| MAIN PM Theory CONCEPTS Grav-Buoy2 FLUID LEVER Summary Components Diagrams Curving Rail Motive Mass Repeat Lever Tilt Motor Coquette Early Failures DISCLAIMER PM Types |
| Questions, comments, or other inquiries may be directed to: contact@nathancoppedge.com |
NATHAN COPPEDGE--Perpetual Motion Concepts
A Fluid Leverage Perpetual Motion Waterwheel Concept
Utilizing Leverage from Tanks at Alternate Radiuses
SUMMARY
The device is an octagonal wheel, which if torque is applied, turns
about an axis. On each side of the octagon is mounted an arm. The
arm is a pipe, which projects from one corner of the octagon, along
the side and outwards some distance in the same direction towards
an attached projecting outer tank, which is spherical.
Attached to the pipe along the length of its side of the octagon are
three tanks, collectively equal, or approximately equal, to the volume
of the outer drum. If we assume for now that sufficient torque
could
be generated, apertures in the pipe opposite the triple tanks allow
the triple tanks to be filled during the low point in the cycle, when
that
portion of the wheel is submerged. As the wheel turns, hatches that
were open at the low point close by gravity and force of the water,
trapping the water within the lower tanks and a length of the arm.
Continuing upward the hatches close more tightly under water
weight, and then at just past the midpoint the contents of the triple
tanks are emptied down the arm (over the hatches) and into the
corresponding outer tank, increasing--at least temporarily--leverage
force acting on the rising water weight.
With the correct proportions it is possible to have two outer tanks
filled for a portion of the path every 22 degrees that it succeeds to
move, pulling on approximately 10 or 11 filled triple tanks positioned
at a lesser radius.
Thus if each triple tank is exactly 1/3 the waterweight of an outer
tank, the leverage force of two outer tanks need only be greater
than
the waterweight of (11/3) = 3.67 outer tanks at the radius of the
triple
tanks. So if twice the distance from the axle is twice the leverage, I
might estimate that at least at one point in the cycle, sufficient
torque
would be applied to suggest movement. IF that force is sufficient to
move the wheel 22 degrees, then it is again in the same position, and
the cycle would repeat, if we make certain assumptions.
Assumptions such as that it is possible for the fluid to fill the triple
tanks completely while the wheel is in motion, and possible for the
outer tanks to be emptied without hindering the device. I also have
not accounted for the inevitable resistance of the outer tanks
dragging through the water. However it seemed to me that water
resistance would only allow the triple tanks to fill; it would not
reduce the bulk of the water acting in one or two outer tanks.
For criticism of this design, see my Personal Critique.
Fluid Leverage Components nathancoppedge.com
Utilizing Leverage from Tanks at Alternate Radiuses
SUMMARY
The device is an octagonal wheel, which if torque is applied, turns
about an axis. On each side of the octagon is mounted an arm. The
arm is a pipe, which projects from one corner of the octagon, along
the side and outwards some distance in the same direction towards
an attached projecting outer tank, which is spherical.
Attached to the pipe along the length of its side of the octagon are
three tanks, collectively equal, or approximately equal, to the volume
of the outer drum. If we assume for now that sufficient torque
could
be generated, apertures in the pipe opposite the triple tanks allow
the triple tanks to be filled during the low point in the cycle, when
that
portion of the wheel is submerged. As the wheel turns, hatches that
were open at the low point close by gravity and force of the water,
trapping the water within the lower tanks and a length of the arm.
Continuing upward the hatches close more tightly under water
weight, and then at just past the midpoint the contents of the triple
tanks are emptied down the arm (over the hatches) and into the
corresponding outer tank, increasing--at least temporarily--leverage
force acting on the rising water weight.
With the correct proportions it is possible to have two outer tanks
filled for a portion of the path every 22 degrees that it succeeds to
move, pulling on approximately 10 or 11 filled triple tanks positioned
at a lesser radius.
Thus if each triple tank is exactly 1/3 the waterweight of an outer
tank, the leverage force of two outer tanks need only be greater
than
the waterweight of (11/3) = 3.67 outer tanks at the radius of the
triple
tanks. So if twice the distance from the axle is twice the leverage, I
might estimate that at least at one point in the cycle, sufficient
torque
would be applied to suggest movement. IF that force is sufficient to
move the wheel 22 degrees, then it is again in the same position, and
the cycle would repeat, if we make certain assumptions.
Assumptions such as that it is possible for the fluid to fill the triple
tanks completely while the wheel is in motion, and possible for the
outer tanks to be emptied without hindering the device. I also have
not accounted for the inevitable resistance of the outer tanks
dragging through the water. However it seemed to me that water
resistance would only allow the triple tanks to fill; it would not
reduce the bulk of the water acting in one or two outer tanks.
For criticism of this design, see my Personal Critique.
Fluid Leverage Components nathancoppedge.com
| STATISTICS: Fluid Leverage VOLITION: 1 (1 active wheel / 1 dual axial wheel) EQUILIBRIUM: 8 (not good) (1 fluid substance / 1 stem / 8 subcycles) EFFICIENCY: 0.125 (1 / 8 at best, reaching 0 for "fluid particles") VOLITIONAL STATEMENT: Simply put, the fluid lever has no real moving parts |
More on my concept of Volitional math at IMPOSSIBLEMACHINE.COM |