|
Main Forum Page
|
The Gyroscope Forum |
3 May 2024 13:28
|
|
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: |
Sandy Kidd |
| Subject: |
Clarification of Terminology |
| Question: |
Not so much a question, more of an explanation.
A few questions have been raised with reference to the terminology I have been using throughout this site.
I will attempt to explain what I mean by the terminology used.
Please do not feel offended if I over-simplify, and of course correct me if I’m wrong.
The “Free Lunch” scenario
I shall expand if I may, just a little bit on Nitro’s explanation
It is reasonable to assume that no effort is required to physically move a gyroscopic system to a different position (logically a more elevated position), whether it be a passive gyroscope in precession mode, or an accelerated system, (see below) in saturation mode.
The intention is to reap the benefit of this action, somehow, on the return part cycle, which as Nitro has already stated has to be a decelerating motion.
Except in special cases, in accelerated systems, once the gyroscope has entered the saturation zone, it becomes very hard to control, and more often than not, no longer any use for our purposes.
Gyroscopic System – A gyroscope suitably mounted on a shaft, rod, arm, whatever and mounted such that it can be made to rotate around a fixed point (axis of system rotation), whilst being free to move in the vertical plane (fulcrum).
The system includes all attachments to the gyroscope and its support elements.
Accelerated Mass - Assume the system is subject to radial acceleration, but the gyroscope itself is not being rotated, the accelerated mass of the gyroscope and mounting shaft can be calculated. The output for any rotation speed will be constant for that particular speed.
Accelerated Systems - As above but this time with the gyroscope rotating.
As soon as the gyroscope starts to rotate and develops torque there is a reduction in the accelerated mass of the system i.e. the gyroscope, its mounting shaft and anything else attached to it.
This reduction is directly proportion to the torque developed by the gyroscope and if the rotation speed of the gyroscope is continuously increased, will continue to be reduced until the “saturation point” is reached. At this point there is no longer any accelerated mass left in the system, as the gyroscope has progressively and effectively transferred all of the rest mass of the system to act vertically downwards through the axis of system rotation.
No further input into the system will alter the outcome except to increase the inward acceleration rate of the gyroscope, hence “saturation”.
Note. There is no change to the overall weight of the system throughout.
Every system at a particular rotation speed will have a unique saturation point, that is of course providing the gyroscope can develop enough torque to reach it.
The problem I find with all of this, is that people cannot get to grips with the fact that a mass can be “apparently” rapidly rotated in a circular path, without actually being accelerated.
How would Sir Isaac handle this one, folks?
Hope this helps.
Sandy Kidd
|
| Date: |
15 April 2005
|
| report abuse
|
|
Answers (Ordered by Date)
|
| Answer: |
Victor Geere - 16/04/2005 17:02:03
| | | >> a mass can be “apparently” rapidly rotated in a circular path, without actually being accelerated.
Sandy,
are you referring to precession here?
Victor
|
| Report Abuse |
| Answer: |
Sandy Kidd - 18/04/2005 07:33:46
| | | Morning Victor,
If it had been a passive system in precession mode, I would say yes.
However I had an accelerated system more in mind when I made that statement.
There is of course no precession in an accelerated system, therefore the system would have to be rotating in the saturation zone.
Sandy.
|
| Report Abuse |
| Answer: |
Victor Geere - 18/04/2005 14:29:48
| | | On the one hand you are saying :
>> a mass can be “apparently” rapidly rotated in a circular path, without actually being accelerated.
and then you say :
>> However I had an accelerated system more in mind when I made that statement.
If it can be rapidly rotated without being accelerated, yet it is an accelerated system where precesion has been ruled out how did it become an accelerated system? Can you please explain a bit more.
|
| Report Abuse |
| Answer: |
Sandy Kidd - 21/04/2005 06:26:36
| | | Hello again Victor,
An accelerated system can be rotated at high or low speed.
Likewise the gyro can be rotated at high or low speed.
Assume the system is rotating at a middle of the road, fixed speed.
As I have previously stated with the gyroscope not rotating, maximum accelerated mass will be developed in the system.
However if the gyroscope is run up, as the gyroscope’s rotational speed is increased the accelerated mass of the system, is diminished accordingly.
There is a point where, if the gyroscope is rotated fast enough, will remove, cancel out, whatever, all the accelerated mass in the system.
At this point, which I call the saturation point, there is no mass left in the system.
The gyroscope, will for a short time rotate at the same geometric position, i.e. there has been no visible change to the system but there is no mass left to accelerate.
The gyroscope will then proceed to accelerate inwards towards the axis of system rotation.
This is about as close as it gets in similarity, to passive system precession.
Therefore whilst there “appears” to be a mass in that system, and that system is being rapidly rotated we know that the “apparent” mass is not being subjected to any acceleration.
Hope this helps,
Sandy.
|
| Report Abuse |
| Answer: |
Victor Geere - 21/04/2005 09:00:14
| | | Thank you for the explanation Sandy.
I tried to look for you mail "no mass cannot be accelerated" but couldn't find it. Can you please send me the question id as displayed in the address bar of the browser. e.g.
http://www.gyroscopes.org/forum/questions.asp?id=380
The question id of this thread is 380.
Regards
Victor
|
| Report Abuse |
| Answer: |
Sandy Kidd - 21/04/2005 09:55:53
| | | Victor
Question ID is of that thread is 180, which followed Question ID of thread 173, Same topic, same argument.
Sandy.
|
| Report Abuse |
| Answer: |
Victor Geere - 21/04/2005 10:22:03
| | | I agree with your observation that mass seems to disapear along with angular momentum and centrifugal force.
I also don't think that Newton will be able to handle this one with his laws as they are.
Something that is well known to frustrate Newton's laws is E=M.C.C (M C Squared) (The energy required to accelerate an object to the speed of light is equal to the mass of that object M, times the square of the speed of light C). (Mass increases with the energy applied when aproaching the speed of light and the energy required approaches infinity) With no mass the energy required to accelerate the gyroscope to the speed of light is zero. This is obviously not true for your observation.
Therefore the gyroscope has to have mass acting in the direction of centrifugal force. This is also contrary to observation and false. One would expext that the axis of the gyroscope would approach a vertical position pushing the gyroscopes towards the centre of rotation given the system rotation. This is also contrary to observation. The only plausable explanation then is that centrifugal force and precession are both pressent but acting in oposite directions, cancelling each other out.
|
| Report Abuse |
| Answer: |
Sandy Kidd - 22/04/2005 06:32:58
| | | Victor,
Consider an active or accelerated system
If the gyroscope drive, mounting, support shaft is mounted in line with its fulcrum, and not offset as many of my devices are, the gyroscope will, if it can, strive to reach a position where its rotation axis is directly in line with the system rotation axis.
This is the point of least action.
This it will strive to do once all the system mass has been neutralised and is now free to accelerate in an arc to that point.
Because of mechanical limitations imposed on the movement of the gyroscopes in offset systems, this action obviously cannot happen.
Yes Victor it is all a balancing act of gyroscopic torque versus accelerated mass in this case the torque is sufficient to overwhelm it.
I think we can leave Einstein out of this at the moment, he will have enough trouble from gyroscopes, sooner rather than later..
The gyroscopic torque (however inspired) is attempting to turn the gyroscope inwards towards the system, against the normal radial acceleration of its mass.
Sandy.
|
| Report Abuse |
| Answer: |
Victor Geere - 30/04/2005 18:11:10
| | | Einstein did have a problem with gyroscopes. He thought that a spinning gyroscope would fall slower than one that is not spinning. He would have been right if Galileo didn't prove that masses with different weights fall at the same speed. Assuming that Einstein was talking about a gyroscope in precession mode, which has a reduced weight.
I called Einstein's help in to explain to you that, if mass had been neutralised, the gyroscope could precess at the speed of light. It is weight that is neutralised.
Further, a precessing gyroscope is being accelerated, by gravity turned on it's side by the now famous "90 degree effect" of the gyroscope.
|
| Report Abuse |
| Answer: |
dave brown - 14/08/2005 21:47:57
| | | Sandy, question about the make-up of your systems.
I came up with the idea not realizing that yours were here, and so similar. :P to me. Anyway.
Maybe a difference.
If you look at video #6 of the lecture, start at 1min. 10secs.
It is a very rigid system. Are yours?
Take that same system but slide that one gyro's bar so the gyro is farthest out from the support. Then add a few more. Then spin the base, how fast I don't know... Fast!
- I'd assume the motors driving them would have to be close to the support.
Why have them so far out? Look at gyro videos #4, 7, 8 and watch the support. Like it has less friction / down-force.
- Now look at lecture #10 and see how easily the child holds up the weight, then again at the heretic when he deals with the much larger one. And now, back at #6 lect. at 1:05, he definately had to stop it, there was no "see how easy that stopped" for that part.
Is that your project in the heretic video? I was thinking put 4 gyro.s, heavy, get rid of the V support and replace by a terra-firma one just to get it going, a big circle. May need bearing'ed wheels on the shafts for that. and make the shafts longer, and very rigid.
- why far out? back to video #8 and the reason that little tower fell over in the lecture. The further out the gyro is, the less down force seems to be exerted, or up force, as you see fit.
I really want to see this thing fly.
|
| Report Abuse |
| Answer: |
dave brown - 14/08/2005 22:10:33
| | | Hmmm, maybe a slight alteration after watching lect. #12 from 1:10.
We may need a single pivot as shown in the video.
I believe that the energy required to support a gyroscope is split between the pivot point and the orbital size and angle.
What I'm getting at is, applying enough orbital energy that the upward force at the pivot point becomes negative.
- I believe you talk about this when you say saturation.
Well, I can't believe that I got this far. if this doesn't work, there is no way that I'm at the end. Always more steps, more considerations.
And I'm mistaken on another point, sorta. He does mention there is no force required in the #12 video.
|
| Report Abuse |
| Answer: |
dave brown - 15/08/2005 14:03:26
| | | ok, lets complicate our machine a bit.
make two levels of 2, or more, gyros.
the support post would need an inner post to spin-up the upper level, while the lower one is decelerating, as you say.
- both would need restrictions, as you say, to not go too high(vertical) or too low(parallel).
We need a way to stop the base from spinning, either helicopter style tail rotor or for now, some posts attached to scale in grooves or holes on base.
|
| Report Abuse |
| Answer: |
Sandy Kidd - 16/08/2005 12:34:02
| | | Dear Dave Brown,
I do admire your enthusiasm, but I don’t think any of your ideas would deliver any thrust. No I do not think that I am the “God Almighty” in passing judgement, it is just that I personally over many years have tried just about every and any combination of gyro set up imaginable, and apart from a precious few seen nothing.
My latest posting in answer to Dave S, “Freedom to think” just about sums it all up.
To the BBC “Heretics” program.
The first machine of mine on the “Heretics” video was my very first device which Eric Laithwaite knew delivered the thrust I claimed.
He witnessed this on several occasions.
What upset me was the fact that he congratulated me “on camera” when the thing worked for the umpteenth time at the Imperial College, then denied it
So much for integrity and credibility.
My Australian successfully lab tested devices were conveniently omitted from this program. The laboratory results were private property but well advertised in the book, and obviously deliberately ignored.
OK Laithwaite was the Heretic not myself, but a bit of truth and accuracy would have helped.
The other device of mine shown on this program, was only one of 3 machines demonstrated to BAE.
Do not know how they got it, but I was less than happy the way it had been handled by BAE.
This one I do admit did not do a lot on test, but the statement that Kidd’s machine (machines) showed no thrust became the subject of a claim against the BBC for severely biased, erroneous, and selective reporting.
(A bit like my “Tomorrow’s World”. slaughtering. Also BBC).
I lost the case when an “expert in these matters” chosen by the BBC of course, and probably well paid for his personal but worthless opinion stated that I must be mistaken.
I do not mind at all being labelled a crank, but I do take exception to idiot.
In the final analysis if they had admitted the truth, this would have vindicated Laithwaite and his claims even though he himself never succeeded.
Maybe that’s what they did not want.
Regards
Sandy Kidd
|
| Report Abuse |
| Add an Answer >> |
|
