. The physics all check out. It did take me a quite a while to figure out the how and the why of the physics. Interesting thing is that, as I suspected, none of Newton's laws are broken by the operation of the device. As required, all forces sum to zero. This thing will use a fair bit of electricity though if you want to get any real amount of thrust.
- The physics seem to dictate it is possible to generate thrust with a simpler variation to my original idea. Although it would not be as efficient it would have a lot less moving parts and therefore would likely be more reliable. I am measuring efficiency as the amount of thrust divided by the amount of power input to the system. I will likely be pursuing this alternative simpler method of propulsion.
- Now that I have worked out the math and the physics behind the operation of the device I am 95+% confident it will work. I reserve the remaining ~5% until I have a working model that moves as predicted.
- built and published a website with some very conceptual information about how the device works but absolutely no details about the construction or inner workings of the device. The website's primary purpose is to describe the possibilities of having a drive that can continually reuse the same "propellant" and what it do for space travel.
- started writing a detailed description of the functionality and operational theory of the RAM Space Engine. The format of the document is in the style of a booklet that is written in layman's terms. This booklet will be a detailed description of how the device operates, details on layout of components and how and why the device works within known physics.
That's all for now.
cheers and Merry Christmas to all,
Blaze
|
| Report Abuse |
| Add an Answer >> |
