top

Possible rotational solution

Post new topic Reply to topic FizzX.org Forum Index | Inventor's Corner    Page 1 of 1

Fri May 04, 2007 3:04 am PostPost subject: Possible rotational solution
WaBoy
Contributor
Contributor


Joined: 29 Apr 2007
Posts: 34
Location: Pacific NW - US/Canada

Reply with quote

Cruising the net, my wanderings brought me to an unusual website in Norway: http://www.galleri-finsrud.no/index.html. Mr. Reidar Finsrud is an artist/sculptor of some repute who claims to have built a perpetual motion machine (PMM) back in 1996 and has been observed by the public to operate for at least a month without external intervention. The pictures on the website show a somewhat complex machine that, to me at least, seems mechanically inefficient. Further searches led me to KeelyNet.com: http://www.keelynet.com/energy/finsrud.htm, a website whose veracity, in my opinion, is suspect. I include it here only because it contains a very simplified drawing of Finsrud’s machine.

The mechanical sculpture consists of an iron ball rolling around a circular track attracted by a nearby horseshoe magnet until the ball is nearly in contact and the magnet is lifted out of the way. The kinetic energy of the ball carries it past the magnet’s location and toward the next magnet when the first magnet is restored to its original position. This operation is repeated three times per revolution with either 3 or 4 revolutions per minute. Observers swear there is no external energy added and that it continues for as long as they are willing to watch. The mechanism still appears to be operating 11 years later, although not likely continually because of normal wear and tear, at the Finsrud Gallery in Skaarer, Norway.

I’m suspicious on several counts: 1) the designer is an artist, not a physicist or engineer; 2) the designer claims it is a sculpture, but calls it “Perpetuum Mobile” (perpetual motion); 3) despite a number of news-paper and magazine articles, few have expressed interest in the device; and 4) it appears to be a very inefficient Rube Goldberg contraption (no doubt the artistic purpose). On another level it is an interesting thought experiment when the ball and horseshoe magnets are replaced with diametrically magnetized neodymium (NIB) ring magnets.

By replacing the grooved plate on which the iron ball rolls around in the original design with a lightweight rotating plate to which one or more NIB ring magnets are attached, external magnets can draw the plate magnets until the plate magnets are near (pull), mechanically insert a magnetic shield as the plate mag-net accelerates by, then remove the shield so the external magnet pushes the plate magnet away, thus using attraction and repulsion to accelerate the rotating plate.

The magnet itself (at least for experimental purposes) can be an inexpensive NdFeB (Neodymium-Iron-Boron or NIB) ring magnet about 1/2” OD x 3/16” ID x 1/4" thick with about 4.73 lbs pull force. The cost of the magnet is a little less than $2.00 US. Three or four magnets equidistantly glued or bolted near the edge of the rotating plate with the same number attached to a stationary external frame should allow the magnets to pass each other if a magnetic shield is inserted between the magnets as they pass each other. Removing (or swinging away) the shield allows the magnetic field repulsion to continue the acceleration.

Until I figure out a way to display graphics, this is my best description. I suspect the timing and size of the magnetic shield is critical. I can see a multiple plate unit with each plate rotationally offset from the others to increase rotational energy with perhaps a flywheel to control speed. I believe someone with a small shop could put a proof-of-concept model together fairly easily and inexpensively.

Anyone? (BTW, avid_engineer’s free magnetic simulation software got me thinking about a moving magnetic shield for a rotational magnet and stationary magnet interaction... sort of like an electromagnet. Hmm...)
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
 
Fri May 04, 2007 5:00 am PostPost subject:
alsetalokin
Site Admin


Joined: 14 Apr 2007
Posts: 640
Location: Sol III

Reply with quote

Hi WaBoy. You seem like an earnest and interested person, but you are obviously new to the field (pun intended) of Permanent Magnet Motors. We have seen the Finsrud (or Finsruud) device videos--it is indeed an interesting art project. There is also a long-running Perpetual Motion Machine in the Ontario Science Center; if you ever get over that way to Toronto it is well worth looking over. Unfortunately both these devices have hidden external power sources.

Clock mechanisms have been produced that wind themselves up by the natural changes in the barometric pressure, and so the clocks will run until something breaks; heat engines can run on temperature differences of as little as 1.5 degrees Celsius (in fact one can be seen at the beginning of one of Finsrud's videos); I myself have constructed several engines that run on snow, or hot coffee, or heat stored in a chunk of metal--If I attached a magnet or two and only let you observe it for an hour, you would be fooled, I can almost guarantee it. I forget how long a Zamboni-pile powered bell has rung continuously, but it is over a hundred years, anyway--it works on electric potential produced by the action of the humidity in the air on a specific arrangement of chemical plates. So hidden power sources are not always obvious (obviously, duh...), and it may take a while to exhaust the energy therein.

Your idea of shielding the magnetic field at critical points of a cycle is a good one--it has been tried very very many times in very many configurations by lots of creative inventors, with lots of different shielding materials (mu metal, bismuth, pyrolytic graphite, bucking electromagnetic coils, etc.) but nobody has been able to get it to work out properly to sustain motion without more energy input than is output. Before you start "making chips" in your machine shop I suggest you do a bit more research, so you don't duplicate efforts which have already been tried and which have failed. I encourage you to keep experimenting, though.

The keelynet website is a great archive of interesting information about all kinds of "free energy" and "perpetual motion" and "antigravity" devices, and the machines of John Keely make a very interesting study. His devices had an elegance and functional beauty seldom seen today, and a lot of investors were excited enough by them to keep Keely living quite high on the hog for some time. His external power source was only discovered after his death--he seems to have used compressed air.

As far as I know the only "free energy" device that has not been thoroughly debunked is the Testatika device of Baumann's Methernitha community. Nor has it been replicated, though many have tried. This device uses magnets (and crystals and coils and disks and...) but seems to resemble, mostly, electrostatic generators of the Wimshurst or Poggendorf type. Videos can be found which show several variants of this machine self-running and at the same time powering heavy electrical loads such as brilliant tungsten lamps and resistance heating elements. I have spoken to a respected scientist who has actually seen and touched a Testatika machine, and he has no explanation for it. The Methernitha community was engaged in development projects for large machines, but lately seems to have gone underground, since Baumann's death.

This is truly a fascinating area for research, and I wish you happy hunting. Please keep us all posted on your progress!
_________________
"Abandon hope, all ye who enter here..."


Last edited by alsetalokin on Fri May 04, 2007 5:07 am; edited 1 time in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
 
Fri May 04, 2007 5:02 am PostPost subject:
drichardson
Site Admin


Joined: 26 Oct 2006
Posts: 221

Reply with quote

You may want to check out this thread on the Steorn forum:

http://www.steorn.com/forum/comments.php?DiscussionID=13991&page=1#Item_0

Oh, to display images, place the image URL between the [img] [/img] tags.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
 
Fri May 04, 2007 1:29 pm PostPost subject:
WaBoy
Contributor
Contributor


Joined: 29 Apr 2007
Posts: 34
Location: Pacific NW - US/Canada

Reply with quote

@ alsetalokin
@ drichardson

Thank you both for your response.

Umm… I guess I wasn’t too clear, so let me restate: 1) I’m suspicious (for lots of reasons) of the Finsrud machine; and 2) it was only intended as a “thought experiment.” I apologize – my sense of humor is a little off this late in the day.

Actually, it is just a variation on the inclined track, magnet and ball that goes back to the 1750s. I don’t recall the person’s name offhand.

John Keely, as you pointed out, is both articulate and imaginative in his fund-raising and his promotion of Tom Bearden kept the Colonel in skittles and beer for a number of years as well, despite a series of investors’ lawsuits. There are dozens of others we could both name, including the recent AKOIL demonstration in Dubai which apparently failed very badly.

But despite the frauds, hoaxers and scammers, we’re still fascinated enough with the concept of “free energy” to prowl around various websites and join various blogs and forums. I joined the Steorn forum about two months after the “announcement” just out of curiosity to see how long it would keep going, especially after the claim to “break the Law of Conservation of Energy.”

Now that I’m retired, I’m spending more time in front of the computer in the hope that someone, somewhere is clever enough to work their way around CoE. Perhaps Steorn actually has something, but as time goes on, I’m less inclined to believe so. My wife simply thinks I’m crazy.

But wouldn’t it be nice if we could power our homes, drive a small car or power a small boat in which to fish for the last of the edible fish in our rapidly declining sea stocks?

Best wishes to you all.

Edit: "and his promotion of Tom Bearden" should read "and KeelyNet's promotion of Tom Bearden." John W Keely couldn't possibly have personally have promoted Bearden unless he was subject to a kind of perpetual motion himself - he'd be over 150 years old.


Last edited by WaBoy on Sat May 05, 2007 10:53 am; edited 1 time in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
 
Sat May 05, 2007 6:15 am PostPost subject:
alsetalokin
Site Admin


Joined: 14 Apr 2007
Posts: 640
Location: Sol III

Reply with quote

Here's a link:
http://www.americanheritage.com/articles/magazine/ah/1961/3/1961_3_78_print.shtml
to an article that (eventually) describes the Franklin Institute's replica of the Redheffer (or Redhoeffer) perpetual motion machine of 1813. While Redheffer's original device was driven surreptitiously by an external crank arrangement hidden in the woodwork in one instance, and a catgut drive belt in another, the replica built by Nathan Sellers and Isiah Lukens was entirely self-contained and was so good it actually fooled Redheffer himself, a classic case of conning the con.

This is relevant to the Steorn problem because the replica device built by Sellers and Lukens could actually be disassembled, its parts examined, and reassembled without the drive mechanism being discovered--if one removed the sliding weights and/or their inclined "trucks" it would stop working; when the weights were replaced it would start slowly and pick up speed until it reached its maximum; its hidden clockwork drive was so powerful it would run for days on a single winding and wouldn't be discovered on a routine disassembly; it could be wound up by the act of "polishing and dusting" the case (no key required)...As far as I know it is still on display at the Franklin Institute in Philadelphia.

So a relatively casual examination of the Steorn device, as likely to be permitted to DrMike, may not be adequate to rule out fraud.
I'm just sayin'....

(BTW the inclined track, magnet, ball appears to have been first described by a Jesuit by the name of Johannes Taisnierus in 1570 and critiqued by Bishop Wilkins in 1648. The magnetic shielding idea was used by a shoemaker named Spence to construct a couple of machines sometime before 1818--unfortunately fraudulent, but good enough to have fooled Sir David Brewster, the physicist who invented the kaleidoscope.)
_________________
"Abandon hope, all ye who enter here..."
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
 
Sat May 05, 2007 8:46 am PostPost subject: Finsrud
Joh70
Contributor
Contributor


Joined: 11 Feb 2007
Posts: 37
Location: South-Germany

Reply with quote

Finsrud's contruction is a genius and very acurat desing. But in my opinion it is not a "perpetuum mobile" in classical sense (to be used as a effective energy generator). I spend some hours to think about its principles. it uses earth rotation (spin), called coriolis power, throug its swinging pendulums. this is a very impressive construction. but may be it will not work near equator and sourt/north-poles of the earth, because the swinging axis do not get additional power there. place it at equator and tell if it is working there!? Magnets are only used to adjust tha balls weight at the point rolling over the springs.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
 
Sat May 05, 2007 8:51 am PostPost subject:
Joh70
Contributor
Contributor


Joined: 11 Feb 2007
Posts: 37
Location: South-Germany

Reply with quote

the three pendulums arranged in a equal sided triangle summarizing the power out of earth rotation spin and store power actualy not used by the ball. this means the pendulums deliver the energy but also work as a capacitor for energy to middle up and downs.

see also here:

http://fizzx.com/viewtopic.php?t=29
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
 
Sat May 05, 2007 1:52 pm PostPost subject: Possible rotational solution
WaBoy
Contributor
Contributor


Joined: 29 Apr 2007
Posts: 34
Location: Pacific NW - US/Canada

Reply with quote

@alsetalokin

Many thanks for the American Heritage article; it gave a number of references that were unknown to me and provided several hours of enjoyment chasing them down. I’ll be more careful in my own references. As you pointed out, it was Johannes Taisnierus in 1570, not 1750 as I stated. There are several reasons why the ball, inclined plane and magnet don’t work as defined by Taisnierus.

Joh70 correctly pointed out the pendula attachments to the Finsrud sculpture and stated: “this means the pendulums deliver the energy but also work as a capacitor for energy to middle up and downs.” This may or may not be, but if the pendula, through “Coriolis power” actually provide the energy, why not harness this power as an “alternative energy resource?” Then again, maybe it is, and I’m not yet aware of it.

You commented, “heat engines can run on temperature differences of as little as 1.5 degrees Celsius; …I myself have constructed several engines that run on snow, or hot coffee, or heat stored in a chunk of metal--If I attached a magnet or two and only let you observe it for an hour, you would be fooled, I can almost guarantee it.”

I assume you mean the now-increasingly popular Stirling engine. I’ve seen these as well as wind and log (towed behind the vessel) generators occasionally used in deep-water sailboats to power emergency battery rechargers and small desalinization units. Dean Kamen, inventor of the Segway self-balancing human transporter and the iBot personal mobility machine, has spent considerable time and money developing the Stirling engine to provide power and clean water to developing countries. (I vaguely remember a Dan Rather TV interview back in 2001 or thereabout).

But all this begs the question: “Can there be such a thing as a “free energy” or “over-unity” machine?”

While proof of the pudding may be in the eating, proof of Steorn claims will be the independent manufacture of their device from engineering drawings and necessary instructions. If they can sneak a cheat through that and still provide a half watt per cubic centimeter without having to purchase fuel, I’m willing to accept it.

[We’re moving to Richmond, BC over the next few weeks so my responses might be a bit irregular. Changing countries, cities and IPs can present a few problems – but she’s happy to go home and that’s what counts.]
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
 
Sat May 05, 2007 6:27 pm PostPost subject:
Joh70
Contributor
Contributor


Joined: 11 Feb 2007
Posts: 37
Location: South-Germany

Reply with quote

Hi Waboy, yes, you could use finsrud design as an “alternative energy resource?” but i asume, it have to be huge and big to deliver relevant amount of energy. not very effective. but it seems that it works. dont think finsrud is a fake. but it is more art then energy.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
 
Sat May 05, 2007 6:30 pm PostPost subject:
Joh70
Contributor
Contributor


Joined: 11 Feb 2007
Posts: 37
Location: South-Germany

Reply with quote

and maybe it will not work in africa, near the equator. as more it comes near the equator or the poles the ball rolls slower until it will not roll anymore. also not very effective. read the books about coriolis power and pendulums etc.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
 
Sat May 05, 2007 6:55 pm PostPost subject:
alsetalokin
Site Admin


Joined: 14 Apr 2007
Posts: 640
Location: Sol III

Reply with quote

Here's a link that chilifries referred to and that was posted on Freeenergytracker (thanks!):
http://www.lhup.edu/%7Edsimanek/museum/test-pm.htm

@Joh70: Your idea is a good one; I thought of it also--one of my earliest scientific influences came from seeing the large Foucault Pendulum in the DeutchesMuseum in Munchen as a child. I think the Finsrud device is too small, though--I still suspect a clockwork or falling-weight drive. I think the magnets are just for show, as they are in the PMM in the Ontario Science Center.
Of course, the energy stored in the rotation of the Earth-Moon system can be extracted in various useful ways, depending on one's location--the ocean tides can be very powerful in certain places and have been harnessed to drive hydroelectric generators. Not "free energy"--the day gets just a bit longer, and the climate a bit warmer, for every watt extracted in this manner!

@WaBoy: Good luck on your move! I wish I was there, too. Yes, I referred to Stirling engines in my earlier post, which can be made very efficient and low-tech (like mine!)--although the high-tech ones are quite interesting as well, especially the nuclear-powered free-piston linear alternator designs that NASA would like to use for spacecraft.
I completely agree that building an Orbo from design specs and engineering drawings, and subjecting one to calorimetry testing, would probably be convincing even to me--at least it would rule out a clockwork drive!
_________________
"Abandon hope, all ye who enter here..."
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
 
Post new topic Reply to topic FizzX.org Forum Index | Inventor's Corner
View previous topic
View next topic
Display posts from previous:   




You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum