Energetic Forum  
Facebook Twitter Google+ Pinterest LinkedIn Delicious Digg Reddit WordPress StumbleUpon Tumblr Translate Addthis Aaron Murakami YouTube ONLY 13% OF SEATS AVAILABLE!!!*** 2017 ENERGY CONFERENCE ***


* NEW * BEDINI RPX BOOK & DVD SET: BEDINI RPX


Go Back   Energetic Forum > >
   

Renewable Energy Discussion on various alternative energy, renewable energy, & free energy technologies. Also any discussion about the environment, global warming, and other related topics are welcome here.

Bedini RPX Sideband Generator
Reply
 
Thread Tools
  #691  
Old 12-27-2015, 09:01 PM
armandino armandino is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2015
Posts: 24
Quote:
Originally Posted by SpecJet View Post
Armandino, Congratulations on your build, you've done a fantastic job.
I think this is the closest Skinner replication I've seen to date.

There is one area that I think you may have missed, in replicating Skinner.

Watching your video @ :09, you can see that your wobble plate is attached to the input shaft by a ball joint that allows it to stay horizontal to the ground at all times regardless of the angle of the input shaft.

If you watch the original Skinner video, @ :28, you can see that the wobble plate changes angle as the input shaft tilts and remains perpendicular to the input shaft at all times. @ :29 you can see the setscrew that holds the wobble plate to the input shaft. You can also see the input shaft spinning as the machine starts up @ :36.

I think this is a critical part of the design as the angle of the wobble plate is what creates the condition that allows the top weight to always be falling down hill.


Looking forward to seeing more videos and watching your progress.


John
thanks, I will treasure your suggestions and I am sure that will improve the performance of my mechanism
__________________
 
Reply With Quote

Download SOLAR SECRETS by Peter Lindemann
Free - Get it now: Solar Secrets

  #692  
Old 12-28-2015, 01:11 AM
Aaron's Avatar
Aaron Aaron is offline
Co-Founder & Moderator
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Washington State
Posts: 10,571
elliptical drive

Quote:
Originally Posted by armandino View Post
To Aaron

I understood your comments and thank you for valuable tips and I have concluded that I will apply an elliptical motion precisely in primary drive motor-pinion replacing the pinion with a pair of elliptical crowns wheel used on bike with its chain drive. It will be seen later on the result.
Looking forward to it.
__________________
Sincerely,
Aaron Murakami

Reply With Quote
  #693  
Old 12-31-2015, 12:25 AM
MagnaMoRo's Avatar
MagnaMoRo MagnaMoRo is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2015
Location: I live on Earth with some 7 Billion others of my kind.
Posts: 80
Quote:
Originally Posted by armandino View Post
To Aaron

I understood your comments and thank you for valuable tips and I have concluded that I will apply an elliptical motion precisely in primary drive motor-pinion replacing the pinion with a pair of elliptical crowns wheel used on bike with its chain drive. It will be seen later on the result.
Just a simple reminder that this historic image clearly shows that the upper part of the upper tilt arms were connected to brackets. Nothing is visible much more complex then that.

__________________
 
Reply With Quote
  #694  
Old 12-31-2015, 06:13 AM
Aaron's Avatar
Aaron Aaron is offline
Co-Founder & Moderator
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Washington State
Posts: 10,571
elliptical orbit

Quote:
Originally Posted by MagnaMoRo View Post
Just a simple reminder that this historic image clearly shows that the upper part of the upper tilt arms were connected to brackets. Nothing is visible much more complex then that.
BroMikey's animated gif shows it clearly: http://www.energeticforum.com/283944-post683.html

Upper input lever rotates on a swinging arm a the end of the brackets and anyone that says otherwise is spreading misinformation. Whether it is intentional or not is another story, but misinformation nonetheless.
__________________
Sincerely,
Aaron Murakami

Reply With Quote
  #695  
Old 01-01-2016, 03:52 AM
SpecJet SpecJet is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 2
Alternate design for elliptical drive

The attached pic shows an option for creating elliptical drive of the top shaft.

The red plate is driven by the electric motor.
The blue plate is driven by and synchronized with the red plate via chain and sprocket so that they are always locked, rotationally.

The drive bar is locked to the pivot on the red plate, but slides thru the pivot on the blue plate.

By changing the offset on the red plate you can adjust the length of the ellipse.

By changing the offset on the blue plate you can adjust the width of the ellipse.

A Heim joint on the end of the ellipse shaft would accommodate the top shafts change in angle and height as the top shaft moved through it's elliptical path.

Not knowing exactly how the top of the machine was put together, this is the design I had for my build as it would allow for just about any path configuration of the top shaft from extreme ellipse to circular, without having to rebuild anything to test different settings.

John
Attached Images
File Type: jpg ellipse drive, rev i.jpg (96.2 KB, 63 views)
__________________
 
Reply With Quote
  #696  
Old 01-11-2016, 05:13 PM
armandino armandino is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2015
Posts: 24
Aaron - Hello I ask you a favor. a comment on my movie calculates the power in watts with only a rotation module, is 150 W. I want this forum can compare this calculation because if this result were true, I think with two modules could already reach interesting values. I have no illusions but would be a great encouragement to continue the work.
96 Kg weight, arm length 50 cm, rotation speed 96 RPM.
__________________
 
Reply With Quote
  #697  
Old 01-28-2016, 10:19 PM
Aaron's Avatar
Aaron Aaron is offline
Co-Founder & Moderator
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Washington State
Posts: 10,571
skinner machine

Quote:
Originally Posted by armandino View Post
Aaron - Hello I ask you a favor. a comment on my movie calculates the power in watts with only a rotation module, is 150 W. I want this forum can compare this calculation because if this result were true, I think with two modules could already reach interesting values. I have no illusions but would be a great encouragement to continue the work.
96 Kg weight, arm length 50 cm, rotation speed 96 RPM.
Hi, I only just now saw this. I apologize for not responding before.

Do you have a link to the video?
__________________
Sincerely,
Aaron Murakami

Reply With Quote
  #698  
Old 01-29-2016, 10:09 AM
shylo shylo is offline
Silver Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 594
Here's the link https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ib3ZATuJZis
Hope that worked.
Hi armandino, Very nice work , could you take some pictures of the various stages top middle and bottom and post?
I think with just one set of weights it won't show any gain but with all four ....?
A lot of work though.
Thanks for sharing.
artv
__________________
 
Reply With Quote
  #699  
Old 01-30-2016, 07:36 PM
armandino armandino is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2015
Posts: 24
hello, thank you, I'm proceeding in this way in an attempt to force consistent with amplification of four modules. for now all I have shared is the movie on you tube.
Armandino
__________________
 
Reply With Quote
  #700  
Old 04-26-2016, 04:44 AM
Danny B Danny B is online now
Platinum Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: L.A. Ca.
Posts: 3,343
Rpm

Armandino, you've done great work. I'm getting ready to jump in to a Skinner replication very soon. After I finish my wood-gas truck.
I believe that Skinner ran at 60 rpm. You are 50% higher with what appears to be a larger radius. Here is an interesting vid; https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pw3lpFvuzps
I believe that the acceleration of gravity is 33 feet per second squared. If you run at a high enough rpm, the acceleration of gravity is too slow to make the weight fall before the angle of the shaft changes to an unfavorable position.
You have a larger radius so, a larger diameter. The surface speed of a larger circumference is going to require a slower rotation so that the weight has time to accelerate to the lowest position.
Skinner built with 4 smaller units rather than 1 larger unit.
You can picture a very large unit running at high rpm. Both weights would be thrown to the outer limit of travel and stay there.
The upper weight is heavy and fat with a large travel circle. It is thrown outwards with centripetal? force and doesn't have to FALL anywhere.
The lower weight is tall and skinny with a relatively small travel circle. It is driven strictly by gravity. The acceleration of gravity is the only thing that contracts the tendency of centripetal force to pin it to it's outer limit of rotation.
That is why the lower weight is tucked in close. It is tall to keep a heaver weight as close to the center as possible. The center axis has reinforcement because any flexing will cause funny oscillations.
Skinner could have gone to a bigger center axle BUT, the upper weight would have to be bigger to flip it around by reaction. A tubular titanium axle would be very nice to keep the weight ratio as high as possible between the axle and the upper weight. Yes, the top of the lower weight can be solidly linked to the shaft without any ill effects.
An IC piston engine is limited by the feet per minute that a piston can tolerate. It appears that the Skinner device has the same type of limit. The bigger the device (circle of travel), the slower it must turn.
Since bearing drag fights the acceleration of gravity, the lower weight must rotate as freely as possible.
Disclaimer, all of the above may be total bull pucky.
__________________
 
Reply With Quote
  #701  
Old 04-26-2016, 02:14 PM
Danny B Danny B is online now
Platinum Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: L.A. Ca.
Posts: 3,343
part deux

I'm looking over what I wrote last night. It mostly looks OK. The upper weight is falling BUT, it is a different animal than the lower weight. I only started looking at the Skinner device a couple of days ago and it takes me a while to get up to speed.
The upper weight is trying to continually reposition the axle and it isn't particularly harmed by momentum. The lower weight is trying to stay in one place and it doesn't want momentum. The upper weight can describe a larger circle without causing problems.
IF gravity is a constant,,, IF we allow that Skinner worked out the variables, then we can use the velocity of the "travel circle" of the c/g of the lower weight as a CONSTANT.
Any 60 rpm Skinner device will have the same distance from the c/l of the axle to the c/l of the lower weight. If you double the circumference of the travel circle, you must reduce the rpm by 50%
You could theoretically build a large machine that ran at low speed and connect it to a Faraday disc. The Skinner device would be a good match for an overshot water wheel, in that it requires constant rpm.

Skinner built with the lower weight circle just below the upper weight circle. This too is probably optimized. He needed the lower weight very heavy BUT, compact and tucked in close to the axle. That dictated that it be tall. The weights are as close as possible to get whatever dynamic balance he could find. Aaron pointed out that there is some "give" at the top pivot.
this reminds me of a trebuchet. A trebuchet on wheels works better than one that is solid on the ground. A trebuchet is weights and levers. If I recall correctly, a trebuchet does a transfer of momentum and needs some movement of the main axle to work correctly.
The lower weight could easily be made of lead. I've made weights like this before. First stop is the tire store to buy old tire weights. I used a tin can with a piece of EMT in the center. Just pour the weight and slip it over the center shaft of the weight bar. This allows the weight to be tucked in just a bit closer at it's max O.D.
The upper weight is a fixed quantity. The lower weight is "trimmed" with small weights to minimize the shaking from balance problems.

The starting point is to use the stills from Pathe to obtain all the dimensions for an accurate copy.
1. c/l to c/l of the lower weight & long axle
2. O.D. and height of the weights,,, to get the proportions and weights.
3. c/l to c/l of the upper weight to it's pivot point(s)

The only way to scale up this device is to build it taller OR slower. Skinner built it as a quad to get around this limitation. We can probably assume that he built a LOT of variations to arrive at the height of his final design. The height can be increased if the rigidity of the axle is maintained without raising the weight of the long axle.
A large-diameter, tubular titanium axle could have a tungsten weight bolted right to it.
I'm going to go see what is happening with the economy.
__________________
 
Reply With Quote
  #702  
Old 04-27-2016, 02:09 PM
artoj's Avatar
artoj artoj is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Sydney, Australia
Posts: 169
Past posts

Hi Danny,

Here are a few of my past posts that might help you with accurate sizes and dimensions.

http://www.energeticforum.com/257187-post94.html
http://www.energeticforum.com/257297-post100.html
http://www.energeticforum.com/257321-post104.html
http://www.energeticforum.com/257489-post122.html
http://www.energeticforum.com/257597-post135.html
http://www.energeticforum.com/257923-post180.html

I have completed most of the drawings and was ready to start a Kickstarter for replication, when I noticed the general interest had waned and the factory space and engineering support was not as forthcoming as I hoped.
I have a 120 page PDF file that I might release, when I have time to complete the complete engineering and mathematical analysis. It looks like my time has been occupied by getting my bills paid and home repairs, not much time to complete this work soon. I have no time limit to when I will finish the work, so another few more years does not bother me.
I am still working on projects I started 30 years ago, writing, music and art also are long term items, I hope to get all my work finished just in time for my own funeral. Regards Arto
__________________
 
Reply With Quote
  #703  
Old 04-27-2016, 03:38 PM
Danny B Danny B is online now
Platinum Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: L.A. Ca.
Posts: 3,343
will work for dimensions

Arto, do you have a preliminary design for your casket?
Thanks very much for the info and links. I'll look later in the day. I don't need any kickstarter to build this. I have everything clear in my head about the layout. i just don't have solid parameters for weights and dimensions. The Skinner device is like the school girl motor. There is a lot more going on than is apparent at first glance.
The weight is falling down a ramp. A body falls vertically at 33 ft. sq. The ramp isn't vertical so, the speed of the fall is proportional to the angle of the ramp. The max speed of rotation must be maintained slightly below this speed.

I'm not perfectly clear on the top pivot yet. I need to know/figure the precession of the top weight relative to the lower weight. Quick logic says that it should be 90 deg.
The more help that I get on dimensions of the original device, the faster I'll have a replication. The finance, materials, engineering and building don't present any impediments to me. I just need parameters.
__________________
 
Reply With Quote
  #704  
Old 04-28-2016, 07:35 AM
mksboysal mksboysal is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 13
Skinner Replication

Hi guys,
The machine that are being discussed here I built it, it took me around four months to come to this completion, not finished yet. Enjoy the pictures. Frame size is 5 ft by 5 ft and the height is around 7 + ft. The lower weight is 340 lbs and the upper weight is around 75 lbs. As you can see the upper weight it's totally adjustable, you can slide back and forth if you want to. The driver motor is a 3 ph 1/8HP with a 56:1 gear ratio planetary gear it is controlled with 1/4 HP VFD drive. When I turn this thing on it's scary to stay close by! So I stand back 5,6 ft away when that 340 lbs rotates at 33 rpm or little higher you have to respect the "force in motion" under no load prime mover motor consumes 80 to 90 watts, the output power is still being tested!!! During the operation the frame sways a little but I have plans to make it firmer by installing cross braces all around the frame. Come along tool is temporarily hold the lower weight and does a good job with it. 90 decree weight lowers the input power close to 25 to 30 % anyway if you have a ? or comment drop me a line. If some of you need help? I maybe be available to help you design yours.
Attached Images
File Type: jpg SANY8322.JPG (370.2 KB, 57 views)
File Type: jpg SANY8284.JPG (322.2 KB, 46 views)
File Type: jpg SANY8323.JPG (449.3 KB, 57 views)
File Type: jpg SANY8293.JPG (358.2 KB, 49 views)
__________________
 
Reply With Quote
  #705  
Old 04-29-2016, 04:12 AM
Danny B Danny B is online now
Platinum Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: L.A. Ca.
Posts: 3,343
The best mechanical OU devices seem to shake like a demented banshee

mksboysal, that is quite a construct. I believe you are in Hawaii. I'm sure that it is more difficult to find parts there.
Artoj has extensive plans for a replication. Until I have a good working model, I don't want to multiply problems by 4. I plan to build a single device. I'm going to build a copy, not a replication. Iíll do as you did and just use an off the shelf reduction motor. The advantage of building a quad device is that you should be able to cancel out some of the huge momentum swings.
Armandino bolted his device to the wall.
At 1:02, this device has a very cute 4-gear system; https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Bp4t...ature=youtu.be
IF I find the time to work on this and IF I am successful, then, I will look at making the much larger quad machine. Good luck on your project.
__________________
 
Reply With Quote
  #706  
Old 04-29-2016, 07:25 AM
mksboysal mksboysal is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 13
Quote:
Originally Posted by Danny B View Post
mksboysal, that is quite a construct.
Artoj has extensive plans for a replication. Until I have a good working model, I don't want to multiply problems by 4. I plan to build a single device. I'm going to build a copy, not a replication. Iíll do as you did and just use an off the shelf reduction motor. The advantage of building a quad device is that you should be able to cancel out some of the huge momentum swings.
Armandino bolted his device to the wall.
At 1:02, this device has a very cute 4-gear system; https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Bp4t...ature=youtu.be
IF I find the time to work on this and IF I am successful, then, I will look at making the much larger quad machine. Good luck on your project.
Danny, it was said that: Great things are done more through courage than through wisdom. Applies to building this machine, some errors may show up but easily solvable. Building a copy and not a replica it's good thing. For the reason that you may have a resource for building materials and parts that might be free to get it or salvage it. Your comment on building a " quad device is that you should be able to cancel out some of the huge momentum swings" Great idea, William Skinner must have thought of that too, that's why his 5th generation machine the 1 min. clip that is available today works so smooth.
"Armandino bolted his device to the wall" excellent idea, if you have a place to make it permanent installation, you can resolve a lot's challenges by doing it so.
__________________
 
Reply With Quote
  #707  
Old 04-30-2016, 01:42 AM
Danny B Danny B is online now
Platinum Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: L.A. Ca.
Posts: 3,343
Mehmet, I'm pretty sure that Skinner made a lot of attempts before, he got his final design. He probably noticed the shaking very early. I'm finalizing design ideas,, in my head for the moment.
Plan "A" is it now stands is; build a 100 gallon water tank with an open top. From there, attach 4 uprights of box steel tubing. Then, 2 parallel steel plates to hold the 2 lower bearings.
The weight of the water will keep it from scooting around the shop. I'll use a variable speed motor for the drive. The output shaft, under the lower plate, will be connected to a water-wheel. I have a General Radio strobotach so, I can check rpm. I can use a dummy load to check adjustments.
I'm lining up constant-velocity U-joints,,, a must https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikiped...nimated%29.gif

Tracta joint; https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikiped...city_Joint.jpg
Tripot joint; http://mechanicaldesign.asmedigitalc...55504jmd1.jpeg
I'm leaning towards the tripot joint because I believe that it will take more weight than the Rzeppa joint. The Rzeppa joint is what you see on the front axle of your car. I'll slowly work my way up to the top. I don't have a very clear picture of the top yet.
__________________
 

Last edited by Danny B; 04-30-2016 at 03:37 AM. Reason: more info
Reply With Quote
  #708  
Old 05-01-2016, 07:19 PM
Danny B Danny B is online now
Platinum Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: L.A. Ca.
Posts: 3,343
dimensions,,, again

Artoj, I have your dimensions on the links that you kindly sent. You give a weight / size of ; 5 3/4 X 7 for the upper weight and 4 X 33 for the lower weight. If you look at :32 in the vid, Skinner has his hand on the upper weight, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ObdM7VzE18A
He isnít a midget so, the weight is larger than 5 3/4 X 7
The lower weight also seems bigger than 4 X 33.
Can I safely assume that your plans are for a scaled down device? I'm probably going to start buying materials next week.

I might have to postpone for a bit, though.
For some unknown reason, Flight 33 Productions wants to use my wood gas truck for a feature that they are getting ready to shoot.
http://i8.photobucket.com/albums/a28...psy4bz31ux.jpg
Flight 33 Productions
No rest for the wicked.
EDIT, the photobucket picture for my woodgas truck is now listed as an attack page. WTF
__________________
 

Last edited by Danny B; 06-05-2016 at 10:27 PM. Reason: ???????
Reply With Quote
  #709  
Old 05-02-2016, 01:44 AM
artoj's Avatar
artoj artoj is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Sydney, Australia
Posts: 169
No Midget

Danny, Skinner is 66.36" in height, I drew a 3D/perspective computer projection to a resolution of about 1/8". All materials, bolts, pulleys, motors, shaft etc conform to the dimensions as presented. I was replicating all period materials as available in 1925-1939. I am an Artist and this was a way of clearing the speculation as to any mystery, as I see it, there is no more hidden aspects. Regards Arto.
__________________
 
Reply With Quote
  #710  
Old 05-13-2016, 12:19 AM
Danny B Danny B is online now
Platinum Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: L.A. Ca.
Posts: 3,343
A few quotes

There seems to be some difference of opinion as to whether the shafts/weights move in a circle or in an ellipse..

"The "gravity power machine" stricKen about two weeks ago consists of a steel framework containing four shafts controlled by on the eccentrics. "
"controlled by on the eccentrics. On each shaft is an off-balanced weight which Skinner said was "about the secret of the whole thing." He explained that the shafts, turning in the eccentrics, "
"The one-eighth horsepower electric motor. Skinner said, was used only for power to turn the eccentrics and the "gravity power machine 'provided the power"
"He explained that the shafts turning in the eccentrics, moved the weights in a circular motion at 60 revolutions"
" of the weights to new centers of gravity caused by the changing positions of the shafts. The weights do not actually fall. The one-eighth horsepower electric motor, Skinner said, was used only for power to turn the eccentrics"

If you look at the bias on the gimbals, you can see that they are much longer than they are wide. This would suggest an eccentric rather than a circle. There is no reason to use his style gimbal. The new stuff is much better. Though the gimbal does carry the whole weight of the upper counter weight.

My lower weight is 4" X 42" steel bar stock. I'm still working out the ratio of upper to lower weight.
__________________
 
Reply With Quote
  #711  
Old 05-18-2016, 07:32 AM
3758 3758 is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: near Kansas City, Missouri, USA
Posts: 7
My latest / updated / revised / amended "Replication Investigation" video

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mEat-8zOjlE
__________________
 
Reply With Quote
  #712  
Old 05-18-2016, 06:19 PM
Aaron's Avatar
Aaron Aaron is offline
Co-Founder & Moderator
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Washington State
Posts: 10,571
Skinner Machine Elliptical Input

Elliptical input:

https://youtu.be/JolNozy8UEY?t=34m52s

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lA9wHJsFzm4
__________________
Sincerely,
Aaron Murakami

Reply With Quote
  #713  
Old 05-18-2016, 09:17 PM
BroMikey's Avatar
BroMikey BroMikey is online now
Platinum Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 4,883
Thanks for the Video work.










__________________
 
Reply With Quote
  #714  
Old 05-20-2016, 01:34 AM
Danny B Danny B is online now
Platinum Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: L.A. Ca.
Posts: 3,343
Thanks guys for the excellent video work. Huge improvement. It definitely looks like the upper shafts move in an elliptic. BUT, I'm somewhat at a loss. Starting at 7:45 in this vid, you can clearly see the 4 shafts. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mEat-8zOjlE
3 are moving and one appears to be stationary. I'm not trying to start an argument. I am in the process of building the full size machine with the full size weights.
Duh, the 4th shaft is hiding behind the closest shaft. What i thought to be a stationary, immobile shaft is a highlighted reflection off the corner upright member.

EDIT, at :50 you can clearly see that all 4 are moving; https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mEat-8zOjlE
At 9:01 to 9:17 you get a good view of the bottom side of the weight. It kinda looks like the bottom has holes in it. At 9:11, it appears that there is some sort of cross plate on the bottom of the upper weight. Is the upper weight solid?
The upper weight has a much smaller support bar than the lower weight? I'm at the point of fabricating the "translation plate" Does anybody have a good guess at dimensions?
__________________
 

Last edited by Danny B; 05-20-2016 at 02:33 PM. Reason: more confusion
Reply With Quote
  #715  
Old 05-21-2016, 05:06 AM
Danny B Danny B is online now
Platinum Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: L.A. Ca.
Posts: 3,343
hollow weights?

I'm playing around with my piece of solid round bar stock. It's 4" X 42". I'm convinced that the weights are NOT solid bar. There is only a bottom mount for a piece of steel weighing 175 lbs. The bottom mount is just too flimsy to stand up to the rotation that he uses. The top of the tall weight has a small rounded, raised lip and some kind of small protrusion in the center. I believe that the center protrusion is an attaching point for lifting.

In the vid, he moves the upper weight with his fingertips. I just don't believe that it is solid bar. Also, it swings back on it's own in a manner that tells me that the mass isn't all that high. At 9:01 to 9:17, it looks like the base of the upper weight is perforated with big holes.
So ???
__________________
 
Reply With Quote
  #716  
Old 05-21-2016, 07:07 PM
Danny B Danny B is online now
Platinum Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: L.A. Ca.
Posts: 3,343
Concrete weights

Here is part 1 of a very interesting replication. He uses concrete weights and by part 4, he has to put a tether at the top of the weight. He works his way up to a system that goes from a circle to an ellipse. Part 5 wouldn't load for me so, I don't know the final step of his progress.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=00xIxEQqRsk
__________________
 
Reply With Quote
  #717  
Old 05-28-2016, 04:04 PM
armandino armandino is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2015
Posts: 24
2^ step replica Gravity Power Assisted

Hello, I see that the interest in such a complex machine like the one designed and built by Skinner, has not decreased. The tests and simulations of many of you encouraged me to continue my experience. According to video I posted previously, I started building my machine with one element evaluating the multiple mechanical reactions caused by the movement of a rotating weight and, believe me, they are very strong. For this reason I do not approve the experiments in a closet for clothes where mechanical support is appreciable but I think it dangerous for the operator. I continued the construction of my machine with the addition of three other rotating modules to the first existing. I thought much the pressures that are generated for which I have synchronized the rotation of the top as opposed to coppia.- in this way get a counterbalancing of the rotation of the axes, and so will be well for lower weights. Each sistemma turns 120Kg !!, you've got it right, in total will be 480 kg, offset. I think I have played well the thought of Skinner who showed us a mechanical system that is standing alone. Head a mechanical bypass throttle system I inserted after the first transmission that inprime the boards a boost of 120 į that, I ricoldarlo to those who have not considered in their implementation, are the Archimedean levers that instead of traditionally move with a vertical movement, in this case carrying out a rotation that allows to multiply its power output without reducing the revolutions. then I show you the 3rd stage where even the lower weights will run synchronized oscillations hopefully contained.
Cordial greetings and ....... do not be evil, this BITES machinery.
__________________
 
Reply With Quote
  #718  
Old 05-28-2016, 04:06 PM
armandino armandino is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2015
Posts: 24
Video replica Skinner Machine

sorry I forgot to enter the video link.
good vision and let's hear

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HJMXDB5bF7o
__________________
 
Reply With Quote
  #719  
Old 05-30-2016, 06:20 PM
soundiceuk's Avatar
soundiceuk soundiceuk is offline
Silver Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Posts: 969
That's an impressive replication!

You must be the first to go for all 4 sections.

Is it a full size replication?
__________________
 
Reply With Quote
  #720  
Old 05-31-2016, 08:44 AM
armandino armandino is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2015
Posts: 24
machinery characteristics

Quote:
Originally Posted by soundiceuk View Post
That's an impressive replication!

You must be the first to go for all 4 sections.

Is it a full size replication?
Hello,
thanks to you I appreciate your compliments. It is a full size. The dimensions of the machinery? height of 3.20 meters x 2.50 x 2.50. I'm making some size different from W. Skinner machinery. I avoided that the lower weights during rotation are detected by the protection of the frame. The distance of the weights from its axis is of 50cm. That's why I got this width. I wanted to avoid an unwanted blow to the legs that would have crushed. The material I used is C45 steel, the dimensions vary depending on the specific use in the machinery. But ...... how much effort to assemble everything !!
__________________
 
Reply With Quote
Reply

Tags
1939, 1939 gravity power, energy, force, free energy, gravity, gravity power, lift, overunity, power, weight, william f skinner, william skinner, skinner, william

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



Please consider supporting Energetic Forum with a voluntary monthly subscription.

For One-Time Donations, use admin@ this domain > energeticforum.com

Choose your voluntary subscription

All times are GMT. The time now is 03:30 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Search Engine Optimisation provided by DragonByte SEO v1.4.0 (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2017 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
Shoutbox provided by vBShout v6.2.8 (Lite) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2017 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
2007-2015 Copyright - Energetic Forum - All Rights Reserved

Bedini RPX Sideband Generator

Tesla Chargers