PENDULUM F. M. Chalkalis - mathematical proof of the device's OU operation

[Hughe]

PENDULUM F. M. Chalkalis - mathematical proof of the device's OU operation
PENDULUM F. M. Chalkalis - a talented inventor


? Kanarev FM

Contact the author: kanphil@mail.ru

Recommend that you review the video first http://chalkalis.blogspot.com/

Abstract.

F. M. Chalkalis, he says, invented the power multiplier, which converts electrical energy into mechanical energy with an index of energy efficiency, he believes, is ten times greater than one. http://chalkalis.blogspot.com/

View Video impresses with its visual results, but the calculation of these results, of course, wrong. The author and his advisers failed to properly calculate any amount of electrical energy consumed for the rotation of the pendulum, no amount of mechanical energy generated by the rotation of the pendulum. Their guilt in this, as new laws and new laws mehanodinamiki electrodynamics has not yet reached them. So help them by using the original data's experiment [1], [2].


Pendulum F. M. Chalkalis simple (Fig. 1).
2765

Two metal ball a total weight of 45.69 kg sectorial located at a distance of R = 0,51 m on the horizontal axis of rotation. This adds a lot of weight by frame on which are mounted balls. Weight 4.50 kg frame. The author does not hesitate to determine the moments of forces acting on the ball and the frame, by multiplying the mass of balls in the distance (R) from their centers of mass to the axis of rotation. Multiplying the result by the frequency of the pendulum, the author finds, as he believes the pendulum shaft power expressed in kilowatts. Since the mass of the frame is 10 times smaller than the mass of balls, then we remove it while in the calculation.Then the result is taken from the text of his article is as follows [3]:


Central weight F 45,69 Kg = 448,2 Ν ∙ r 0,51 m = 228.58Nm ∙ 160 RPM ? 9550 = 3,829 Κ w (1)

This result is valid only for the position of balls in the moments when the radii of their centers of mass to the rotation axis arranged horizontally. If the radii are vertical, then the moments of gravity acting on them with respect to the axis of rotation of the pendulum are equal to zero and the result (1) is also zero.

The video shows that the sector with the balls rotated uniformly. Based on this, unless you consider a sinusoidal nature of the change of the torque generated by balls in their rotation, according to the laws of mehanodinamiki, the kinetic energy of the uniform rotation with frequency 160ob./min balls. (Author's data of the experiment) is equal to [1], [2]

2766

and power at the shaft of the pendulum is

2767

urther, the author reports that the instruments were recorded consumption for the rotation of the two friction discs, which act on the impulse sector arc frame on which were mounted balls, showed the value of current 2768 and the voltage 2769 Multiplying them, the author receives power is being undertaken on a pendulum drive
http://www.sciteclibrary.ru/ris-stat/3817/image15573.gif
and believes that the energy of the pendulum effect it is 3829 * 100/408 = 9385%.

Since the friction discs are the sector that keeps the balls from time to time, for the correct determination of the electric power sold to drive the pendulum, it was necessary to record the waveform of voltage and current. Determine the duty cycle of current pulses S and the voltage and the resulting value (4) divided by the square pulse duty cycle energy consumption. Visually (Fig. 1) we can assume that the sector is mounting balls, approximately one-fifth of 360 degrees, ie 360 / 5 = 72grad. Then the operating power, which is realized on the drive of the pendulum is equal to 408/25 = 16.32 Tues To this we must add the energy consumption by idling the motor, resulting in friction discs in the sector of 360-72 = 288grad. It will be approximately the same as in the workflow. Therefore, power, implemented on a uniform drive the pendulum is equal to 16.32 16.32 32.64 = Tues

As a result, energy efficiency, energy multiplier of copyright will be equal to approximately 1666.43 * 100/32, 64 = 5105%. We note that the voltage on the electric motor to drive the friction discs is equal to 24. If this voltage is generated with a voltage of 127V network, the meter shows the minimum capacity 127 * 17 = 2159Vt.

If the motors, resulting in friction discs, powered by a battery of 24V, the pulse power, taken from the battery, will be 32.64 Tues In this case, to recharge the battery must be taken from the network 32.64 W and the energy efficiency of idling pendulum is about 5000%.

Thus, in order to realize the explicit power pendulum effect F. M. Chalkalis, we must replace existing electric meters, which correctly take into account only the continuous consumption of electricity and erroneously - pulse. Then the energy of the pendulum effect will be close to 5000%. But the theoretical efficiency. If the pendulum to the shaft connecting the continuous load, it will be able to keep the regime of uniform rotation, if it is a much smaller initial value of 1666.43 Tues The exact magnitude of the load can only be determined experimentally for his own installation. However, the energy of the pendulum effect F. M. Chalkalis idling is undeniable. Of course, if you connect to the shaft of the pendulum impulse load, the efficiency multiplier of energy will increase in comparison with a continuous load.

CONCLUSION


There is reason to congratulate the inventor of F. M. Chalkalis with his inventive success, which buried the Newtonian dynamics and electrodynamics of Faraday - Maxwell ..

Literature

Kanarev FM Theoretical Mechanics. Part III Mehanodinamika. http://www.micro-world.su/ Folder "Textbooks"
Kanarev FM The introduction of the new electrodynamics. http://www.micro-world.su/ Folder "books"
http://chalkalis.blogspot.com/
http://www.micro-world.su/index.php/2010-12-22-11-39-37/304---fm-chalkalis---
www.libero.it or http://www.micro-world.su/ folder "Video"

[sandy]

Hi Hughe,

Good to see to see you on board here at Nexus :) Sorry I can`t respond to your thread but it is way over my head in understanding all the technology presented and the point you are making. I just trust that your intention to get something going in the Fe arena is your ultimate goal and I can respect you for that. All the best and there are very bright people here who hopefully will respond in understanding with the feedback you are looking forward too!!

[ZookieMonster]

Hi Hughe,

Can you give a summary of the input and output energies involved? I saw the video at the website. Impressive; but not very descriptive.

I'm just a layman in the field, but I assume that anything with an efficiency of 101% or higher is considered overunity. 5000% efficiency would be wow-wow-wow!!


:smow::typing:

[Hughe]

Hi Hughe,

Can you give a summary of the input and output energies involved? I saw the video at the website. Impressive; but not very descriptive.

I'm just a layman in the field, but I assume that anything with an efficiency of 101% or higher is considered overunity. 5000% efficiency would be wow-wow-wow!!


:smow::typing:

@Zookie,

I wrote a post that explains about this type of machines last night. I asked whether I disclose (?) is or not here.
Basically there is new theory of physics that fixed the flaws of Newton's three laws of motion.
You are intelligent man so, you know, cause and effect. Newton's laws didn't explain what's inertia of mass why and how. It simply assume inertia does exist. A scientist revised the Newton's laws and put inertia and 'cause and effect' in place.
Under this new framework, OU device becomes real.

A good example is a swinging seat of child. Everybody knows. A father put a child on it and moves with both hand in the beginning. As times goes, the seat moves wider and wider, the father uses one hand, then few fingers. As the seat is at peak of movement, the father can use slight touch to maintain the seat movement. A pulsing input to a an object in harmonic motion, increase the total energy of the system. This is proven property of nature.

The device is running by a electric motor that keep it running the huge sector. The motor definitely consumes energy, the kinetic energy of rotating sector is many times bigger than motor's input energy. How could it possible? Exact same way of the swinging seat I described.

The inertia of matter hold and maintain increased energy.

The new laws of motions honestly ground breaking. Mathematics is relatively easy - grade 12 math mostly used. But, I haven't seen individuals who look into this one. I know why. I know you knows too.

There is another example. It takes about 50 hp (horse power) to accelerate a car at 50 mph (100 km/h). To maintain 50 mph on highway, the car needs only 30 hp. That's why some of fuel efficiency cars turn of two or three cylinders of engine (I4 or V6/V8) when the cars moves at constant speed. Intriguing question is how the car keep moving at 50 mph with 60% of power? The mass of moving car, which links to inertia keep it going.

I give one more example. We throw a rock for fun often. Our thrusting power is fixed. Throwing a quarter inch pebble won't much impact when it hits something in distance. Picking up 2 inches diameter rock, throw it to a person or animal can kill it with deadly force. The question again why it's possible? The initial input energy to the pebble and bigger one is same. Newton's laws can't explain. Suppose the energy of system is constant, heavier object must move slow than lighter object to satisfy the energy conservation theory.

I studied Leonardo da vinci's gravity motor for some time. It looks working the way it's constructed. But, it has flaw. It misses the inertia regulating component. Even it will work by an ingenious design, it barely keep it runs. Leonardo knew something though.

I hope it makes you grasp the idea behind it.

[lightblue]

this is it zooks..here's the inventor explaining it....


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iHhZZ9DuzK4&feature=player_embedded


:crazy_pilot:

.

[ZookieMonster]

I suppose my ignorance in the field is showing ... but say you have a weight on a string. Now turn that string. At some point the centripetal forces and gravity will keep the string horizontal. But the moment you let up in your turning action, the string will start to descend.

My question is simple: how much input energy is being put into the system to keep it turning indefinitely at constant RPMs; moreover, if this input energy is less than the output energy (as over-unity requires) ... then how come we don't see the system spin out of control?

I believe in free energy, mind you. I've seen credible devices elsewhere. With magnets and feedback loops. Just not sure anything in the video is proof of free energy. The inventor doesn't even have a feedback mechanism in his demonstration. He seems merely to be turning the knob on some electrodynamic device, e.g. to impart energy into the flywheel and to change the speed of rotation.

:smow:

[Hughe]

ZookieMonster,

The inventor, Chalkalis spent 35 to 40 years to figure it out. And he put out for public domain so that other people who have money and resources build better one. The problem is in FE field people are back stabbing each other.

Have you checked this site?
http://peswiki.com/index.php/Directory:Gravity_Motors
Chalkalis machine is one type of gravity motor.


My question is simple: how much input energy is being put into the system to keep it turning indefinitely at constant RPMs; moreover, if this input energy is less than the output energy (as over-unity requires) ... then how come we don't see the system spin out of control?
My goal is to find out exact formula that governs the dynamics of gravity motor. When I saw the machine, and studied the theory, it became a working device to me.

As you see Chalkalis's video, he controls the speed of sector and maintain at certain RPM not to make it out of control.

The trigger (electric motor, the father in the swinging seat example) needs to maintain the mover (wheel / child on the swinging seat). Constantly adding energy at the peak, the swinging seat will flip over makes the child takes off. The rotating wheel will turn faster and faster, it will causes mechanical break down.
Being off the right timing will drag the mover - swing seat or wheel - and it won't produce extra energy. This is what billions people think why OU device is not feasible.

I can see if Chalkalis starts work with one open-minded engineer, there will be a real FE gravity motor within few months. Question is such co-work will ever happen. I contacted one inventor who was selling a gravity motor kit in Russia. I haven't got any responses yet. As soon as an Inventor shows remarkable machine on the net, then suddenly it's vanished. No new news or products on the market whatsoever.

[ZookieMonster]

All the best to Chalkalis and his invention, Hughe.

I'm merely trying to understand his invention. I've an open mind on all things free energy. We need it badly as a species, sure enough.

:typing:

[lightblue]

.
hughe, how do you rate mehran keche's perpetummobiles?


.

[Nagual]

Over-unity suggests that more energy can be taken out of a system than the total energy which goes into the system. This is not possible as you can't have more than 100% of anything.
However, there is another perfectly valid way of looking at the operation of any system, and that is to rate the output of the system relative to the amount of energy that the user has to put in to make it work.
This is called the ?Coefficient Of Performance? or ?COP? for short. A COP = 1 is when all of the energy put in by the user is returned as useful output. A COP>1 is where more useful energy comes out of the device than the
user has to put in.

[Chicodoodoo]

No need for complicated explanations and mathematical formulas. Any over unity device can produce more energy than it consumes. That means it can be designed to be disconnected from any external power and be able to run itself indefinitely. Let's see it do that, then we'll talk.

[Nagual]

That means it can be designed to be disconnected from any external power and be able to run itself indefinitely.

hey Chico
please note that 'over-unity' and 'self-runner' are two different things... most 'OU' devices -such as the Bedini SSG- have a COP>1 but they cannot self-run...

[Chicodoodoo]

A COP = 1 is when all of the energy put in by the user is returned as useful output. A COP>1 is where more useful energy comes out of the device than the user has to put in.


note that 'over-unity' and 'self-runner' are two different things... most 'OU' devices -such as the Bedini SSG- have a COP>1 but they cannot self-run...

That sounds like hand-waving semantics to me. Given your definition, if more "useful" work is produced than consumed, then put that "useful" work back into running the machine. Any "useful" over-unity machine should be able to manage that.

[Hughe]

@Nagual

You are right. All the gravity motors harness gravitational field energy and inertia. It needs input to make it work.

@Chicodoodoo
The irony is when you replicate FE devices they don't guarantee to produce more energy than input. One of reasons I consider patents with few schematic diagrams, words are rubbish. To be a practical FE generator, it needs formulas that satisfy laws of physics.

John Bedini is export in FE field. I can tell he definitely know who to build FE generators, pulse motor that collects radiant energy in space. He built a 10' pulse motor last year for demonstration. He has been monitored, suppressed by U.S government as I know. Why he is reluctant to reveal formulas? I studied his book. There are lots of schematics, explanations. I abandoned to study his pulse motors. Cause I gotta build many prototypes to master its mechanism assuming all of them will work.

A toy airplane and big Jumbo jet have the same formulas: the area of wings, speed of airplane, cross sectional area. Kids can design and build a real airplane. That's the power of sciences. It's universal language.

I dislike the way mainstream scientists put mathematics over real phenomena. They set few rules and ignore any theories or machines that can not be explained by them. That's stupidity right there.

@lightblue
Mehran Keche is the scientist following link? http://peswiki.com/index.php/Directory:Keshe_Foundation

I never heard of him. He probably had such machine. There have been hundreds scientists and inventors who killed Einstein and Newton. Many of them got murdered or erased in scientific fields.

I narrowed down feasible FE devices: within my intelligence, have few point of references, easy-to-get materials.
I locked on the gravity motor last year by accident. Since then, I've been studying it on and off during spare time to understand it. I gonna have a private workshop soon in my room or remote place. "This is not for sale!"

[Nagual]

Any "useful" over-unity machine should be able to manage that.

believe me Chico, I'd love to see that!

I've discussed this issue with John Bedini himself (among other non-mainstream scientist/researchers) and so far nobody could get around the second law of thermodynamics, however there are cases like Kapanadze who can self-run his invention producing amazing results (big time OU) but then again, he tap into the natural imbalance of the ground potential produced by the telluric currents flow underground, so something else is being input into the system to keep it running...