PDA

View Full Version : Milkodini hybred


Ted Ewert
10-18-2007, 09:12 PM
I finally got back to working on my Milkovic oscillator again. I married it with my SG rotor and added an aspirin bottle full of lead shot for a 7 lb weight. I use the full revolution instead of the pendulum. Itís much easier to regulate and develops a lot more force. Itís been christened the Milkodini machine.
The coil gets the wheel moving fairly well, enough to go through a few oscillating points during spool up.
The secondary will start to bounce wildly at certain RPMs, even with heavy springs to dampen it, unless I hold on to it. Even grabbing on to the arm and really leaning on it doesnít completely stop it from oscillating. There is a lot of leverage when the stroke is shortened.
I have been adding a few bicycle sprockets and some chain to get the speed up on the output shaft. I have it up to a 5-1 ratio so far but I may have to go even higher.
I have a few things coming in the mail to complete the power conversion section in the secondary. Iím using a big old Farmall power takeoff pulley I bought on Ebay for a flywheel. Itís got most of itís weight (20 lbs) in the perimeter and is all steel.
For a generator I might try a DC drill motor. A 14 or 18 volt unit would work. I could run a pulley off the chuck.
This offset wheel has potential. Itís only taking about 600 ma @ 12 volts to put out a considerable amount of force in the lever. And, of course, the current stays the same regardless of the loading.
I think I have figured out an efficient way to convert a short stroke into torque. Iím going to use a couple of gearwrenches, attached to the lever, to turn the shaft. This arrangement will allow a varying range of stroke lengths to still generate torque.
On Milkovicís web site he explains that the rotation of the pendulum, or wheel in this case, and the power supplied to oscillate the lever are two distinct sources of energy. The motive force applied to the pendulum is converted to angular momentum and is stored as potential energy.
The vertical force, which transfers energy to the lever, is the result of centrifugal force. Modern science maintains that this is a ďphantomĒ force and is really the result of other forces caused by a rotating mass. Apparently this is incorrect.
As Milkovic shows, the rotation of the pendulum is independent of this force and can be maintained regardless of load in the secondary.
This is truly a mechanical force amplifier.

Cheers,

Ted

Hereís a few pics of the machine in itís initial stage. Sorry about the mess.

http://img210.imageshack.us/img210/8627/milko1gr7.jpg

http://img520.imageshack.us/img520/9093/milko5td4.jpg

http://img300.imageshack.us/img300/2033/milko4bx3.jpg

Peter Lindemann
10-19-2007, 01:56 AM
Ted,

Fantastic work. You are absolutely correct. Centrifugal force IS the secret energy source everyone has been looking for. Your MILKODINI machine can tap this very well.

Once you have the output system fully developed to harness the secondary oscillations, the trick to creating massive power gains will be about careful speed control of the wheel. You have already seen that certain speeds are capable of producing huge force multiplications. If you can figure out how to "lock" the speed of the wheel at one of these "hot spots", energy is there, like a ripe Apple, waiting to be picked.

If you are patient, and just solve one problem at a time, you will succeed where so many others have not.

Keep up the great work!!!! :thumbsup: :notworthy: :cheers: :clap:

Peter

Ted Ewert
10-19-2007, 02:10 PM
Thanks for the encouragement and kind words Peter, I really appreciate it. :D
I used the monopole wheel because it draws a constant current and, well, nobody seems to know what to do with the "free mechanical" energy this thing produces. I finally found a use other than driving a fan. ;)
The monopole wheel is not known for it's fine speed control, which will require some patience while adjustments are made. Nevertheless, significant energy is transfered to the secondary almost constantly. It doesn't seem to be a matter of "if" but rather how much energy can be drawn from the secondary per unit of time.
There is a fair amount of straight forward mechanical engineering that is required to make any machine do what we want it to. I enjoy this part of the process the most and look forward to refining and tweaking this mechanism. I already have three or four variations swimming around in my head.
I would encourage anyone who finds this concept interesting to build a simple pendulum on a lever. Once you swing the pendulum and try and steady the lever with your hand, you will instantly know what kind of power this thing is capable of.
Thanks again Peter for your explanations of this concept and how it works. I find your insights invaluable and look forward to your input whenever you're kind enough to lend it.

Cheers,

Ted

Aaron
10-20-2007, 02:54 AM
Ted,

This is some great out-of-the-box thinking! Looking forward
to the progress!

Ted Ewert
10-22-2007, 02:22 PM
I finally got the whole machine operating over the weekend. It displayed some interesting results. Iím still on a steep learning curve concerning this type of energy. What I thought I knew on Friday is not what I know today. The physical dynamics of an object in circular motion are truly fascinating.
What I have learned here is that the concept of KISS (keep it simple, stupid), needs to be the overriding consideration when designing the output system. Mechanical energy gets eaten up fast in friction and slop. Economy of motion is crucial in a machine of this type.
The way I have it set up doesnít work really well. The concept is sound, but the mechanical execution sucks. The output speed needs to be increased in one step, not two like I have. The flywheel needs to go on the final shaft, not on the primary. And finally, the deflection of the lever arm needs to be reduced.
The last point is very important. Energy is bled from the wheel momentum in, what I would estimate, an exponential rate in relation to vertical deflection. The more energy that is taken off the lever as a result of travel, the slower the wheel turns.
As in any type of motor, there is only so much useable energy per unit of time. The temptation is to take too much, which then dramatically lowers the efficiency of the mechanism. Getting to know the optimal balance will take a fair amount of experimentation.
The ideal energy transfer mechanism would be hydraulic in my opinion. Unfortunately, I have no experience in this field at this time. But learning new things is what makes life interesting.
Anyway, here are a few pics of the completed machine. I did manage to light a few ledís after burning up most of the energy in my Rube Goldberg power take-off section (take-off being the key property here).

http://img136.imageshack.us/img136/1200/widefnl5.jpg

Here is the gearing mechanism I used. I took apart an old bicycle and used the sprockets. It creates a 1-5 increase in speed (and a 5-1 reduction in torque). The flywheel weighs 20 lbs.

http://img113.imageshack.us/img113/8334/milko6qz5.jpg

I used a stepper motor as a small generator to light a few ledís. There wasnít much left by the time the generator received some rotation.

http://img113.imageshack.us/img113/7840/gearstd2.jpg

I used two gear wrenches to transform the vertical motion into rotational drive. They worked in theory, but were too lossy with mechanical slop. A clutch bearing might work better.

http://img514.imageshack.us/img514/1874/mechvalveeg0.jpg


Cheers,

Ted

Jetijs
10-22-2007, 02:52 PM
Great work Ted,
thanks for the pictures! I always enjoy looking at such stuff :thumbsup:

Peter Lindemann
10-22-2007, 03:07 PM
Ted,

Thanks for the new pics and the progress report. Building your own Constantinesco ratchet converter is awe inspiring. This shows tremendous ingenuity on your part.

Your conclusions are correct. The output system has its own "oscillatory constants" due to total mass. Getting directly to the output in one stage is necessary to prevent the introduction of "parasitic oscillations" which are the real mechanism requiring more input energy. As the mass of the output increases, the slower it wants to oscillate. This takes it out of resonance with the oscillations of the weight on the wheel. The larger the motion of the output, the more elliptical the motion of the weight on the wheel. It is the random motions of the weight through the ellipse that produces the parasitic oscillations resulting in the loss of momentum in the input. It is not a direct "loading" effect from the output. It is still an indirect effect, but the increased energy needed to keep the system going is present.

Continuous synchronization of the output and the input oscillations are required to produce force amplification.

Keep up the great work. The machine is teaching you its secrets!!!!!

Peter

Ted Ewert
10-22-2007, 08:10 PM
Thanks guys, I appreciate the words of encouragement. :D
Trying to visualize the different subsystems in relation to the whole machine is a challanging puzzle. I can see why Veljko uses such stiff arms with his pendulums. This reduces the parasitic oscillations. Using a bike frame, which is quite stiff in the vertical plane, is also a great idea of his. Veljko is da man. :notworthy:
Springs are very helpful to keep the lever arm within a small range of movement. They can be lossy though, and stiff springs are best.
I can see a trip to the scrap yard in the near future to get some old car springs for my next machine.
Lots to learn here. I want to look into a simple hydrolic system to convert a small amount of motion with a lot of force to something a little more usable. I'm seeing a wide piston with a short stroke driving a narrow piston with a longer stroke. I see a diaphragm bilge pump swimming in my future. :)

Cheers,

Ted

Ted Ewert
10-24-2007, 12:03 AM
I found an interesting quote from Bruce DePalma about the inertial properties of a rotating object:

ďExperiments performed by this author have suggested a picture of space which is perfused with a "fine substance". This concept is one which lies between the ineffability of a space-time construct such as Einstein and the tangibility of gross matter. The important part about this "fine substance" is that it is shown that this substance confers inertia on physical objects. The substance of inertia can also be shown to have the property of polarization.
Normally the inertial mass of an object is anisotropic --- that is to say, an inertial measurement performed by applying a force vector to the object and measuring the resulting acceleration; the inertial mass obtained in this measurement would be a constant independent of the direction of the applied force vector. The important discovery is that the inertial mass of a rotating object becomes polarized and anisotropic.
In terms of the real behavior of a rotating object the inertial mass is found to increase for measurements performed in the direction of the axis of rotation, and perforce the inertial mass is found to decrease for measurements made in the direction of the plane of rotation. Complete inertial polarization of the rotating object takes place when the inertial mass taken in the direction of the plane of rotation of the test object decreases to zero with increasing rotational speed.Ē

Polarization of inertial mass is something I have never heard of, but it makes sense. I wish there was a more detailed explanation of this phenomenon.
Interesting stuff!
Cheers,
Ted

Jetijs
10-24-2007, 01:03 AM
Ted,
take a look on this topic:
http://www.energeticforum.com/renewable-energy/1221-using-n-machine-generate-torqueless-electricity.html
There are some links about experiments with rotating objects and inertia :)
I think this could be helpful.
:cheers:

adam ant
10-24-2007, 04:36 PM
hydraulic piston pumps are an idea if thats the direction you want to go.
internal gear pumps are good, as well as muti-screw pumps. the latter probably using much less torque, as they are not good under much pressure.

Ted Ewert
10-24-2007, 11:33 PM
Thanks for the heads-up Jetijs. Those are some good posts. :)

hydraulic piston pumps are an idea if thats the direction you want to go.
internal gear pumps are good, as well as muti-screw pumps. the latter probably using much less torque, as they are not good under much pressure.I've been looking at pumps lately and trying to familiarize myself with the different types. Hydraulics lends itself to a lot of flexibility, although the stuff is not cheap. Ebay has a lot of pumps but I don't know them well enough yet to pick a kind to use.
These types of machines will put out a lot of pressure, but very little stroke. I need to find the right motor to turn that into a high speed rotation. Most of these motors are high torque, low speed.
I can do the same thing mechanically, but the losses are higher and there isn't as much control.
I'm going to start breaking this machine down in order to make a different type of mechanism. It will be a dual rotor with a hand crank. I'll put everything I learned with this unit to good use in the next. Stay tuned! :D
Cheers,

Ted

adam ant
10-25-2007, 03:28 PM
then i would definitely look into the multiple screw type pumps. they have the least amount of torque required, and a high output of water/fluid flow, but they do not do well under pressure. they are basically for moving and circulating water in short distances only. Sea World in San Diego has a HUGE pair of these. each screw is almost 30 feet long and perhaps 10 feet in diameter. they are used on a water ride to efficiently take the water from the resevoir at the bottom "splash pool" back up to the top of the slide. it moves way more water than any other conventional pump, but with no pressure, there is little resistance(little torque needed) other than the weight of the water.

Peter Lindemann
10-25-2007, 04:27 PM
then i would definitely look into the multiple screw type pumps. they have the least amount of torque required, and a high output of water/fluid flow, but they do not do well under pressure. they are basically for moving and circulating water in short distances only. Sea World in San Diego has a HUGE pair of these. each screw is almost 30 feet long and perhaps 10 feet in diameter. they are used on a water ride to efficiently take the water from the resevoir at the bottom "splash pool" back up to the top of the slide. it moves way more water than any other conventional pump, but with no pressure, there is little resistance(little torque needed) other than the weight of the water.

Adam,

The large Screw Pumps are a modern version of the most ancient pump there is, based on designs by the Greek Engineer Archimedes. Check out this search in Google:

Archimedes Screw - Google Search (http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=Archimedes+Screw&btnG=Google+Search) Check the first link listed at Wikipedia. (I tried to link that here, but the full URL wouldn't transfer for some reason.)

This type of pump requires a rotational input. I think Ted is looking for a type of pump that could operate from the linear oscillations of the output of his machine. My recommendation would be the basic Diaphragm Pump. Check out this citation:

Diaphragm Pumps About - Engineers Edge (http://www.engineersedge.com/pumps/diaphram_type_pump.htm)

Hope this helps.

Peter

Ted Ewert
10-25-2007, 06:41 PM
This will probably work just fine for only $30.00.
It's a diaphragm bilge pump with a capacity of 12-25 GPM.

http://us.binnacle.com/images/mainimages/24020.jpg

Peter Lindemann
10-25-2007, 07:19 PM
This will probably work just fine for only $30.00.
It's a diaphragm bilge pump with a capacity of 12-25 GPM.

http://us.binnacle.com/images/mainimages/24020.jpg

Ted,

In standard industrial usage, diaphragm pumps are usually used "back-to-back" so while one pumps, the other resets. The push stroke uses more energy because it is the one that lifts the water up. The pull stroke takes very little power to simply refill the pump chamber. By putting two pumps "back-to-back" each half stroke is a push stroke in one pump and a pull stroke in the other.

Since your Milkodini machine produces equal amounts of force both up and down, using two pumps back-to-back is the only way of harnessing the full power of the machine.

This link goes to a company that sells industrial diaphragm pumps. As you can see, all models are used in the "back-to-back" configuration.

General Application Pumps - NDP Series (http://www.yamadapump.com/ndp-series/NDP_splash.html)

I think your little bilge pump is the right one for you to get. Just get two of them and hook them together for twice the output.

Peter

adam ant
10-25-2007, 08:07 PM
the Archimedes screw, yes. i have seen these used in propulsion designs as well, they just couldnt get enough thrust out of them to be very useful.

the only reason i mentioned it is because of Ted's current design with the gears. he wouldnt have to modify it too much.

Ted Ewert
10-26-2007, 12:15 AM
Here is a nice little dual diaphragm pump, which is what I think you were referring to:
Only 3 GPM's but it has the dual action. And it's only $60.
http://us.binnacle.com/images/mainimages/24019.jpg

Those Yamada's are nice, but they run on air. :(
The bilge pump can also be a double action pump depending on how it's rigged. If you have a 5 foot draw, and then a 5 foot vertical push, it's doing the same amount of work on each stroke.
We'll see how the next machine runs and then decide.

Ted

Peter Lindemann
10-26-2007, 04:45 AM
Here is a nice little dual diaphragm pump, which is what I think you were referring to:
Only 3 GPM's but it has the dual action. And it's only $60.
http://us.binnacle.com/images/mainimages/24019.jpg

Those Yamada's are nice, but they run on air. :(
The bilge pump can also be a double action pump depending on how it's rigged. If you have a 5 foot draw, and then a 5 foot vertical push, it's doing the same amount of work on each stroke.
We'll see how the next machine runs and then decide.

Ted

Ted,

The other pump with the 12-25 GPM rating is the better unit. Just get two of them. Your Milkodini Machine has plenty of power to drive two of these. If you can lift 25 gallons of water a minute 6 feet above the unit, that is more than enough energy to keep the wheel turning. You've already proved it will turn for only 7.5 watts input!!

This is a very interesting path to take and I am fascinated to see where you go with this.

Peter