You are here: GreaterThings.com > News > Free Energy > Directory > Gravity Motor > Ben Thomas

Ben Thomas' Attempt At Building Overbalance Wheel

Contents:
Part I: I'm building a copy of "Techstuff's" gravity wheel
   - feedback - it will never work
Part II: My Overbalance Wheel Did Not Work
   - feedback - differences noted between Ben's and Techstuff's units
Part III: Ben plans next iteration

Part I
I'm building a copy of "Techstuff's" gravity wheel

Responding to:

• Unsuccessful Replication >

  Could Not Get My Gravity Motor to Work - Jim Tanner describes unsuccessful attempt to replicate 'techstuff' Robinson's gravity motor.  Photo.

Ben Thomas Building a Copy

Feedback to Ben

----- Original Message -----

From: Jim Tanner

To: Ben Thomas

Sent: Friday, June 13, 2003 9:01 AM

Subject: Re: Techstuf's gravity motor.

Dear Ben,

Thank you for your fine note and good suggestions.

 

I am working on a martin house

and designing a Clem Engine this week.

 

May your work be enjoyable and educational.

 

I am enclosing a note from Donald Simanek.

 

Best wishes,

Jim Tanner

 

----- Original Message -----

From: "Donald E. Simanek" <dsimanek@lhup.edu>

To: "Jim Tanner" <jitanner@charter.net>

Sent: Wednesday, June 11, 2003 11:40 AM

Subject: Re: 8-sided racket-making machine

> Jim,
>
> Intersting link. It gives considerable insight into the psychology of PMM
> inventors.
>
> Nice model in your picture. The noise indicates loss of energy to sound.
> The perfect PMM would be perfectly silent. But if you put sound-deadening
> cushioning to damp the sound, that same energy will be lost to thermal
> energy in the cushioning material. Isn't nature cruel?
>
> I'm curious. Why did you build it?
>
> Now that you have built it you can run some tests. Give it a push to start
> it. Measure the initial rpm and the time it takes to stop.
>
> Now use string to tie the weights to the rim so they cannot move. Start it
> again. Measure the initial rpm and the time it takes to stop.
>
> You will find that with the weights immobilized, it will spin longer than
> with the weights free to move, assuming identical starting velocity or rpm.
> Bottom line, the moving weights don't help, they result in poorer
> performance. The best spinning wheel is the simple, unadorned, uniform,
> rigid wheel. Magnets won't help either.
>
> Yes, I've built these things too. My reason? To demonstrate these facts to
> students in physics classes, and to teach them the proper way to test
> machines. Would you believe that some students were very surprised that the
> wheels with shifting weights or magnets didn't perform better?
>
>          -- Donald
>

Part II
My Overbalance Wheel Did Not Work

Feedback

Hi

I have looked at the replication of the gravity wheel, and you can see several changes from the original wheel.

What I think need to be changed is this.
Use 8 in stead of 10 weights. Maybe you need more heavy weights, and longer and more stiff pin to hold the weight. Slow down the rotational speed, so the centripetal force will be less, and the force of gravity will be more dominant.

Regards
Svein

one of the things about replication is the need to be scrupulously accurate about the copy.  Aspects of the design may be completely misunderstood by both inventor and replicator.  e.g. earlier attempts to replicate flying machines failed because the significance of the exact shape of the wing profile was not appreciated.

I note that coiled springs as use by techstuff bend in a very odd manner - all the curvature at the fixed end and none at the weight end (look at photo).  Also note techstuff's claimed rotation of 19 rpm - this is the speed at which his wheel is most efficient (or the speed above which it is not efficient enough to overcome gravity)

Use of a pre-fab wheel might seem easy, but unless you can reduce the no. of spokes then they'll get in the way of the springs.  Perhaps 4 would be sufficient?  Also the ratio of the weight of the 8 masses to the mass of the carrying wheel is very high in TS's version.  These things cannot be ignored. I remain skeptical about TS's claims - what he says might or might not be true.  I also think that this wheel, if it works, has nothing to do with gravity but uses the fact that the springs are bent up in one way and straightened out in another.  The non-linearity causes an energy gain.

Stephen.
From: Stephen Lawrence, 8 Supanee Court, French's Road, Cambridge, England,
CB4 3LB.  Tel/Fax +44 1223 564373

Part III: Ben Plans Next Iteration

From: "Ben Thomas" <k4zep@earthlink.net>
To: "Stephen Lawrence" <stephen@lawrence.newnet.co.uk>
Cc: "Sterling D. Allan" <sterlingda@greaterthings.com>
Sent: Monday, June 16, 2003 5:46 AM
Subject: Re: "Gravity" Wheel

I agree with you in principal. [message above]  My next wheel will be built as exact a copy of what I see in the pictures.  My first try was built on how I thought the device worked but perhaps my "understanding" was incomplete!  Just keep all the praise and philosophy out of the way.  It is for my part a tremendous distraction to me when I am working in the shop for my own personal reasons.

I too noticed the way the springs bend and that is a product of the way coils load and unload.  There is a non linear way the springs bend when they open up on the upwards traveling portion of the wheel.  Most of the bending moment is very near the attachment point and this is exacerbated by the coiled construction. With the linear music wire this is spread out over the whole length of the wire linearly over rotation and time and I think results in the perfect balance in the wheel!  With the music wire, there is also a place on the other side of the rotation as the weight comes down where the weight will move from its inward position to its outward stop in 3-5 degrees almost like a snapping action.  It is possible that the coiled spring will have more snap, maybe an avalanche action.  If this avalanche action would have the weight arrive at the outward limit sooner than a "linear" normal movement, this could be what produces the excess rotational energy.  I will try to make the weight/mass ratio of the wheel even greater if I can and will use 8 weights this time.

I have the 3/8 springs that have I obtained from Lows Hardware store and I can get the 4 Oz. fishing weights locally.   Working in Acrylic is no problem as you can see from my large pulse motor unit.  The base slats that each "cell" is made of is a unknown but I plan to make it out of 1/4 in wood and will paint them with Krylon after they are complete or, I might just make them out of 1/4' Acrylic.  Notice where he cuts out a small oval part out of the wood so the spring can lay flat, I will do that too.  I won't use the "pulley" bearings as I have a good set of BB, but that should not cause any problems.  I am dubious right now, but I'll give it at least 3 tries. TS is strangely quiet, it sure would be nice if he gave a little input as a successful reproduction of his device would vindicate his machine.

Ben

See also:

Gravity Motor in Motion - photos posted by 'techstuff'.  With a nudge of the hand, it begins spinning, quickly reaching ~19 rpm. where it continues spinning until stopped by hand.

• Gravity Motors (general index)

Page posted by SDA, June 13, 2003.
Last updated November 17, 2006