Eccentric slew ring wheel perpetual motion machine

[freeztar]

Moderation note: the first 4 posts of this thread were moved from the silly claims forum thread “Moved from "Over Balanced Wheel - Perpetual Motion"”, because with the addition of actual sketches of the described machine, it’s now possible to discuss them in a manner consistent with the standards of the engineering and applied science forum.

 

Here are the designs that Sir Isaac Einstein wanted to post.

AN OVERBALANCING WHEEL USING SLEWING-RINGS.txt

[Moontanman]

I can't make heads or tails of it, how is it supposed to work? Is this an unique design?

[stereologist]

Moontanman it is unclear how it is constructed.

 

USING SLEWING-RINGS MEANS THIS OVERBALANCING IS CONSTANT.

If you believe this to be true, then either build one and show us or do the simpler thing and write it out mathematically. I assure you we will all understand the math.

 

When you write out the math simply show the work as a function of time. Show that time drops out of the final result so that the overbalancing is constant.

[CraigD]

I think I understand SIE’s posted sketches, and have simplified it into the following:

The outer ring engages (such as with gear teeth) with the outer eccentric ring (as “slew” simply means “turn in place”, something all the rings in the machine do, I refer to the original drawing’s 2 “slew” rings as “eccentric” rings, since they don’t share the axis of the other 2 rings). The outer ring’s radius is about twice that of the inner ring (let’s say 2 m and 1 m). The inner ring engages with the inner eccentric ring. The inner and outer rings are connected, such as by a back plate, so that they turn together. The eccentric rings are not connected, and turn independently. A system of axles and/or bearings (not included in my sketch) allow the rings to rotate, but prevent their axes of rotation from moving.

 

The idea for how this machine can produce output work without input work is, as best I can surmise and summarize:

 

The inner eccentric ring (let’s assume the eccentric rings each mass about 10 kg) exerts a downward, counter-clockwise turning force on the inner ring of about 100 N. The outer ring exerts a downward, clockwise turning force on the outer ring of about 100 N. The joined outer and inner rings thus experience a net clockwise torque of [imath]2 \,\mbox{m} \times 100 \,\mbox{N}- 1 \,\mbox{m}\times 100 \,\mbox{N}= 100 \,\mbox{N m}[/imath]. Connected to an external work-consumer, such as an electrical generator, it’ll produce up to [imath]2 \pi \times 100 \dot= 628 \,\mbox{J}[/imath] per revolution. If allowed to turn at 1 revolution/s (60 RPM), it’ll produce up to 628 W power.

 

The flaw with this reasoning is that, for the axes of the eccentric rings to be prevented from moving, the net force vector on the rings must be zero. Because the downward force of gravity must originate from the rings center of mass, we aren’t free to choose to have all – or any – of the opposing force originating from the contact points of the rings and eccentric rings. Thus, the assumed downward force on the inner and outer rings due to the force of gravity on the eccentric rings is zero. No part of the machine accelerates or outputs work at all.

 

SIE appears to try to avoid this by having the system that prevents the axes of the eccentric rings from moving consist of a single “shepherd wheel” positioned such that it can’t exert force with a nonzero vertical component, reasoning that if the shepherd wheel can’t exert any vertical force, and the eccentric wheels’ axes don’t move, all of the vertical force must be exerted by the inner and outer rings originating at their contact points with their eccentric rings. This reasoning is flawed, however, because no possible force originating from these points can be equal and opposite to the force of gravity on the eccentric rings originating at their centers.

[UncleAl]

1) Time is homogeneous

2) Noether's theorems.

3) Mass-energy is locally conserved.

4) No perpetual motion machines of the First Kind.

 

1) Entropy, Carnot cycle, Law of Large Numbers.

2) No perpetual motion machines of the Second Kind.

 

No perpetual motion machines from first principles. Mechanism is irrelevant.

 

The Museum of Unworkable Devices

Perpetual motion machines

 

NO PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINES; no exceptions.

[Qfwfq]

I would put it more simply Craig, if the two rings rotate the same angle, the eccentric ring goes with them instead of maintaining position, where it is the lowest will be stable equilibrium. Simple.

 

If instead the outer and inner rings are constrained to rotate at angles in exact inverse proportion to the ratio of their radii so as to maintain the eccentric ring's position, then the torque will be transmitted between them in the corresponding inverse ratio, making the entire system in equilibrium.

 

The designer presumably imagined that the equal angle rotation would imply equal arcs, despite the difference in radius.