Half a croissant, on a plate, with a sign in front of it saying '50c'
h a l f b a k e r y
You gonna finish that?

idea: add, search, annotate, link, view, overview, recent, by name, random

meta: news, help, about, links, report a problem

account: browse anonymously, or get an account and write.

user:
pass:
register,


                       

[vernon]s ARTRR two possibly working versions

the difference between when you push something like a c elt can be timed to create groovy motion effects
  (+1, -2)
(+1, -2)
  [vote for,
against]

[vernon]s Alternating Response Times Radiate Reaction (link) idea apparently works. Here are two machines that use it. one might even fly!

a purely mechanical approach

C elts also known as "rattlebacks" rotate one way first, then the opposite way. if [vernon] were to use periodically modulated force on a two item clump consisting of a hinged pencil with a regular pencil [vernon] could get the c elt with its periodicity, to rotate whichever way [vernon] preferred. the compression wave would get there at different times between the hinged as well as ...unhinged... pencil thus making the c elt rotate however [vernon prefers] This is different than just using either of two actuators, as the delay of the hinged pencil causes that transmitted force to occur at a different "rotational susceptibility" of the c elt.

when you push it changes the direction of rotation, which is a way that alternating response times (modulate) the reaction

Now here is the longer version, which actually started as a response to [vernon]s ARTRR idea

Alternating Response Times Radiate Reaction makes an omnidirectional pathmover

One ARTRR is two circle magnets levitate on a pencil. the force that permits the magnet to levitate is the spontaneous continuous reordering of magnetic domains from background thermal motion, that is background thermal motion actually provides the motion that realigns ferromagnetic domains as well es electron spins when the magnet is pushed with another magnet. plausability of this is idea comes from the well known technique of magnetic refrigeration where ordered magnetism actually cools things

so it appears to me, using phrases from [vernons original writing, that [vernon]s multihandled beam movers are like a magnetic field "reifying" from a multitude of positionally plural forces, while supergirl directs force from a point. it is both inevitable (at some kinds of matter) as well as potentially useful to vary the time or location phase of these to create groovy new forms of motion.

supposedly then you could make a rotor this way, there is a thing called an c elt, it a shape that spins one direction, then the opposite direction after a while. use the c elt as the base magnet. pushing the levitating magnet towards the magnetic c elt will make it rotate, as it happens one direction, then another. I think that varying the periodicity of the push force on the magnet, as [vernon] suggests we could get the c elt to rotate whichever direction we preferred, thus creating a groovy new motion effect

this ARTRR uses two levitating magnets as well as an c elt to trace arbitrary motion curves: (object starts gliding on a plane) then c elt at base gets full push, thus it just rotates, then, 1/4 strength push, rotate then opposite rotation, which is less energetic, which could make a curve as the ARTRR glided along the path.

further with [vernon]s alternating response periodicity idea you could get the c elt twomagnet mover to travel any direction as you blend the curves. If the c elt were attached to an airfoil rapid rotation might actually lift it off the ground, if you could keep the magnets pulsing!

The purely mechanical approach

the thing is im using a natural "phase effect" material here with the magnet, perhaps theres a purely mechanical approach; if [vernon] were to use alternating force on a clump consisting of a hinged pencil with a regular pencil, skipping the magnets [vernon] could get the c elt with its periodicity, to rotate whichever way [vernon] preferred. the compression wave would get there at different times between the hinged as well as ...unhinged... pencil thus making the c elt rotate however [vernon prefers] This is different than just using either of two actuators, as the delay of the hinged pencil causes that transmitted force to occur at a different "rotational susceptibility" of the c elt.

thats two ARTRRs so I think it works

beanangel, Feb 10 2012

the c elt also known as a "rattleback" rotates one direction first, then the opposite direction http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rattleback
personally I think it might be a little like a "centrifugal governor" molded as one part where rotating it changes the center of gravity, also, the talk area of the article lists some anagyre ish machines [beanangel, Feb 10 2012]

[vernon]s ARTRR Alternating_20Respo...0Radiate_20Reaction
ARTRR Alternating Response Times Radiate Reaction [beanangel, Feb 10 2012]

[link]






       [Vernon] and [beanie] have merged into [Ultimate MegaObfuscationMan!] RUN!!!!!!
RayfordSteele, Feb 10 2012
  

       [Marked-For-Deletion] Bad Science
MechE, Feb 10 2012
  

       Ditto on the obfuscation. I have no idea what this is even talking about.
Psalm_97, Feb 10 2012
  

       Have you ever actually played with a rattleback? Even the slightest hindrance to its motion/balance ruins the effect.
mitxela, Feb 10 2012
  

       To make more sense I rephrased my thought on what a mechanical ARTRR might function as, then put it at the beginning.   

       I move we leave it up until [vernon] comments
beanangel, Feb 10 2012
  

       The link has nothing to do with ARTRR.
MechE, Feb 10 2012
  

       The link has Know thing to with ARTRR?
beanangel, Feb 10 2012
  

       Sweet mother of velociraptor Jesus, they've combined.   

       I think we've got maybe a few days before they reach critical mass. We should probably be running about now.
Hive_Mind, Feb 10 2012
  

       [beanangel], I don't see that you are properly applying the hypothesis that is supposed to let an ARTRR work.   

       1. You need an object, or a method of applying forces to an object, which can exhibit two different propagation times, when the applied forces traverse the object. Remember that an object cannot fully respond to an applied force, and begin to move "as a whole", until an applied force propagates throughout the object and thereby affects every part of it. Therefore "propagation time" is essentially synonymous with "response time".   

       2. You need two of those objects.   

       3. You need to arrange things so that the two objects can interact with each other.   

       4. When forces are applied to the two objects, you always want one of them to exhibit a relatively short propagation/response time while the other simultaneously exhibits a relatively long propagation/response time.   

       5. You want to apply the forces such that each object alternates between the two response times.   

       6. You want to apply the forces at a cyclic rate that is faster than the long-response time, but slower than the short-response time. For example, if the short-response time is 1/1000 of a second, and the long-response is 1/100 of a second, then the cyclic rate should be greater than 100 times per second, but less than 1000 times per second. The hypothesis hints that the the closer to the short-response time, the more efficient the ARTRR will be. So, in that example, you might prefer a cyclic rate, for applying forces to the objects, of maybe 995 times per second.   

       So, as I wrote at the start here, I don't see how your proposals implement the hypothesis.
Vernon, Feb 11 2012
  
      
[annotate]
  


 

back: main index

business  computer  culture  fashion  food  halfbakery  home  other  product  public  science  sport  vehicle