Machine element or mechanism – Gyroscopes – Multiple gyroscopes
Reexamination Certificate
2000-10-05
2003-05-27
Bonck, Rodney H. (Department: 3681)
Machine element or mechanism
Gyroscopes
Multiple gyroscopes
C074S573110, C244S165000
Reexamination Certificate
active
06568291
ABSTRACT:
This invention relates to gyrostabilizers, and in particular to a method and apparatus for stabilizing vehicles and other structures moving in different directions. The gyrostabilizers of the present invention are designed to dampen tremors, vibrations, swaying, pitching, rolling, yawing or other unsteadiness in vehicles and objects that have no other inherent means for self-stabilization.
BACKGROUND AND PRIOR ART
Counter-rotating or oppositely spinning discs mounted on centrally located shafts or axles are known to be used as stabilizers for guided missiles in U.S. Pat. No. 3,193,216; for rotation control of a space vehicle in U.S. Pat. No. 3,424,401; and to suppress oscillation about an axis of a loaded crane in U.S. Pat. No. 3,498,476. In U.S. Pat. No. 3,540,289 a device having flat annular or circular rotors of magnetic material in a rigid frame is used to anchor a body subject to attitude change. Typical types of gyroscopes known to the subject inventor include for example U.S. Pat. Nos. 2,872,707 to Kuiper; 3,158,340 to Sellers; 3,226,982 to Betts; 3,410,143 to Bowles; 3,509,778 to Bowles; and 4,150,579 to Vaughn. The devices identified above occupy valuable space and add considerable weight to the body that is being stabilized.
The disadvantages of the oppositely spinning discs arise from the requirement that they be physically mounted to a centrally located shaft or axle; thereby causing the entire disc to rotate and adding considerably more weight and surface area to the stabilizing device. Another disadvantage is that the centrally located axle or shaft restricts that space for other uses and finally the disc, axle or shaft arrangement limits the total revolutions per minute for discs due to wear and fatigue of the parts.
The disadvantages of the weight involved in spinning an entire disc have been addressed as follows. In U.S. Pat. No. 4,669,323, an attitude correction device is mounted above a gyro rotor and utilizes the flow of a viscous liquid and the rotation of one ball. U.S. Pat. No. 4,674,356 discloses a counter-balancing device having a discoid body with a circumferential ring of balls in a lubricating and damping fluid functioning to reduce vibrations and uneven bearing wear associated with unbalanced rotating members; the emphasis is on counter-balancing and not gyrostabilizing. According to U.S. Pat. No. 4,905,776 vibrational dampening for a drilling assembly is accomplished with races or tracks of tungsten-carbide balls in a fluid medium attached to the axial support rotating a drill bit. In a series of patents assigned to ETI Technologies, Inc. (U.S. Pat. Nos. 5,605,078; 5,768,951; 5,829,318; and 5,941,133) balancer and vibration removing devices are disclosed which employ balls, cylindrical weights, disc-like weights and viscous fluids moving freely inside a housing with an annular groove, called a “race.” All of the above spinning or rotating devices are arguably of less weight than a solid disc surface, but they all require mounting on a shaft or axle for rotation. Thus, the use restriction on the area in which the device is rotating remains a disadvantage. In addition, there are limits on the size of the stabilizing device based on space available within each application.
Further improvements in gyroscopic stabilizers are desired.
SUMMARY OF THE INVENTION
The first objective of the present invention is to provide a counter-revolving stabilizer.
The second objective of the present invention is to provide a counter-revolving stabilizer with no physically mountable axle or shaft requirement.
The third objective of the present invention is to provide a gyrostabilizer having less mass than a disk.
The fourth objective of the present invention is to provide a gyrostabilizer that requires less space than a disk.
The fifth objective of the present invention is to provide a gyrostabilizer that produces more controllable revolutions per minute than a disk.
The sixth objective of the present invention is to provide a dual counter-revolving gyrostabilizer that permits independent control of each gyro.
The seventh objective of the present invention is to offset gyroscopic precession and double the effect of angular momentum available from a single gyro.
The eighth objective of the present invention is to provide a gyrostabilizer that can be retrofitted to function in many existing vehicles and structures.
A preferred embodiment of the present invention is a design wherein a race or track contains balls propelled in a circular motion via fluid pressure or electromagnetic propulsion in an arrangement where there is no center shaft or axle. This arrangement shifts the weight of the gyrostabilizer to the perimeter where most of the momentum is created. Thus, greater momentum can be generated at a fraction of the weight of gyrostabilizers that spin on an axis. Also, the space between the center of revolution and the revolving weights is usable or void space for vehicles or structures that are weight sensitive. The absence of a physical shaft or axle also provides unlimited flexibility in sizing the stabilizing device, such that the device can be scaled to fit very large or very small vehicles and structures, including toys.
REFERENCES:
patent: 769693 (1904-08-01), Forbes
patent: 2577942 (1951-12-01), Agins
patent: 2822225 (1958-02-01), Teufel
patent: 2871707 (1959-02-01), Kupier
patent: 3006581 (1961-10-01), Langman
patent: 3048108 (1962-08-01), Roberson et al.
patent: 3158340 (1964-11-01), Sellers
patent: 3193216 (1965-07-01), Fischel
patent: 3226982 (1966-01-01), Betts
patent: 3237457 (1966-03-01), Luber
patent: 3336810 (1967-08-01), Schaffer et al.
patent: 3365596 (1968-01-01), Jones
patent: 3365959 (1968-01-01), Quermann
patent: 3410143 (1968-11-01), Bowles
patent: 3424401 (1969-01-01), Maurer
patent: 3498476 (1970-03-01), Mattson et al.
patent: 3509778 (1970-05-01), Bowles
patent: 3540289 (1970-11-01), Ivers
patent: 3662608 (1972-05-01), Vold
patent: 3726146 (1973-04-01), Mishler
patent: 3733923 (1973-05-01), Goodrich et al.
patent: 3822602 (1974-07-01), Holmes et al.
patent: 3927329 (1975-12-01), Fawcett et al.
patent: 4014280 (1977-03-01), Laxo
patent: 4150579 (1979-04-01), Vaughn
patent: 4364106 (1982-12-01), Lam
patent: 4669323 (1987-06-01), Hojo et al.
patent: 4674356 (1987-06-01), Kilgore
patent: 4891997 (1990-01-01), Hayashi
patent: 4905776 (1990-03-01), Beynet et al.
patent: 4951514 (1990-08-01), Gubin
patent: 5349915 (1994-09-01), Thomas et al.
patent: 5582381 (1996-12-01), Graf et al.
patent: 5605078 (1997-02-01), Taylor et al.
patent: 5768951 (1998-06-01), Hannah et al.
patent: 5829318 (1998-11-01), Hannah et al.
patent: 5839386 (1998-11-01), Frieling et al.
patent: 5857360 (1999-01-01), Kim et al.
patent: 5871249 (1999-02-01), Williams
patent: 5941113 (1999-08-01), Wierzba et al.
patent: 5966986 (1999-10-01), Laul
Bonck Rodney H.
Law Office of Brian S. Steinberger P.A.
Pang Roger
Steinberger Brian S.
LandOfFree
Shaftless gyrostabilizer does not yet have a rating. At this time, there are no reviews or comments for this patent.
If you have personal experience with Shaftless gyrostabilizer, we encourage you to share that experience with our LandOfFree.com community. Your opinion is very important and Shaftless gyrostabilizer will most certainly appreciate the feedback.
Profile ID: LFUS-PAI-O-3032524