Spring - Drive - Motor
by Alfred Evert
Link to original website: www.evert/de

Nearby null energy is demanded to keep masses rotating (only friction losses are to compensate). By that minimum input of energy, however most strong inertia- resp. centrifugal-forces can come up. At horizontal working rotor systems (thus by vertical axis) these forces are constant and symmetric. At vertical working rotor systems (thus by horizontal axis) gravity forces are affecting in addition. Sum of all forces then no longer are equal into all radial directions. So there should exist simple solution for usage of differences of forces.

At picture EV FKM 01 at A schematic is shown effective mass (WM, German wirksame Masse, red points) steady turning around system axis (SA) at circle track (here left-turning is assumed all times). There can not come up usable forces by this totally symmetric arrangement, e.g. centrifugal forces affect only tension within material of spokes.

At diverse proposals for solution of previous chapters was found, mass is not to guide at circle-round track but has to move at uneven tracks, in order to break that general symmetry of all processes and power effects. At this picture at B for example is shown a track, at which effective mass can fall nearby free within a sector (D), later on is turning relative steady at circled bow (E) by constant radius, which at following upward-phase is reduced, so mass comes back to track more inside (F).

Objectives of these conceptions in principle was to transfer kinetic energy of free falling motion into turning momentum. Contrary to these attempts of solutions now stands general knowledge, lifting and lowering of masses is force-neutral at any case, no matter by which process or leverarm-system that job is done. So by that point of view, naturally all these systems are symmetric concerning demanded and ´produced´ energies.

Nevertheless, despite of balance in general, also valid in general is fact schematic shown at this picture at C: masses of rotor systems with horizontal axis don´t weight at all phases same kind onto spokes. At downside positions inertia- and gravity-forces add to stronger forces, marked at this picture as phase G with strong pulling forces. At following upward-phase (H) for example, radial forces are much weaker. Previous surplus of forces thus should be usable for pulling inward masses at that phase.

Prerequisite thereto is, forces are to store intermediately, e.g. in shape of spring´s tension. Also based on that idea I already made several proposals at different chapters. However, affecting forces are to use as effective turning momentum only if forces don´t work radial but into tangential direction. Objectives of this chapter here thus are to design corresponding leverarm-system.

At picture EV FKM 02 schematic are shown essential constructional elements of system. Around system axis (SA) is turning system shaft, at which fix is mounted rotorarm (RT, German Rotorträger). Rotorarm here is drawn as a disk, really are demanded two parallel disks in order to bear other constructional elements symmetric.

At rotorarm is installed rotor bearing (RL, German Rotorlager), around which rotor (RO) can swivel. Rotor here for example is drawn like circle-bow, which maximum can be half circle long. So at one axial level are to arrange two of these rotors.

At A both rotors are at vertical positions. At B is shown, rotor (right side) can swivel inward until leaning at a supporting point (SP). At C this construction did turn by 90 degrees and there are drawn further elements.

There is an other connection between rotor and rotorarm, which here is called pulling-rod (ZS, German Zugstange). This rod at the one end is beard swivelling within rotor and this bearing here is called pulling-joint (ZL, German Zuglager). At the other end, that rod is guided by swivelling bearing of rotorarm, here this bearing is called spring-joint (FL, German Federlager).

As rotor can swivel, distance between both bearings is variable. Pulling-rod (ZS) can glide within spring-joint (FL) and phasewise rod will reach far out of spring-joint (here at upside rotor). There is also installed a spring-element (FE, German Federelement), which is compressed at stretched position. This drawing is only schematic. Function of both bearings e.g. could also be vice-versa, i.e. rod phasewise could reach outside of pulling-joint (ZL) and spring-element (FE) could be installed outside of. For example, pulling-rod (ZS) could also be constructed as telescope-rod with springs integrated.

Rotor downside at C is at that phase marked G at previous picture: effective mass of rotor wants to move downward by gravity like inertia, i.e. mass is weighting at spring, so spring is tensioned (while rotor upside weights at its supporting point and its spring is slacken in total).

At this picture at D rotor did turn by 90 degrees and phase of start of spring-tension (left) is shown and also phase of expanded spring (right). Rotor left side at D swings outward, so spring-element (FE) lastly gets compressed (like described at C at downward rotor). Rotor right side at D shows weaker forces into radial direction (compared with it´s previous position), so spring there is able to draw mass inward. That phase thus corresponds to sector H of previous picture (however at this position spring is slacken already in total).

At this animation one can see motion´s process of effective masses (dark-red parts of rotors). Naturally, masses in front of rotors move at other track than masses further backside of rotors. At motion´s processes like this, one may not think masses theoretical concentrated at one central point, one must look at two centres of masses at least (like upside already marked by M1 and M2).

If for example right-side-down frontside-mass already is guided upward, backside-mass still moves downward. At the following, frontside-mass by swivel-inward ´gets out of way´ for following mass. As soon rotor leans at supporting point (here marked by dark-blue circle), mass weights only at system axis. Mass there ´glides´ downward sloped surface, pulling rotor-joint over its uppermost position towards left side. Frontside-mass there already swings outward while backside-mass even is lifted towards left-side-up. Afterwards, rotor takes position like circle-bow nearby concentric to system axis.

So masses as a whole, here move at asymmetric track like already shown upside at picture EV FKM 01 and which shape of track was intended rather advantageous at earlier chapters. At that conception here however, track of free falling and lifting of masses are not decisive. Effect of this machine here is based only at work of spring-element.

Tension of Spring
At picture EV FKM 04 is shown only one rotor by downside position at A and by positions after each 30 degrees turning at B and C. Starting at rotor-joint (RL), rotor (RO) is marked only as red circle-bow. At rotor are marked backside mass-centre (M1) and frontside mass-centre (M2). Between these mass-parts is drawn pulling-joint (ZL) of rotor. Pulling-rod (ZS) and spring-element (FE) is tensioned (at A) and slackened (until C). Spring-element (FE) and rotor-joint (RL) here are drawn at radial line of system axis (SA).

At each mass-part are drawn constant gravity-weights (G1 and G2) as vertical black lines. Inertia-forces (T1 and T2, German Trägheitskraft) of each mass are marked by tangential black lines, here e.g. of half length of gravity-forces. By addition of both effective forces are each resulting forces (R1 und R2). Both masses in total affect pulling-force (RZ, German resultierende Zugkraft) by vectorial addition of previous resulting forces. Rotor at each position wants to move into each direction by each strength of forces.

At A resulting pulling force (RZ) exactly shows into direction of pulling-rod (ZS), i.e. spring-element (FE) there is tensioned at its maximum. Whole rotor there hangs at spring-element, diagonal downside-ahead.

By this construction - at static view - naturally comes up backward (towards left) showing component at rotor-joint (which thus would be negative momentum at RL). However it´s important, backside-mass (M1) shows stronger resulting force (R1) than frontside-mass. Backside-mass is also positioned some left of spring-element (FE). So backside-mass affects pulling down-ahead of rotor-joint (RL), thus positive momentum.

At the other hand, spring is tensioned some earlier, e.g. already as rotor-joint (RL) and spring-joint (FL) are positioned left side of system axis. Mass in total there hangs downside of these two bearings. As soon as spring is tensioned at its maximum, this leverarm-system works like fix installation of masses at rotorarm (RT), i.e. rotor by that position moves through its downside phase.

Extension of Spring
At situation shown at B, relations of forces did change, especially of frontside mass part. Its resulting force (R2) is essentially weaker and thus also pulling force (RZ) of rotor as a whole. Its power-component into direction of pulling-rod (RZ), marked by diagonal dotted line, now is decisive weaker (than at its previous position at A), so now tensioned spring is able to pull rotor inside.

Remaining vertical power-component (vertical dotted line) is to take by rotor bearing (RL). This joint however has not arrived its downmost position. So even within that phase of starting upward-motion, positive turning momentum affects at this rotor-joint (RL) - however again only because backside mass shows stronger forces.

At position shown at C now spring is slackened completely, however also there is to see importance of these both mass-centres: upside mass already swings to left side while downside mass still moves to right side. Both inertia forces are overlaid by gravity forces resp. resulting forces R1 and R2 are reduced and show in different directions. Both mass parts practically want to turn around pulling-joint (ZL), while rotor-joint (RL) naturally has to lift rotor.

Forces and counteracting Forces
If rotor mass would be installed at solid spoke, spoke would be weighted at its maximum while rotor is running through its downside positions. Analogue at present leverarm-system at this phase come up maximum pulling forces by addition of gravity- and inertia-forces (resp. centrifugal forces).

Opposite to simple spoke present concept has only some more ´complicated suspension´: while effective mass (preferably of long stretched shape) is at downside position, joints of its leverarm-system still are left side of system axis. Normal tension within material of solid spoke thus is transferred (at least by parts) into tension of material of spring. This tension of spring is ´for nothing´ because done by gravity and inertia. At the other hand, motion´s process, lifting and lowering and rotation of mass around system axis is unchanged.

At the beginning of upward-phase now each resulting force becomes weaker (in principle because gravity weights now vectorially are reduced more and more by upward-showing intertia (resp. centrifugal) forces). Energy intermediately stored within spring now is strong enough to pull mass inward (practically at first ´lighter´ frontside mass, later on also backside mass).

At this phase of ex-tension of spring, pulling-rod (ZS) shows to right side and spring-joint (FL) is positioned downside of system axis. Pressure forces of spring affects at spring-joint (FL) - into tangential direction. So expanding spring does that workload which results positive turning momentum. That force demands counteracting force, which is represented by remaining power-component of rotor masses which still shows right-side-outward. As spring at the one hand is pulling masses inward, same time spring is pulling rotorarm (RT) ahead in turning sense of system.

Once more is to point out importance of previous two mass centres: that relative turning around pulling-joint (ZL) at previous picture EV FKM 05 at C, by relative view exists already some earlier. Pulling force of spring does not weight at rotor-joint (RL, with corresponding negative momentum), but spring is pulling frontside mass (with its relative weak forces) around backside mass (with its still much stronger forces showing outwards). Fulcrum of that motion resp. power-affect thus is each backside mass part.

This process can work only if backside masses of rotor represent an ´inertia-centre´ within space. Extension of spring e.g. would be without effect, if mass by itself would fall inwards. That´s case if wheel turns too fast, i.e. spring is tensioned until rotor right-upside tilts inward by itself.

So after system is started turning, phasewise is build up tension of spring. By work of spring at phase of ex-tension, positive turning momentum is achieved. System will accelerate by itself up to certain maximum speed. Just below that maximum revolution, surplus of accelerating forces are to draw off system as usable turning momentum.

This conception is not based on shifting weights, differing turning speeds, free falling, lifting and lowering of masses or any characteristics of known proposals for solution of motors using gravity. Decisive element of this conception only is, normal (static) tension within material of spokes is transferred into tension of spring element and thus (dynamic) motion and work based on differences of affecting forces become possible.

This principle of motion´s process is to realize by diverse techniques. So at picture EV FKM 05 is shown previous rotor- and leverarm-system only by rough sketch, by cross-sectional view and longitudinal view (and elements only drawn by parts). Two of these rotor-rod-modules are to install at one axial level (pointed out at this drawing). Between two rotorarm-disks could be installed even six rotor-rod-modules.

As mentioned upside, pulling-rods (ZS) and its bearings and that spring could be realized different kind, e.g. by telescope-rods. Area of swivel of rotor could be much less than shown at previous pictures. However, effective mass of rotor should not be concentrated (e.g. at pulling-joint ZL) but should be shaped long stretched, so parts of masses run at different tracks with differing resulting forces.

In order to show wide variation for realizing this principle, at picture EV FKM 06 schematic is shown an other example. At system shaft (SA) is installed rotorarm (RT) in shape of three rods. At each end of rods are installed each rotor-joints (RL). Rotor (RO) is shaped as circle-segment of some 120 degrees.

Second connection between rotor and rotorarm now here is arranged that kind, pulling-joint (ZL) is installed at rotorarm (RT) and spring-joint (FE) is installed at rotor. Spring-element (FE) is installed outside (e.g. for easier adjustment). These elements are arranged that kind, centre of weight of rotor hangs vertical down at pulling-rod (ZS) when rotor is positioned left side down.

So at this picture, rotor downside left shows phase of tensioning of spring (spring is compressed). Rotor right side at this picture already got pushed inward by spring (spring extended to its normal length). So spring must be strong enough to do that work just before rotor comes into vertical position upside of rotor-bearing (RL). Rotor upside at this picture is positioned inside and rests at rotorarm (RT).

At this design, area of swivel of rotor is rather small. Large part of available surface is represented by effective masses. Cross-section of rotor e.g. could well be square. Three elements thus are to install at one axial level, so also three work-strokes by three springs occur at one revolution of system.

This example once more demonstrates, relation of leverarms and masses and turning speeds and spring´s characteristic must be coordinated well. Spring must be tensioned at its maximum left side down, where mass is shifted outward a little bit. Rotor right side is pressed inward and rests inside until nearby 10-o´clock-position. So centre of all weights in total is positioned some left of system axis all times. So that system could really start by itself resp. this permanent unbalance of weights represents also some positive turning momentum.

This animation shows motion´s process. Swivelling-outward of rotor starts just after rotor-joint passed its uppermost position. Motion-inward of rotor starts already before rotor-joint comes to its most downside position. Relative small motions are to recognize at gaps between rotor and rotorarm and also by surrounding black circle.

Naturally this motor will show the more performance the stronger springs are, i.e. the more heavy weights are installed, the larger radius of machine and the stronger inertia forces are working at most large lever arms. However that machine must not be large like ´Bessler-Wheel´ with diameter more than three meters, because no free falling of masses is necessary. There is also no transfer of energy by impulses, so that motor will work quite silent.

However this system must turn relative slow like Bessler´s wheels did (probably less than 60 rpm), so springs have time enough for working process. Optimum relation of all leverarm lengths, weights and spring´s characteristics could be calculated theoretic, however will be found faster by practical experiments.

Solution for using gravity by pure mechanical devises must be ´simple´. So I hope some handcrafts are convinced by previous ideas of that simple design and want to approve suggestion by real construction.

Evert / 10.12.2004