THE GYROSCOPIC INERTIAL THRUSTER

RETURN to INDEX

This concept released 4 May 1997
Public release document gitworks.htm
by Inventor David Eugene Cowlishaw
Rewritten 30 May 1997, faster loading,
more graphics.
Paragraph removed (begging text) 5 Jan '98

Abstract:
The Gyroscopic Inertial Thruster (GIT_tm) is a mechanical assembly that in it's operation, produces a thrust upon all attatched and contained parts by shifting the inertial energy profiles of those parts in such a manner so as to effectively turn action and reaction in the same direction, the vectored forces combining to form a gravity-like acceleration without matter ejection (jets, rockets), or fluid traction means (propellers, etc.).

A basic inertial thruster is comprised of a circular race that contains one or more drive masses that roll around the interior of the race, spinning about their own axes as they do so as a result of rolling contact with the sides of the race.

The race is configured to provide 2 points of contact with each of it's contained spinning masses (I'll call them balls for convenience, but any shape of circular cross section such as double cone etc. will work with a race of matching profile).

The race and drive balls are surfaced to provide a high friction at the points of contact such that a positive rolling traction constrains the spin of the balls to be directly related to their rolling movement in the race.
^
A motor means is needed of course for a sustained orbital velocity of the drive balls in the race, three main varients will be discussed later. (GITMotor)

Acceleration is achieved by crafting the race to provide a varying contact path for the orbiting, rolling balls such that the path at one extreme is in contact with the spinning balls very close to their spin equators, and at the other extreme, the contact points are very close to the spin poles, with the intervening paths a smooth transition between extremes.

The variable path race, one or more circulating masses, and a motor means to start and maintain orbital motion comprise the basic thrust device.

OK, enough mumbldey gobble, this is not anti-gravity, and I swear I haven't captured a UFO! The seemingly impossible task of 'boot-strapping' your self across the heavens is not a mysterious other dimensional force, it's a simple principle of physics and an effect derived from the inertial properties of moving matter.

If your computer is slow, it will help the smoothness of the following repeated copies of this animation if you click on the picture to turn it off before scrolling down through the rest of this document.

Got it going yet? Good! If not, do something about it 'cause the rest of this will be confusing, and words will fail to show what a simple motion picture can immediately convey.

UfoDrive.avi is 19 frames, 2 seconds in length, and is one frame shy of one quarter of an orbit for each ball. When looped continuously it gives the illusion of balls in continuous orbit, and as such if you follow one ball around the loop, it should take about 8 seconds. Of course, if a drive ring were really going this slow, it wouldn't be in the air long, but at least we can see what's going on in our 'Visible GIT'.

Now, looking at the UfoDrive animation, the back, or tail of the drive is at the bottom of the screen where the balls gather together to spin, so the nose is at the top, where the balls are moving at maximum speed in the race.

We are looking at the underside of an accelerating race about to go over our heads (in a virtual direction sense, not figuratively speaking I hope).

Notice the purple rings in this graphic. They represent the contact paths along which the balls roll, narrow at the nose, and wide apart at the tail.

As you can see the balls speed up and slow down in a complete orbit, continuously changing velocity as the orbit continues. Not shown is a motor means that is needed to keep the balls moving. Once the balls are started and reach optimal race velocity, the motor supplies friction losses but is not hereafter considered in the forces that result in an acceleration force on the race.
^
This particular model (I call it Crazy 8), the orbital path diameter (a circle through the centers of the balls), is equal to eight times the ball diameter, the split race shown is 'pinched' at the tail to a ball contact circle minimum of 1 eighth of the ball diameters.

Editorial note, added 10 September 1997: I've taken a bit of flak involving "closed" and "open" designations of the race, and in this original document, "closed" refers to the control means clamping together or "pinching" the split hollow toroidal race, forcing the CONTACT POINTS TO MOVE TOWARD THE SPIN AXES OF THE ORBITALS (actually opening the contact path).

All GIT races built to date (other than my original plaster model) are of the simple circle pair race, and they move oppositely, being the contact point paths AND the race both, and by pinching that model at one side (circles cut in plate material for instance), it brings the contact paths closer, giving a more equatorial contact with the orbitals, forming the "nose" or forward direction of the race.

The race can be crafted in many ways, and the hollow toroid has the advantage of maintaining the orbital path much more closely than the simple circle race, but is more difficult to create for us not blessed with a big machining facility. I hope this clears up the confusion, now back to the original document:

The above configuration yeilds a limit of an eight to one acceleration ratio. In other words, if the race were closed evenly around it's girth, the balls would have to spin eight times in the race to cover the same distance if the race were completely open (balls rolling on their equators for one complete spin). To complete the eights, of course there are eight balls.

An artifact of the animation shows all balls spinning at the same rate, turning in unison. That behavior is limited to one of the drive varients, the central friction drive wheel (or ring).

Sighhhhh......Editorial note added 10 October 1997
I Goofed! The above statement is false, I'm leaving it in since this is history, and I'm not going to try to hide the fact that this new science is not complete yet, or that all is known by me involving the GIT.

The spin of the orbitals in a friction drive model DOES in fact increase and decrease about the orbit, in fact if it didn't the friction drive GIT wouldn't work! In animating, I modified the spin fractions of each orbital to force them to show a syncronous movement, I should have known better, but HEY! I'm HUMAN! (on the surface anyway ( ',8~ )

See update 17 for details on my faux pas. In the below text please realize that while the unbalanced "tug of war" between the centrifugal force profile and the combined half circle circumferal negative thrusts is still valid, it is only valid in the context that the amount of inertial energy "hidden" as spin acceleration and deceleration is subtracted from the negetive thrust, and thus is the motivating factor in the GIT. Thanks for your patience, this is still an ongoing learning process! Now back (once more) to your annotated original document:

The electromagnetic drive types will behave differently, in that the spin will decrease as the spin energy tractors the ball against the race to accelerate it's forward velocity, and spin will increase again as it approaches the tail.

Assume we're running a friction drive model (it's much easier to figure).

In eight seconds each ball makes one orbit (with these numbers just multiply or divide particulars for higher orbit speeds).

Each ball spins 24 times in the race for one orbit, making the spin 3 revolutions per second (24 / 8).

With the eight balls in the race, One second will spin each one three times, and each ball will occupy the position its predecessor held the second prior.

From here we can calculate the orbit velocities at various points in the race.

At the tail of the race each ball is spinning it's way slowly in the race, and it's forward movement in the race is one eighth the velocity that it has at the nose.
^
This particular race is infinitely variable, so any ratio of front to back velocity from 1 to 1 (no difference, no acceleration) to the maximum design limit, in this case, eight to one is possible, but we need something defined to begin calculation.

OK, now that we have a figure to work with; we can calculate what is called in the physical science field, [Delta_v].

Delta v is fancy for change in velocity, and is the easiest method of calculating acceleration.

By dividing the change in velocity by the time it takes to do so, the acceleration (and deceleration or negative acceleration on the other side) can then be resolved.

This will be the forward velocity at the nose, subtract the velocity of the ball at the tail, and divide that number by the time it takes for one half of an orbit (in our turtle paced demo that's 4 seconds).

Rather than use numbers for a device-specific model of the GIT, I'll continue in generalities, the above math will get you started in designing your own size and mass specific thrust rings.

Remember I said earlier that a good slip resistant finish on the race and balls is crucial for this thing to work. The reason is because the forward acceleration (and deceleration) energy of the balls must be translated into, and withdrawn from the spin of each mass, so it will accelerate in the race under it's own power rather than being hauled around the race strictly by the motor means, and conversely, 'swallow' the energy of deceleration as spin, rather than exhausting that energy entirely into the race.
^
You will notice from your experience that when you try to slow a heavy moving mass it will resist such an effort and plow that energy into you. In the race the same thing happens as the balls decelerate in the nose to tail run.

In a well designed race, the force is spread smoothly from nose to tail in a half circle, the sum of the instantaneous forces pushing on the race are attempting to rotate the race in the direction of orbit, if resisted, that energy is reinvested back into spin of the balls.

In the tail to nose dash, each ball has energy wrapped up in spin, and the narrowing race contact geometry forces the ball to 'claw' it's way back to high velocity at the nose, effectively moving itself faster from energy it has internally stored.

As you can guess, the effect on the race of the madly spinning cannon ball 'peeling out' (figuratively only, you don't want any burn out spots on your race!) on its dash to the nose is an anti-orbital torque force on the race.

Notice the symmetry of these two force componants on the race, in one complete orbit, each ball puts an orbital, then anti-orbital torque on the race, each componant effectively canceling around the axis of the race.

But wait! as far as the GIT is concerned, The torques cancel, but to the universe, those forces add together to be about 70.7% of the combined total as a line pointing from the center of the craft through tail dead center.

You'll notice that so far, the forces we have examined are cancelling each other out in one dimension (around the axis of the race), and some of it is expressed as compression on either side of the race at the tail, and as tension on either side of the race at the nose.
^
Of course the interesting force is the vectoral sum pulling the race tailward, and to be honest, the nose became the tail after my first working model insisted on going 'backwards'!

I had neglected to give sufficient 'weight' to the centrifugal force component of this system. Dig out that physics text again and look up the math.

The force of pull away from the center of a radially constrained mass is a squared relationship.

If you double the velocity in the race, the centrifugal force quadruples! In the above example the drive balls are moving at an eight to one ratio, and since it's moving eight times faster at the nose, THE CENTRIFUGAL FORCE IS 64 TIMES that at the tail!
REALLY! go look it up... I'll wait.

See! Ok, I'll trust now that you have refamiliarized yourself with that old boring math that you were sure you'ld never have to do again the rest of your life.

FOR EVERY ACTION THERE IS AN OPPOSITE BUT EQUAL REACTION should be waved under the nose of any fool hardy enough to believe in flying saucer drives!

But of course! that's why this thing works! If you want to get ahead of the curve in action, reaction physics, you'll need to think in circles!

Now that you're dizzy with the particulars, I'll attempt to flesh out the sum of complimentary, competing, and overpowering forces in this puzzle.

The acceleration then deceleration of the balls in the race become a cancelling torque in relation to the circular orientation of the unit when at maintained optimum orbit velocity.
^
As each ball accelerates itself in the race with it's stored spin energy, it places a pull on the race against it's position in space.

Though not very successful in spinning the craft around it, the tractoring mass does exert a force on the race wanting to pull it toward the tail, and when combined with the 'body blow' thrust on the race also pushing the craft toward the tail from the other side of the orbit, a definite tailward trend is established.

We can't ignore the thrust components nearest the nose and tail. As each ball approaches tail dead center it is in the last remnants of a path that is converting it's forward rush into spin, and a thrust against the midline of the race is the result. Passing tail central, the spinning mass then tractors on the race, creating a thrust toward the midline, and thus a balanced and cancelling head to head play of forces.

At the nose the reverse is true. Approaching nose central, the ball has yet a little spin to pull on the midline, when crossed, the path demands deceleration, and it pulls the race away from the midline, again canceling.

The nose of the craft (the race actually) is being pulled on from both sides, while the tail of the race is being pushed from both sides, and though not players directly in the movement of the craft, these thrust components are very important when considered with the whole.

And there you have it, the propulsion method that makes a circular wing fly!

Editorial note 10 October 1997 - I frankly had an imperfect idea of what I was talking about in this document when I first wrote it. The fact is the GIT works, and NOW the scramble to understand just why, is a task to be undertaken by those alphabet soup guys, I'm really just guessing! - David E. Cowlishaw

^
Your mission, should you decide to accept, is to do what you can to let your friends and loved ones know how you can get out a little more, explore the asteroid field for a mining claim, go where you want to go, do what you want to do, be a mobile ambassador of the human race!

Ok, there are some scary realities out there, but I for one would like the choice.

I will claim as my own anything that is proven to be original for the 17 year period that I can monopolize the trade (actually the lucky company that sponsors and persues patent applications as an assignee of my rights).

I will graciously concede your contribution to this mobility issue if you can prove you thought about and convinced others of the validity of your claims before I did.

I have found that a manufacturer will overlook even a great potential wind-fall if not assured of some protection in the marketplace. Why should they spend all that effort in perfecting an idea when another firm can knock off copies without the R & D expenses?

Profit is not as motivating to me as the possible reality of actually doing some of the feats that are envisioned in this document.
^
Please open the additional files provided in this collection, I will discuss different motor types, improvements, and an interesting foot-launched GITPACK personal lifter that I've been flying in my mind for some time now.

I hereby declare that the contained original information is true and correct to the best of my knowledge and ability to extrapolate.

4 May 1997 David Eugene Cowlishaw

Comments, suggestions, gossip, your analysis of the device, etc. is welcome.

Of course I will accept major contributions! ,'8~)

Don't even offer to buy stock or shares, as I will not be obliged to make you money, and have any future decision such as a release to public domain compromised.

Assignment of rights or agreement with a company that can do justice to the massive applications these inventions (and improvements not published) entail, will be considered.

Before Copying and distributing these documents, please read GITLEGAL.

Return to INDEX ^ TOP of Page ^

.