# "perpetual motion"

Discussion in 'Off-Topic' started by andresbillingsely, Dec 24, 2013.

Not open for further replies.
1. ### andresbillingsely Thread Starter New Member

Dec 24, 2013
0
0
I'm in the middle of a project. I am planning on building a "perpetual motion" machine. I know this is impossible. The shape of the machine is a wheel (picture below). The wheel does spin for a while, and during that time I want to create electrical energy with it. With this energy I want to charge a battery that will then power a device that will make the wheel spin again whenever it stops. I don't know much about how to go about this project. I think a may need a dynamo and a resistor (and a few more things). I'm afraid of building this wheel and then not be able to produce the amount of voltage needed to charge the battery. Does the diameter of the wheel matter? How fast it spins? The size of the wheel is of exactly 1 ft. Any help would be much appreciated.

2. ### shteii01 AAC Fanatic!

Feb 19, 2010
3,392
497
lol
You will have to do better than that.

1 foot diameter or 1 foot radius?

3. ### MikeML AAC Fanatic!

Oct 2, 2009
5,450
1,066
Ain't gonna happen..., unless you make the wheel infinitely small (in which case it doesn't exist, and no one can prove it works, or doesn't)

4. ### apprenticemart2 Member

May 7, 2013
67
7
I didn't believe that this was possible until I saw you had drawn in direction arrows. The energy comes from the arrows yes?

Shagas, strantor and #12 like this.
5. ### shortbus AAC Fanatic!

Sep 30, 2009
4,013
1,531
It will work better if you remove every other ball. Less weight will make it spin faster and generate more power.

6. ### tcmtech Well-Known Member

Nov 4, 2013
2,035
1,660
So what makes you think that anyone here who has figured out how to make a perpetual motion/energy device work is going to share their knowledge and experience with you?

If a person is smart enough to figure out how to make it work they are also smart enough to know why it can't be shared with the average public.

7. ### Vortex-8 New Member

Dec 20, 2013
18
0
This reminds me of creative device that I had seen a video of on youtube but I don't know the name of the video and it was a few years ago that I saw it, so I can't point you in any direction for finding it unfortunately. It was an interesting concept though. It was a somewhat more complex version of what you seem to be after. I doubt the videos I watched approached anything near being considered perpetual though, because I would have saved it if that was the case.

I think on the user agreement for this site that discussion of perpetual motion devices is banned so you may want to avoid naming your thread title that. From my few days of being member to this site, I'm guessing that some users are going to try to tear into you pretty bad over this, in addition to you not being specific enough about what it is you are doing, or the setup you are after.

I'd say that much of the interesting parts of what you are doing falls under the subject of Dynamics with multiple variables.

You are going to need to explain this part in much more detail, about what you intend to do or the setup you have.......
"The wheel does spin for a while, and during that time I want to create electrical energy with it."

Especially the part about how you initially spin the wheel up, the way you are stating it is difficult to make sense of.

You said....
"Does the diameter of the wheel matter? How fast it spins? The size of the wheel is of exactly 1 ft."

Yes.........all of those things matter, and there are still many more factors.

The diameter matters, how fast it spins matters, the weight (mass) of the wheel (rotor) matters, the weight (mass) of the balls matters, how fast it spins matters, the angle of the radial slats that the balls roll along.......and several other factors.......just in terms of the dynamics of the setup your diagram shows. In this system, some of these things are varying, making it a more complex dynamic system to evaluate.

If you are really serious about doing this, I would suggest using a 'super-capacitor' to store and release the energy you are working with instead of an electro-chemical battery. You will have comparatively way less loss of energy. Use very large size (gauge) wires (copper) and make all wiring as short as possible.

This is where people are going to tear into you on this forum, or just ignore your thread in general......
"I think a may need a dynamo and a resistor (and a few more things)"

This is where I doubt you understand enough about fundamentals of energy or circuits to even attempt this project.

If you really want to do what you are saying you want to do........I can't see how a resistor would have any part of the setup.........unless you are shooting for the least perpetual perpetual motion machine record. A resistor will just cause the system to loose energy and not be recoverable.

As far as a dynamo (electric motor).....I don't have much knowledgeable about the subject.....but i would say to try to use checking out some high efficiency motors that are made for electric RC cars or airplanes. Those usually use 3 pole AC motors as far as I understand, which would require more complex electronics (the motor controller) to work with the motor and would introduce some loss of energy there as well (and I think would be more complex to run in reverse as well). ...So the best option is a high efficiency small DC motor. I think DC motors tend to have a considerable amount of energy loss due to their design and contacts in the motor. Start by just finding some decent DC motor that has the appropriate voltage. The voltage of the capacitor(s) would have to coincide with the voltage of the motor to an extent. You are really going to need to do more research and learning to be able to approach this project based on what you have posted. I hope what I wrote at least gives you some ideas of where to start.

Last edited: Dec 24, 2013
8. ### shteii01 AAC Fanatic!

Feb 19, 2010
3,392
497
The OP clearly stated that they know it will not be "perpetual" engine. Why the eF are you beating the dead horse.

The OP just wants to be able to run it for a longer period of time. That is all.

9. ### Vortex-8 New Member

Dec 20, 2013
18
0
hmmm..............I partly got the wrong idea from the diagram and the description because I forgot the wheel is supposed to be setup vertically, which is what causes the balls to reset, but most of what I said should still apply.

10. ### #12 Expert

Nov 30, 2010
16,298
6,808
The disclaimer in the first post is a magic talisman. No beating up.
Try some sarcasm, though.
Some people don't get it.

11. ### Metalmann Active Member

Dec 8, 2012
700
223

1 mile radius would be sufficient, but only if we can increase gravity.

12. ### #12 Expert

Nov 30, 2010
16,298
6,808
How about orbiting this thing such that the passing of the moon provided the motive force?
Another advantage: frictionless environment in orbit.

13. ### THE_RB AAC Fanatic!

Feb 11, 2008
5,435
1,305
That design of machine has been debunked by many people.

The basic reality is that every weight (ball) travels upwards X distance and downwards the same X distance, so there can never be any effect other than an average balance.

In other words, it can never make more force coming down that it makes going up, so at the very best it's a "flywheel" and a really lousy one as the moving balls soak up energy as it turns. If you remove all the balls it will be a better flywheel and spin for longer.

14. ### Vortex-8 New Member

Dec 20, 2013
18
0
well........even if it can't be a true perpetual motion device........his attempt to try to understand and build the device can serve as a good thinking and learning experiment since it involves so many important variables even though the total setup is not overly complicated to imagine or construct.

It's important to understand how everything effects every other part so don't give up if you really want to try.

Also, consider how you support the wheel (the bearings). Find some good bearings to further reduce the losses of energy from friction.

Last edited: Dec 24, 2013
15. ### Vortex-8 New Member

Dec 20, 2013
18
0
If you are doing this for a project........
Try making a list of as many points as possible where energy is lost or could be lost from the system. You could post the list here. We could do it for you.........but maybe you should give it a try and we can help to check it over if you want.

Then, try to make a list of as many of the design variables of the rotor (wheel & balls) as possible.

Then, try to make a list of all of the electrical parts (it shouldn't be much).

I think that you would have a solid foundation to start with if you can get that far.

Ask more questions if you want.

Dec 20, 2013
18
0
17. ### GopherT AAC Fanatic!

Nov 23, 2012
6,056
3,818
I'd like to thank the Mods for allowing this thread to continue (or for being so medicated that they do not notice).

In any case, nobody is getting hurt or scammed and nobody is talking about an IPO (yet). Lots of learning does seem to be happening though. I am just waiting for the ah ha moment (or the ha ha moment). Let it roll!

THE_RB and shortbus like this.
18. ### nsaspook AAC Fanatic!

Aug 27, 2009
2,908
2,169
His design is Child's play, to really understand the impossibliities of perpetual motion you have to understand this device: http://www.csee.umbc.edu/~squire/blueball.htm

19. ### #12 Expert

Nov 30, 2010
16,298
6,808
You got it right, Gopher. Nobody is being hurt and nobody is being a stubborn fool about this. It's just an experiment and we all (including the OP) know perpetual motion is a fairy tale. As long as it's just an exploration of physics, it's OK with me.

20. ### tracecom AAC Fanatic!

Apr 16, 2010
3,869
1,393
Now you've done it. Next, you'll telling me there's no Santa Claus.