# Novel propulsion method- differential linear percussion

#### Particle Article

Hi again!
I have another new space propulsion method,
this time I have tested it.
I built a carriage and put a pneumatic ram bolted to it.
I set a plane level for the carriage, which is on wheels.
I ducted 60 psi of pneumatic force to the ram on one end,
and used a regulator to step down to 7.5 psi on the other.
When this goes through a 3-port 2-position switch,
and I actuate the ram,
I can move my carriage forward around 20 mm in one cycle.
This is a perfectly feasible, and also effective space thruster afaic tell.
The drive needs to be hauled into space with a rocket I guess.
The method works because of differential velocity, at one end of the ram and the other,
it receives a different shock of energy.

This post serves as prior art, and will remain unedited

This is really easy, hope u like my thought- it seems like it works!

#### Particle Article

Yesterday I got more air kit coz I wanted to implicate more power, so I got 10mm air hose instead of 4mm, but the hose pulls so much on my little ram carrier, that I can't see what is happening.
It was working with the 4mm hose though. I ran it in both directions to make sure. Today I'll experiment more. I have 6mm hose that is quite flexible, I'll try that. Soon I'll put a video on You-Tube for us

#### Mental Avenger

It only appears to work on Earth due to friction. It won't work in space.
Newton's third law is: For every action, there is an equal and opposite reaction.
That isn't just a good idea, its the LAW.

Catastrophe

#### Particle Article

Hi Mental Avenger,
thank you for the insight, regarding friction.
I have now learnt about the unproven Dean Drive.
Friction is involved, the bearing wheels and ram bore do have some.
What I propose I am trying to do here is use inertia.
The ram has a weight on it's shaft.
When it's engaged the inertia of the weight throws the carriage forward.
This results in the movement.
Less energy is used to return the ram for the next cycle,
the stroke is slower so it has less kinetic energy.
Maybe this results in net movement?
I found I can push a 1.5 kg weight 2.5mm,
with rolling car, but it bounces very much
When not hitting anything it moves around 20mm every cycle

I got more pneumatic supplies, maybe tomorrow I can film it as it is now

Last edited:

#### Mental Avenger

Energy cannot be created from nothing. There is energy loss in every mechanical device. Perpetual motion machines do not work.

Catastrophe

#### Particle Article

This one uses conventional force/energy.
It is losing energy in each cycle and would need to powered by a compressor.
However, motion is sort of perpetual in space coz if you throw an object, it will keep going until hit/gravitationally affected.
Did you watch the video?
The force is not created from nothing, it uses 60psi-
the movement gathered is from differential inertia.
An object moving fast has more kinetic energy than the same object moving slow,
is my contention

Please watch my video if you like, it is the device in practice I have just filmed

#### Mental Avenger

the movement gathered is from differential inertia.
An object moving fast has more kinetic energy than the same object moving slow, is my contention
The energy of a massive object is proportional to the square of the velocity. However, the energy to accelerate the object is also proportional to the square of the velocity, minus the friction, for a net loss.

#### Truthseeker007

BANNED
The Navy already has a patent for a ship that can bend space time.

#### Particle Article

thanks Mental Avenger-
I'm still grappling with the Physical concepts
I hope you liked to see my experiment in practice
It's a curious earthly drive

-so essentially the object brakes itself ineffably?

Have you read the patent TruthSeeker?

#### TylerDavidDean

Particle Article, sorry for hi-jacking your thread, but I notice that you are a mechanical engineer. You know what would be dope? A pneumatic motor with permanent fixed magnets axially fixed to the casing. Then, pressurize the motor with charged air.

Its an experiment in Ionic Propulsion. Another thing for earth, but if you want to make a "cart" or a bike and you have a chemical electric battery and an air canister, you can make a hybrid system that has electric charging and a propellant.

Check out my thread in Astronomy about the UDMVT "Union's Dark Mater Vector Telescope."

Last edited:

#### Particle Article

hiya!
I'm not a qualified engineer,
I have briefly worked in R&D as a tech/constructor-
I can do some tasks that a machinist, technician, fitter & turner can do

I'm sorry I can't help with Ion Thrusters, here's the Wiki for us peeps->

-also I don't know anything except vaguely about Gravity Waves and Dark Matter,
You might have something though(studying with optics), as I've heard that light can be bent by gravity
Hope to see you around and I will read with interest

at the moment I am fitting the Inertia Drive to a wheel, I have made the hub.
-- it requires a rare pneumatics part called a 'rotary union'
I'm real curious to see what it does. I would be happy if it can accelerate.

#### YetAnotherBob

sorry, won't work. I am an Engineer. What will happen is that your vehicle will shake back and forth then fall apart eventually. It's been done.

#### Particle Article

Hi- I've thought about this idea again for the last 2 days. Many people have said that the only reason this works on earth is because of the friction between the wheels and the table. The truth of it is that it works worse if brakes are applied to the wheels. It is true that the return stroke in the existing model is only possible because of friction. That can however be nullified or engineered until it doesn't happen. The simplicity of getting around that is basically spinning the drive around within the ship using the point the weight is at for centre. Also the percussive force of braking can be mitigated by pivoting 2 weights which terminate perpendicular to the drive, somewhat to the sides of the ship. All success friends, best hope for the future

#### Particle Article

hello again, hope your having a nice day
Alright I have the next round of extrapolation on this concept.

It is impossible to return the inertia weight to the booster or power stroke without causing some retro movement. This is a Newtonian principle likely. So what happens is, and I believe my principle is sound-
- if you move a weight of tonnes or so within a spacecraft from one end of it to the other, the space craft will move in a power stroke. Now unfortunately it is not possible to repeat the with immediacy, for to do that we need to move our weight back to where it was to do it again. When we move the weight back, the ship moves again, in a retro way relative to our desired travel. Now in my model in the video, this has been accomplished by moving slowly, which washes the low speed low energy movement to the friction on the wheels. This is not possible in space, because even the low energy movement sums to the high speed movement perfectly, and the reason it does this is because it takes a vastly longer time, and in longer time it's slower motion will travel the same distance.
Now, in a device that is slightly different to my model, that problem can actually be defeated (I theorise). The way to do this is to use the same time to travel in both directions, but contact/hit the end of travel with less force at one end, and more at the other. This creates a differential, which sums to movement in one direction more than the other as far as I can conceptualise.
To practically apply this to my models, air rams are actually very adept. The shaft causes one direction to have more force than the other, and that may sufficedly simply be fine. One direction of travel has around the same speed, but hits harder, the end of the seal with no shaft.
To make this more effective, we can gang say 8 rams. Then the ratio of shaft/seal is the same, but it sums to a much larger difference in percussive force, while essentially maintaining the same speed. The speed can actually be controlled easily with a regulator, so it is ~exactly the same.
The weight of inertia on the rams makes the retro/booster movement more violent and longer.

Now, I am appreciative of any critique of my idea- but best is is fair physical contest. That will move us forward(noticed pun heh). Of course this method is power lossing, it is conventional energy, which gladly can be electricity if want. Or nuclear steam. If a ram is not destroyed by such an ugly shaking yet travelling(perhaps in this appliance above), we can engineer a ship and cargo that are not either. In some sovereign truth, components always have some strength.

I hope this captures your imagination even more now, even though it is not vastly conducive to travelling in space, indeed it's vastly inefficient, but I think it can travel forwards now.

If we are employing a powerful compressor, maybe rams could help liftoff on a Martian moon also. It's moons can be considered lifting platforms, and docking locations. I want my spaceship to be purely a transport and never used for alien warfare.

Cheers!- all success

#### COLGeek

Moderator
In the vacuum (and frictionless environment) of space, wouldn't it just stay in one place? What would it "push" against to move forward (and remain doing so)?

#### Particle Article

In all truth I don't know what happens in space with this one,
We would need 2 tumblers working in opposing directions,
so the craft could be in any way controlled.
The theory is that these servos are locked to a fixed speed, and the intervention of the ram applies a force which has bias. I hope it pushes against itself, as the craft itself holds the ram.
The next test is to make an air cylinder and use batteries to see what it does when it's untethered from the boom. I should have film of that within a week or so
kind regard- !

--just a little further, the weight is the massive object which is creating push. Mass in motion is apparent in space. Maybe the pushes are unbalanced by the ram, and create small bias in a direction

Last edited:

#### Particle Article

just a small clarifier perhaps,
the idea is it doesn't push against anything extraneous to the craft
-- hopefully the video demonstrates that, but the boom may be interfering.
Today I will make an air tank and do the Lego programming on an nxt with batteries,
so that I can uncouple it from the boom. Also I will do the basic control program that will attempt to spin the drive backwards to see what that does.
Unfortunately the craft will become much heavier

2 hours until I can make tool noise

#### Particle Article

I'm sorry that my latest video example proved to have unrepeatable results after I improved my science by levelling my board/track better. I have deleted that video from YouTube as it was misleading. I am still very interested in this concept of throwing weights around to move forward in space, and can move 4mm in a cycle with a programmed servo. Perhaps I'll make a video of that. All success

#### Catastrophe

##### "Science begets knowledge, opinion ignorance.
I hope you realise that pre-disclosures such as these will not be useful if you try to patent any of your excellent inventions.

Cat

#### Particle Article

no- thank you for looking after me,
I have other more currently/immediately useful ideas that I may attempt to patent
- but this one is the least I can do for a society that has treated me so kindly
This post among the others I have made serve as prior art.
It is so hard to undo this information now- if successful, we have it

does this application of math to the simple ram motion seem actually true?--
the formula for kinetic movement is==>
K.E. = 1/2 m v(squared)

so if we apply this, the non-linearity may be able to be applied to acceleration in space
so we move with 3 backwards and score 4.5
then we move with 4 forwards, and score 8
the forward movement has more kinetic energy than the reverse one

-in space that will leave us moving, and possibly accelerating too

so our speed is now 3.5
then we do the same thing,
and net 7 after 2 strokes

does the application of the math seem sound peeps?

thank u very much Cat, hope this math seems appealing and exciting!

#### Catastrophe

##### "Science begets knowledge, opinion ignorance.
"This post among the others I have made serve as prior art."

Prior art, connected with your invention, is what is used against your patent application. Say nothing before you apply. That is the advice.

Cat

#### Particle Article

yah, thank u
these posts are my prior art to their subsequent claim
I cannot act in space, and such an idea, it's not really tenable for me to manipulate it
things will move faster with an 'open source' format
I want to give it 8D

- it's still pretty tenuous that this works

once we have electrical acceleration,
we will break light speed close to the sun, if we would like to risk it

salut!
-Nick

#### Particle Article

I have a new video- involving the Lego car/craft I had previously removed. It's the same as the ram one.
Speed is used, which is a power, as opposed to time, which is linear. Here's the video ==>
so the weight moves slowly forwards, and fast backwards, which throws the ship forward. When I made the hemisphere cam it became apparent that the timing can be set better and worse.

Replies
4
Views
343
Replies
0
Views
219
Replies
4
Views
288
Question Propulsion
Replies
2
Views
3K
Replies
1
Views
944