@causevskinikola You are correct to a certain degree. My device does have two movements. A two stage oscillator really refers to a two SIDED oscillator. My device
eliminates one of the sides. It is really a one sided oscillator.
You did not answer about this idea posted on my channel on 19 march 2009.
Also better version on this theme is my ( over unity centrifugal mechanism) posted dec.09 2009 on my channel where is clearly shown that gravity has nothing to do with the over unity, just the inertial centrifugal force.
But all this is thanks to mister Veljko Milkovic. This are all upgrades on his pioneer work on this field.
Hey ToemanX, I've had this idea when I first saw Milkovic's two stage oscillator, 2 years ago. Unfortunately, I have no time or place to experiment (time is greater problem - thanks to stupid capitalism), so thanks a lot for posting this video!!! Also, what I've been thinking is to add a spring on pendulum drive (like in winding clock) to maintain its swing. Could you pleaaase, try that? Another idea: How about tu use car spring (on piston) and to compress it instead? Thanks a lot, again!!!
@ToemanX What I've meant to say is to use spring in opposite direction... On the way down (on pendulum equilibrium point) spring will be compressed. Maybe it could be easier to build this way and spring could last longer? (spring over piston neck, and all in tube - like in pen) >> Nasty draft alert in your inbox!!! :)
very good idea but since there is no lever you are not taking advantage of the length times the force concept of leverage and your pulses remain in constant harmony with the swing of the pendulum, but with a two stage you can vary the length of the lever to change rising height and force. but i do like the compact design :)
A ratchet on the piston, preventing it (partially?) to spring up, can test whether multiple pendulum swing are more powerful than a single one. If you drag the piston lower that way than from a quarter swing, that would prove overunity right there. Because the single quarter swing is right on conventtional science unity.
@Cloxxki I think we have a misunderstanding. The goal is to keep the pendulum swinging. To do that we need to add energy to it. We get the needed energy from the fall of the piston, its' kinetic energy downward.We need the piston to move as much as possible up and down to be able to capture as much downward force energy and supply it to the swinging pendulum. One full fall of the piston supplies the extra energy for one more swing of the pendulum.
@ToemanX The pendulum would still swing laterally freely. Just the pivot would be resticted to move back up, or partially so each swing. If you want a pendulum that keeps swinging, just leave the seccond stage out. It will swing forever when well constructed. To get any surplus energy out, you'll have to get energy out at SOME stage (no pun intended). With constant energy being put into the first stage, when to ever get it back out? The first stage's capacity is limited by its length and mass.
@ToemanX You are too kind, thank you. Yes, a pivot can have some friction and the pendulum itself will need to be put inside a vaccume to not have air resistance. In essence though, it's an eternal motion. Much like space rocks. Once tapped in a direction, nothing will ever stop them from wandering.
Unfortunately the second stage is driven by the pendulum, not the other way around. It's a balance of energies at best. I admire your efforts though.
The energy Gains that are had from the conventional TSO are great. I'm sure yours could have similar results. Tuning the conventional TSO you add or subtract weight to the counter weight in accordance to the external load. Yours would require some sort of adjustable spring (an air spring...) Making yours on a large scale to have may be trickier but probably worth the extra work.
Limiting & adjusting the up and down movement may help
@Yourfishman Where was the energy gain claim of the TSO ever proven? It never did more work than its input, at least where I've read. I do believe it has great peak torgue, which aids in overcoming stiction and dead spot leverage issues, such as with a town square water pump.
If there was a gain (I saw claims of 12x), the output could easily be converted to a simple tap to the first stage. It doesn't work that way however. And my rathcet idea also won't work. Complicated, but not over unity.
It has been proven in my garage. (On a small scale) I think there are other videos on you tube that
make it's OU self evident. Simply consider the free fall power of the counter weight, when the bob is in the up position, and you should understand. I like one of Rhead100's videos, it shows a 4 pounds push, over 4 " in 0.3 seconds, of input work; equaling 70 lbs free falling 2" in 0.3 seconds twice is fairly clear evidence, but maybe it is just me.
@Yourfishman I greatly applaud your efforts, and am a fan of Rhead100's work as well.
unfortunately, fuzzy math is not allowed in science, else I'd have several overunity tricks myself now.
I believe in gravity machines, the leading measure is not time, but height times mass.
The gentle taps to keep a simple TSO going (overcoming friction), are actually over a significant distance (work). The huge output at the second stage is worthless until harvested. Just oscillations, cancelling itself out.
For the most part i agree with you, especially this statement "The huge output at the second stage is worthless until harvested. Just oscillations, cancelling itself out."
BUT I would argue that 70 lb weight in Rhead100 part A video landing with full force onto the "stop block" does represent work. (hammering work)
I would also argue that push is doing more than over coming fiction, it is also overcoming the small loss from the small up and down movement.
@Yourfishman It's more impressive if the 70lbs weight would drop onto a pllow than a hard surface. The bounce is quite slow, and the surfaces near infitely hard. Let the blow crack a nut, then it's work. The losses in sound are negligible in terms of Joules.
Don't over-complicate the TSO. Either you can extract useful work for it, and keep it going with a smaller new input at the first stage, or you can't. Don't mix up work, distance, time and height. Loop it to proove your point. Not that hard
With adequate swing, the weight of the counter weight plays no purpose when falling. It seems that most folks try to harness energy during the LIFT of the counter weight some use a spring. this i believe is wrong.
I think the useable energy should only be collected from the free fall of the weight. I believe this makes a big difference in results. This may be part of the math problem that some find.
@Yourfishman If you are right, that would be awesome. The downswing of the second stage would be isolated from the input completely. one issue I see is that off timing. It needs to stay in sync. Extract energy, and you may slow it down and at best limit the amount of input on the next swing. Catch my drift?
It seems worthwhile to make highspeed footage of a basic second stage, and analyse its velocity. A very efficient (sturdy)landing platform and gearing might extract the impact at ideal time?
You are absolutely correct, timing and loads will have to be balanced out . It requires tuning to sync every thing correctly. Then build in some room for error.
I did review some TSO videos in slow motion.
1. It is clear the free fall is much faster than the lift.
2. There is room during direction change for a "power drain LAG" before the weight is needed again.
3. i wanted to use opposing force magnets for zero contact points but then i have spring effects...
Could you make a lever which is driven by the vertical movement, and then linked to a lever which push the pendulum? Maybe the centrifugal forces in the pendulum will be sufficient to keep the pendulum going?
Now, try to load the "piston" that moves up and down above your pendulum. Let it work on somethig that have high friction. Then see what happens. Interesting device. Good luck.
@ToemanX Hi, and thanks for the reply. I really think this is an interesting device. The heavier the piston is, the more energy input to the pendulum is required to move it up and down. A light piston, will require less energy to move up and down. However, and this is a big however: Friction has no mass, so you should be able to harness energy from friction, litterally without adding energy to the pendulum more than it takes to move a light piston. To be continued...
@ToemanX If you replace the spring and "piston" with a speaker driver, you have a light mass that is able to move up and down and produce electricity- Possibly more electricity than it takes to move the mass up and down. Then you have a possible selfrunner. Interesting?
I have been working with the 2 stage oscillator for over 4 years and not one time have I seen a pendulum do what yours does. PLEASE ; tell me the video was edited in some way to make the pendulum gain altatude just as it was slowing down.
I believe the initial rise of the "bob" during the first few strokes of the video had to do with the start up energy stored in the spring finding a equilibrium with the swing. (resonance)
I don't think you're the first person to come up with this basic setup. I've seen or even mentioned this on forums over the years.
What you did, is take the magic ou tof the 2-stage oscillator. Now, all at once it's fairly easy to put in formulae how it works. And it's evident that there is no gain to be had. The moment you extract any amount of work from any part of the vertical spring stroke, the amplitude of the next pendulum swing will be reduced.
I assume the pendulum will swing freely when there is no load, or if the vertical movement stops completely. Friction that reduce the stroke will probably add a delay between the pendulum position and the vertical position, but I am not sure. I will make one small device myself - just to check.
Is it possible to make an oscillator-generator system by attaching a magnet to the "bob" (the rectangular object attached to both the spring and pendulum) and make a coil either around it or on the sides? Needless to say, you would have to make a much more robust 2-stage oscillator - probably make the structure with materials stronger than wood, make a heavier pendulum, more robust spring, etc.
This simplified idea is posted on my channel on 19 march 2009.
You do not have one stage of freedom of movement but two, one rotation and one translation.
You also have to show the dumper ( useful work).
causevskinikola 1 week ago in playlist Uploaded videos
@causevskinikola You are correct to a certain degree. My device does have two movements. A two stage oscillator really refers to a two SIDED oscillator. My device
eliminates one of the sides. It is really a one sided oscillator.
ToemanX 1 week ago
@ToemanX
You did not answer about this idea posted on my channel on 19 march 2009.
Also better version on this theme is my ( over unity centrifugal mechanism) posted dec.09 2009 on my channel where is clearly shown that gravity has nothing to do with the over unity, just the inertial centrifugal force.
But all this is thanks to mister Veljko Milkovic. This are all upgrades on his pioneer work on this field.
causevskinikola 1 week ago
excellent as usual
kamalmichael 1 month ago
Hey ToemanX, I've had this idea when I first saw Milkovic's two stage oscillator, 2 years ago. Unfortunately, I have no time or place to experiment (time is greater problem - thanks to stupid capitalism), so thanks a lot for posting this video!!! Also, what I've been thinking is to add a spring on pendulum drive (like in winding clock) to maintain its swing. Could you pleaaase, try that? Another idea: How about tu use car spring (on piston) and to compress it instead? Thanks a lot, again!!!
milesbennet 1 month ago
@milesbennet I will try your idea of a spring-on-pendulum-drive. However, using a method
that compresses gas in a piston is a little too complicated to try at this time.
ToemanX 1 month ago
@ToemanX What I've meant to say is to use spring in opposite direction... On the way down (on pendulum equilibrium point) spring will be compressed. Maybe it could be easier to build this way and spring could last longer? (spring over piston neck, and all in tube - like in pen) >> Nasty draft alert in your inbox!!! :)
milesbennet 1 month ago
@milesbennet I understand what you mean now. Yes it may be better to compress the
spring. I will have to give it a try and find out. Thanks for the idea.
ToemanX 1 month ago
very good idea but since there is no lever you are not taking advantage of the length times the force concept of leverage and your pulses remain in constant harmony with the swing of the pendulum, but with a two stage you can vary the length of the lever to change rising height and force. but i do like the compact design :)
cityvillian 2 months ago in playlist More videos from ToemanX
@cityvillian The advantage of a lever is - the longer the lever the smaller the weight (or
force) is needed. The spring in my device replaces the lever and weight. My device is
better because it is simpler - in theory. In reality it is difficult to work with large springs,
to adjust them.
ToemanX 2 months ago
It is a combination of two pendulums - mathematical and physical. Calculate the amplitude. They have to agree.
Lechoslowianin 2 months ago in playlist Uploaded videos
@Lechoslowianin They have to agree? The physical action is reality. It is the job of
math to explain that reality. The math is wrong if it does not agree with the physical
reality - not the other way around.
ToemanX 2 months ago
just watched it to the end. very very cool. thanks 4 sharing
aurisawei 4 months ago
neat, but it's still a 2 stage
aurisawei 4 months ago
A ratchet on the piston, preventing it (partially?) to spring up, can test whether multiple pendulum swing are more powerful than a single one. If you drag the piston lower that way than from a quarter swing, that would prove overunity right there. Because the single quarter swing is right on conventtional science unity.
Cloxxki 4 months ago
@Cloxxki I think we have a misunderstanding. The goal is to keep the pendulum swinging. To do that we need to add energy to it. We get the needed energy from the fall of the piston, its' kinetic energy downward.We need the piston to move as much as possible up and down to be able to capture as much downward force energy and supply it to the swinging pendulum. One full fall of the piston supplies the extra energy for one more swing of the pendulum.
ToemanX 4 months ago
@ToemanX The pendulum would still swing laterally freely. Just the pivot would be resticted to move back up, or partially so each swing. If you want a pendulum that keeps swinging, just leave the seccond stage out. It will swing forever when well constructed. To get any surplus energy out, you'll have to get energy out at SOME stage (no pun intended). With constant energy being put into the first stage, when to ever get it back out? The first stage's capacity is limited by its length and mass.
Cloxxki 4 months ago
@Cloxxki You are an intelligent person but I am having trouble understanding you. You state, the pendulum"...
will swing forever..." What? My experience is that any pendulum, after a few swings, will come to a stop
because of energy lost to friction. The whole purpose of the rise and fall of the piston is to supply the extra
energy to the pendulum needed to replace the energy lost to friction. As much rise and fall of the piston as
possible is needed.
ToemanX 4 months ago
@ToemanX You are too kind, thank you. Yes, a pivot can have some friction and the pendulum itself will need to be put inside a vaccume to not have air resistance. In essence though, it's an eternal motion. Much like space rocks. Once tapped in a direction, nothing will ever stop them from wandering.
Unfortunately the second stage is driven by the pendulum, not the other way around. It's a balance of energies at best. I admire your efforts though.
Cloxxki 4 months ago
@ToemanX
I really like your version of the TSO.
The energy Gains that are had from the conventional TSO are great. I'm sure yours could have similar results. Tuning the conventional TSO you add or subtract weight to the counter weight in accordance to the external load. Yours would require some sort of adjustable spring (an air spring...) Making yours on a large scale to have may be trickier but probably worth the extra work.
Limiting & adjusting the up and down movement may help
Yourfishman 4 months ago
@Yourfishman It is easier using weights in a TSO. I realize making really big versions of my device would be
a problem. Very large springs - say three feet long and one foot in diameter - are not readily available. They
would have to be specially made. This would be expensive but less so if mass produced.
ToemanX 4 months ago
@ToemanX
Exactly, i was thinking possibly a spring built like motorcycle air forks could be a option.
Unfortunate these TSO need to be pretty big to get practical amount of usable energy.
Yourfishman 4 months ago
@Yourfishman Where was the energy gain claim of the TSO ever proven? It never did more work than its input, at least where I've read. I do believe it has great peak torgue, which aids in overcoming stiction and dead spot leverage issues, such as with a town square water pump.
If there was a gain (I saw claims of 12x), the output could easily be converted to a simple tap to the first stage. It doesn't work that way however. And my rathcet idea also won't work. Complicated, but not over unity.
Cloxxki 4 months ago
@Cloxxki
It has been proven in my garage. (On a small scale) I think there are other videos on you tube that
make it's OU self evident. Simply consider the free fall power of the counter weight, when the bob is in the up position, and you should understand. I like one of Rhead100's videos, it shows a 4 pounds push, over 4 " in 0.3 seconds, of input work; equaling 70 lbs free falling 2" in 0.3 seconds twice is fairly clear evidence, but maybe it is just me.
Yourfishman 4 months ago
@Yourfishman I greatly applaud your efforts, and am a fan of Rhead100's work as well.
unfortunately, fuzzy math is not allowed in science, else I'd have several overunity tricks myself now.
I believe in gravity machines, the leading measure is not time, but height times mass.
The gentle taps to keep a simple TSO going (overcoming friction), are actually over a significant distance (work). The huge output at the second stage is worthless until harvested. Just oscillations, cancelling itself out.
Cloxxki 3 months ago
@Cloxxki
For the most part i agree with you, especially this statement "The huge output at the second stage is worthless until harvested. Just oscillations, cancelling itself out."
BUT I would argue that 70 lb weight in Rhead100 part A video landing with full force onto the "stop block" does represent work. (hammering work)
I would also argue that push is doing more than over coming fiction, it is also overcoming the small loss from the small up and down movement.
Yourfishman 3 months ago
@Yourfishman It's more impressive if the 70lbs weight would drop onto a pllow than a hard surface. The bounce is quite slow, and the surfaces near infitely hard. Let the blow crack a nut, then it's work. The losses in sound are negligible in terms of Joules.
Don't over-complicate the TSO. Either you can extract useful work for it, and keep it going with a smaller new input at the first stage, or you can't. Don't mix up work, distance, time and height. Loop it to proove your point. Not that hard
Cloxxki 3 months ago
@Cloxxki
With the conventional TSO,
With adequate swing, the weight of the counter weight plays no purpose when falling. It seems that most folks try to harness energy during the LIFT of the counter weight some use a spring. this i believe is wrong.
I think the useable energy should only be collected from the free fall of the weight. I believe this makes a big difference in results. This may be part of the math problem that some find.
I PM you on Energetic Forum.
Yourfishman 3 months ago
@Yourfishman If you are right, that would be awesome. The downswing of the second stage would be isolated from the input completely. one issue I see is that off timing. It needs to stay in sync. Extract energy, and you may slow it down and at best limit the amount of input on the next swing. Catch my drift?
It seems worthwhile to make highspeed footage of a basic second stage, and analyse its velocity. A very efficient (sturdy)landing platform and gearing might extract the impact at ideal time?
Cloxxki 3 months ago
@Cloxxki
You got it ! : )
You are absolutely correct, timing and loads will have to be balanced out . It requires tuning to sync every thing correctly. Then build in some room for error.
I did review some TSO videos in slow motion.
1. It is clear the free fall is much faster than the lift.
2. There is room during direction change for a "power drain LAG" before the weight is needed again.
3. i wanted to use opposing force magnets for zero contact points but then i have spring effects...
Yourfishman 3 months ago
Comment removed
Yourfishman 4 months ago
@ToemanX
Could you make a lever which is driven by the vertical movement, and then linked to a lever which push the pendulum? Maybe the centrifugal forces in the pendulum will be sufficient to keep the pendulum going?
jallaguri 5 months ago
@jallaguri Your suggestion might work. I can not be sure until I tried it on a model. I will keep your idea in mind
for future models.
ToemanX 5 months ago
Now, try to load the "piston" that moves up and down above your pendulum. Let it work on somethig that have high friction. Then see what happens. Interesting device. Good luck.
jallaguri 5 months ago
@jallaguri We all know what you mean by "load the piston". But remember the concept of ratios. This is a small
model so the load would be a small one. A bigger model would have a bigger load, etc. More advanced
models will better handle larger amounts of load friction.
ToemanX 5 months ago
@ToemanX Hi, and thanks for the reply. I really think this is an interesting device. The heavier the piston is, the more energy input to the pendulum is required to move it up and down. A light piston, will require less energy to move up and down. However, and this is a big however: Friction has no mass, so you should be able to harness energy from friction, litterally without adding energy to the pendulum more than it takes to move a light piston. To be continued...
jallaguri 5 months ago
@ToemanX If you replace the spring and "piston" with a speaker driver, you have a light mass that is able to move up and down and produce electricity- Possibly more electricity than it takes to move the mass up and down. Then you have a possible selfrunner. Interesting?
jallaguri 5 months ago
@jallaguri The "real" weight of the piston includes the weight at the end of the pendulum. They are really one unit.
The pendulum-weight provides the real downward force, which the is motive force for the device. It produces
the gross energy generated. The question is, is this more energy than is needed to keep the pendulum swinging.
Without energy input the pendulum will gradually slow down and stop.
ToemanX 5 months ago
I have been working with the 2 stage oscillator for over 4 years and not one time have I seen a pendulum do what yours does. PLEASE ; tell me the video was edited in some way to make the pendulum gain altatude just as it was slowing down.
RHEAD100 5 months ago
@RHEAD100 The video is not edited. When the falling piston hits bottom it gives the pendulum a jolt of energy.
This would not happen if the piston was hooked up to the load of a generator.
ToemanX 5 months ago
@RHEAD100
I believe the initial rise of the "bob" during the first few strokes of the video had to do with the start up energy stored in the spring finding a equilibrium with the swing. (resonance)
Yourfishman 4 months ago
I don't think you're the first person to come up with this basic setup. I've seen or even mentioned this on forums over the years.
What you did, is take the magic ou tof the 2-stage oscillator. Now, all at once it's fairly easy to put in formulae how it works. And it's evident that there is no gain to be had. The moment you extract any amount of work from any part of the vertical spring stroke, the amplitude of the next pendulum swing will be reduced.
It's just a lever. Many swings to jack it up
Cloxxki 5 months ago
@Cloxxki Any oscillator system will always naturally run down without proper intervention. The first pendulum
swing is a "free-give-me" swing (how much energy is used to raise it first time does not matter). The questions
then are (1) how much energy is needed to complete the second swing? (2) Is that energy less than the energy
gained from the rise and fall of the piston in one cycle?
ToemanX 5 months ago
@Cloxxki
I assume the pendulum will swing freely when there is no load, or if the vertical movement stops completely. Friction that reduce the stroke will probably add a delay between the pendulum position and the vertical position, but I am not sure. I will make one small device myself - just to check.
jallaguri 5 months ago
Nice work
Is it possible to make an oscillator-generator system by attaching a magnet to the "bob" (the rectangular object attached to both the spring and pendulum) and make a coil either around it or on the sides? Needless to say, you would have to make a much more robust 2-stage oscillator - probably make the structure with materials stronger than wood, make a heavier pendulum, more robust spring, etc.
okayillgonow 5 months ago
@okayillgonow It is entirely possible to make a generator the way you suggested. However, you have to
remember how mass produced conventional (rotary) generators are. For the time being, at least, it would
probably be cheaper and easier to hook the "bob" (what I call a "piston") up to a conventional generator.
ToemanX 5 months ago