Hey all,
Glad to see that the 'drama' has been disposed of. I was seriously considering leaving this forum altogether. Bad apples and all...
I don't have said program, it seems to be what everyone uses to 'sim' projects however. Honestly, I don't want to download a program just to see what people are working on. Post a few screenshots? A picture is worth a thousand words, it really is!
Don't get me wrong, it seems like a cool thing to 'build' something in a program that simulates gravity but how much learning time (read: building time) does it take to learn the program?
How hard is it to make a spring?
I can see the usefulness but I can build castles in minecraft you know?
I guess my point is that sometimes technology gets in the way. It is definitely mankind's greatest time waster to date...
Certain people sit and type away their evenings, others spend their time working on 'sims', a few probably spend their time building physical 'models'.
Bessler spent his time in his shop building things that didn't work until he figured out something that did. Or at least stumbled upon something that 'sort-of' worked and kept at it or he had a dream or whatever...
What do you 'sim' guys have to say about the program? What is the learning curve, etc.??
I'm not adverse to learning new things, it just seems like I get a lot more out of building actual 'physical' stuff, even if they don't work.
Just out of curiosity, how many of you have built a real life pendulum?
It isn't hard, but I wonder how many have (or haven't)?
The last one I did was shaped like a capital 'T'... ;)
How many have dropped a marble down a curved slope lately??
Gravity is 'effing FAST!!! Something a 'sim' just can't simulate. I think that you need to get comfortable with that before you can start to see some of the things that Bessler saw... Then again, it is getting late here heh heh...
BTW, the thread title wasn't meant to imply anything, it really wasn't...
Happy building,
PC
W2MD... A great way to build absolutely nothing?
Moderator: scott
re: W2MD... A great way to build absolutely nothing?
I learned WM2D quite quickly, although it probably took around 3 or more months before I got a feel for the quirks. It is very easy to learn, but I am only proficient in building basic assemblies, as I am not willing to learn its more complicated applications, and scripts, as others have.
WM2D is a good tool for certain applications, but if you are looking for something not describied by physics, it may slip you by. It does however help you to visualize and simplify a mechanism, and is a good benchmark to measure a physical build against. But, unless they, or you understand and are correct with understanding of every aspect of physics, this or any other simulator will never take the place of a physical build.
WM2D is available as freeware, without the save feature. This will allow you to have a play and see if it might suit your needs.
Good luck!
PS: I guarantee a picture will not lend itself to the subtleties of some movements arranged in a simulator, or in real life.
WM2D is a good tool for certain applications, but if you are looking for something not describied by physics, it may slip you by. It does however help you to visualize and simplify a mechanism, and is a good benchmark to measure a physical build against. But, unless they, or you understand and are correct with understanding of every aspect of physics, this or any other simulator will never take the place of a physical build.
WM2D is available as freeware, without the save feature. This will allow you to have a play and see if it might suit your needs.
Good luck!
PS: I guarantee a picture will not lend itself to the subtleties of some movements arranged in a simulator, or in real life.
Wm2d is very easy to learn. You click an icon. say a circle that is to be a wheel. Drag it to where you want it and release. Because the circle is the last object selected, some boxes will appear at the bottom of the screen, such a X coordinate, Y coordinate, Circle size, etc. Just enter some information and the circle changes.
If you click the run button your wheel will fall off the screen, so you need to pin it with a round rotatable pin. There are also square pins that prevent rotation.
In the menu you can select properties, and a small window opens up showing the physical properties. If the pin was the last object selected, you need to click your wheel and the properties window switches to your wheel. If you want to begin the simulation with the wheel rotating then enter rotational speed.
You want you wheel off-balance, drag a square to the wheel, then pin the square to the wheel. If you want the square to drop off the wheel, then set the pin active for T<1 and it will remain pinned (active) until the simulation reaches 1 second.
There are weightless rods, springs, sliding slots, etc. And if you want one object to pass over another then you turn off collision of those two objects. If you want them to collide, you turn collision on.
The hardest part is knowing which menu window to open to do what you want to do. (just open windows that seem like they might contain what you are looking for. You can always close them again)
You can open a window where you set what units you like, English inches or metric meters. You can open a window and change the color of objects, or change the line-width of the object. You can set the program to pause or stop when a certain event happens, such T>2 or the rotation speed of your wheel has exceeded some value or slowed below some value. You can graph any property of any object. The only programing syntax is the properties. And if you want to know the syntax of say the rotational speed of you circle, a simple trick is to make a graph of the object's rotation, then looking at the properties of the graph will show the formula for object rotation. Copy the formula and paste it into the pause window then add >2.5 or such and the program will pause when the rotation speed exceeds 2.5 rotation speed units (I have my default set to RPM, but your model might be set to radians per second.)
Like I said, the hardest part is simply learning your way around the program. Once you learn which window or button to click, most wheel models can be constructed in less than ten minutes.
If you are into programing, you can write scripts that automate assemblies. You can make a 300 sided hollow polygon that mimics a hollow drum with thick walls. Of course such a polygon having 300 side elements will slow the program down to a crawl. But if you have a very fast computer, then have fun!
Note that wm2d has some 'bugs' or short comings. If an object is setup to roll bounce around inside a circle, and then if it moves too fast, it can be inside the circle in one step, and then outside in the next step, and never collide with the wall of the circle.
Anyway, I've written way too much here. The bottom line is that wm2d is very easy to learn, and even easier to use. That is its main feature.
If you click the run button your wheel will fall off the screen, so you need to pin it with a round rotatable pin. There are also square pins that prevent rotation.
In the menu you can select properties, and a small window opens up showing the physical properties. If the pin was the last object selected, you need to click your wheel and the properties window switches to your wheel. If you want to begin the simulation with the wheel rotating then enter rotational speed.
You want you wheel off-balance, drag a square to the wheel, then pin the square to the wheel. If you want the square to drop off the wheel, then set the pin active for T<1 and it will remain pinned (active) until the simulation reaches 1 second.
There are weightless rods, springs, sliding slots, etc. And if you want one object to pass over another then you turn off collision of those two objects. If you want them to collide, you turn collision on.
The hardest part is knowing which menu window to open to do what you want to do. (just open windows that seem like they might contain what you are looking for. You can always close them again)
You can open a window where you set what units you like, English inches or metric meters. You can open a window and change the color of objects, or change the line-width of the object. You can set the program to pause or stop when a certain event happens, such T>2 or the rotation speed of your wheel has exceeded some value or slowed below some value. You can graph any property of any object. The only programing syntax is the properties. And if you want to know the syntax of say the rotational speed of you circle, a simple trick is to make a graph of the object's rotation, then looking at the properties of the graph will show the formula for object rotation. Copy the formula and paste it into the pause window then add >2.5 or such and the program will pause when the rotation speed exceeds 2.5 rotation speed units (I have my default set to RPM, but your model might be set to radians per second.)
Like I said, the hardest part is simply learning your way around the program. Once you learn which window or button to click, most wheel models can be constructed in less than ten minutes.
If you are into programing, you can write scripts that automate assemblies. You can make a 300 sided hollow polygon that mimics a hollow drum with thick walls. Of course such a polygon having 300 side elements will slow the program down to a crawl. But if you have a very fast computer, then have fun!
Note that wm2d has some 'bugs' or short comings. If an object is setup to roll bounce around inside a circle, and then if it moves too fast, it can be inside the circle in one step, and then outside in the next step, and never collide with the wall of the circle.
Anyway, I've written way too much here. The bottom line is that wm2d is very easy to learn, and even easier to use. That is its main feature.
re: W2MD... A great way to build absolutely nothing?
Thank you both for your replies.
@ tarsier79: You know, you are right about the picture thing... I guess I was trying to say a picture was worth more than (a file I can't look at) no picture. I can see where gravity-speed movements would be pretty hard to see in a photo, no doubt about that... I will say it is easier to see what the MT drawings are supposed to do if you rotate them around...
@ jim: Thanks for the insight. Seems like you're pretty familiar with the program. I would figure you for the guy who would have all of the MT 'models' built in sim-land to see what their movements (or lack of) look like already. Okay, that is a bit of a task I agree...
A collective work amongst those of you who are good with the simulator would be MOST EXCELLENT!!! Imagine how awesome it would be to download all the MT builds as working (okay, non-working) sims. It would be a great tool (or exercise in frustration?) and a 'common ground'. Maybe it would even lead to (gasp!) cooperation???
Anyways, feel free to post on W2MD here if you have any thoughts.
Thanks again guys!
Happy building,
PC
@ tarsier79: You know, you are right about the picture thing... I guess I was trying to say a picture was worth more than (a file I can't look at) no picture. I can see where gravity-speed movements would be pretty hard to see in a photo, no doubt about that... I will say it is easier to see what the MT drawings are supposed to do if you rotate them around...
@ jim: Thanks for the insight. Seems like you're pretty familiar with the program. I would figure you for the guy who would have all of the MT 'models' built in sim-land to see what their movements (or lack of) look like already. Okay, that is a bit of a task I agree...
A collective work amongst those of you who are good with the simulator would be MOST EXCELLENT!!! Imagine how awesome it would be to download all the MT builds as working (okay, non-working) sims. It would be a great tool (or exercise in frustration?) and a 'common ground'. Maybe it would even lead to (gasp!) cooperation???
Anyways, feel free to post on W2MD here if you have any thoughts.
Thanks again guys!
Happy building,
PC
re: W2MD... A great way to build absolutely nothing?
Phi .. do yourself a favour & take the time to learn the program.
It will increase your creativity & productivity a hundred fold in a short space of time.
I will say with 100% confidence that if Bessler found a mechanical way to use gravity & mechanics alone to self sustain a wheels motion, once those mechanics are known, it can be duplicated in wm2d.
It will increase your creativity & productivity a hundred fold in a short space of time.
I will say with 100% confidence that if Bessler found a mechanical way to use gravity & mechanics alone to self sustain a wheels motion, once those mechanics are known, it can be duplicated in wm2d.
A little more about Wm2d from a bit of philosophical point of view...
If you use it an hour every night then it took 1-3 month to get to the advanced level, but after that you can quickly finish most of designs in minutes. It also have a few glitches you have to bear in mind and work around every time, has its own limits too, but other than that wm2d is a useful tool.
For the right mind it can save countless of time and give accelerated learning, understanding, and analysis of phisical concepts. However for this to achieve you need to know how to use it well, and of course not every person is capable to use wm2d this way.
For me it did a fantastic job. I could "build" machines which contains over hundreds of components... I would never be able to build some of those in a shop and on limited machinery & accesories. And taking into account that at least 99% of what we build is unworkable or not based on the right principle / viewpoint, you can get what is it good for...
My personal "library" contains more than 600 books. Half of those may be only variation on a scheme but still that is 300 original design or let it be only 200. How long it took to build 200 different designs in the real world in your shop?
I am lucky that I can fully grasp a model based on a simulation only. And without phisically touching the thing I can conclude why the concept has no chance to work, where is the problem, and what is the root cause... It takes a few variations on schemes and analysis, checking graphs, thinkering, etc, but at the and I conclude and move on. After some time you can also see when the program do foolish things, so you can modify your model to avoid that. Wm2d led me to designs I would never imagine without it or at least it would take me a lot more years to get there.
This way I finally arrived at something unexpected in 2011 april. Since then I made almost no posts to the forum and only rarely read a bit here, it became more and more boring for me. I also calmed down and losed most of the mad aspects of this research. I don't as much feel the need to read or check other's ideas and designs. Now I have my own, and I am not in a hurry anymore. Of course this is not only because of wm2d. It is still just a computer program which can be only as good as your capabilities to use it in order to more or less replicate a real world application.
If you use it an hour every night then it took 1-3 month to get to the advanced level, but after that you can quickly finish most of designs in minutes. It also have a few glitches you have to bear in mind and work around every time, has its own limits too, but other than that wm2d is a useful tool.
For the right mind it can save countless of time and give accelerated learning, understanding, and analysis of phisical concepts. However for this to achieve you need to know how to use it well, and of course not every person is capable to use wm2d this way.
For me it did a fantastic job. I could "build" machines which contains over hundreds of components... I would never be able to build some of those in a shop and on limited machinery & accesories. And taking into account that at least 99% of what we build is unworkable or not based on the right principle / viewpoint, you can get what is it good for...
My personal "library" contains more than 600 books. Half of those may be only variation on a scheme but still that is 300 original design or let it be only 200. How long it took to build 200 different designs in the real world in your shop?
I am lucky that I can fully grasp a model based on a simulation only. And without phisically touching the thing I can conclude why the concept has no chance to work, where is the problem, and what is the root cause... It takes a few variations on schemes and analysis, checking graphs, thinkering, etc, but at the and I conclude and move on. After some time you can also see when the program do foolish things, so you can modify your model to avoid that. Wm2d led me to designs I would never imagine without it or at least it would take me a lot more years to get there.
This way I finally arrived at something unexpected in 2011 april. Since then I made almost no posts to the forum and only rarely read a bit here, it became more and more boring for me. I also calmed down and losed most of the mad aspects of this research. I don't as much feel the need to read or check other's ideas and designs. Now I have my own, and I am not in a hurry anymore. Of course this is not only because of wm2d. It is still just a computer program which can be only as good as your capabilities to use it in order to more or less replicate a real world application.
Last edited by Gregory on Mon Aug 05, 2013 10:03 pm, edited 2 times in total.
re: W2MD... A great way to build absolutely nothing?
Fletcher, you have just made my day!
It is an assumption that all physical, mechanical things must abide to the known laws of physics, I am not educated with simulation programs, but understand that that at "root" level, they are programed to rely on these assumptions.
This is why I hold Daniel Bernoulli and Leonhard Euler in esteem. They both agreed that some laws of physics were written to comply with Newtons Principia while others are still in an "assumption" stage.
Ralph
I agree with 100% confidence that computer engineers are never going to achieve a simulated runner until the hands-on mechanics or POP are known.I will say with 100% confidence that if Bessler found a mechanical way to use gravity & mechanics alone to self sustain a wheels motion, once those mechanics are known, it can be duplicated in wm2d.
It is an assumption that all physical, mechanical things must abide to the known laws of physics, I am not educated with simulation programs, but understand that that at "root" level, they are programed to rely on these assumptions.
This is why I hold Daniel Bernoulli and Leonhard Euler in esteem. They both agreed that some laws of physics were written to comply with Newtons Principia while others are still in an "assumption" stage.
Ralph
re: W2MD... A great way to build absolutely nothing?
We have a different understanding of 'hands-on' Ralph - the mechanical principle can be found in wm2d just as good as it can building real models of mechanics in the workshop.Ralph wrote:
I agree with 100% confidence that computer engineers are never going to achieve a simulated runner until the hands-on mechanics or POP are known.
Ralph wrote:
It is an assumption that all physical, mechanical things must abide to the known laws of physics, I am not educated with simulation programs, but understand that that at "root" level, they are programed to rely on these assumptions.
Yes, all things abide by the Laws of Nature, including Physics & the Math to explain it - if it is there to be found in Nature then it can be duplicated in a sim program that expresses those same Laws as mathematical relationships & constructs.
Yes, I've heard you say that a few times Ralph - I was well aware of it beforehand & mentioned it a number of times when I gave my presentation on the 'Drop Wing' using Bernoulli's Principle & Aerodynamics a few years ago - I found the connection in Physics texts I have & confirmed it in the wiki as you did IIRC.Ralph wrote:
This is why I hold Daniel Bernoulli and Leonhard Euler in esteem. They both agreed that some laws of physics were written to comply with Newtons Principia while others are still in an "assumption" stage.
One note of caution about WM2D.
Its internal programing assumes conservation of energy. This is how it determines motions of complex assemblies. It makes a guess as to how fast or slow the motion should be, based upon how fast or slow objects were moving in the previous step. If the internal energy of the assembly changes, then it makes another guess. After two guesses, the internal program knows which guess is the better for maintaining conservation of energy. It then makes more guesses, and soon zeros in on the most accurate guess. The accuracy parameters determine how accurate the guesses must be for the program to stop guessing.
Now what happens if the PM assembly were to actually work and gain energy? The program will keep making guesses to bring the motion back to conservation of energy. It either filters out any excess energy when the parameters are loose. Or if the parameters are tight, it keeps trying until the assembly explodes.
It is my opinion that WM2D will never correctly show a working PM wheel. The program will either explode or filter out any energy gain.
It is my opinion that WM2D is a great tool for understanding weight movements, but is a horrible tool when seeking perpetual motion.
Just my opinion.
Its internal programing assumes conservation of energy. This is how it determines motions of complex assemblies. It makes a guess as to how fast or slow the motion should be, based upon how fast or slow objects were moving in the previous step. If the internal energy of the assembly changes, then it makes another guess. After two guesses, the internal program knows which guess is the better for maintaining conservation of energy. It then makes more guesses, and soon zeros in on the most accurate guess. The accuracy parameters determine how accurate the guesses must be for the program to stop guessing.
Now what happens if the PM assembly were to actually work and gain energy? The program will keep making guesses to bring the motion back to conservation of energy. It either filters out any excess energy when the parameters are loose. Or if the parameters are tight, it keeps trying until the assembly explodes.
It is my opinion that WM2D will never correctly show a working PM wheel. The program will either explode or filter out any energy gain.
It is my opinion that WM2D is a great tool for understanding weight movements, but is a horrible tool when seeking perpetual motion.
Just my opinion.
re: W2MD... A great way to build absolutely nothing?
Thank you for your input Jim_Mich, or can we now go back to just "Jim"?
Your opinion describes how I as a none user, would expect the program to function. Could we say that ectropy (tendency of a dynamical system to do useful work and grow more organized)will upset it?
Or for that matter, would you consider a gravity stimulated machine "Ectropic"
The Second Law of Thermodynamics says that in a closed system, ectropy will decrease. It needs ectropy coming from the environment to keep living.
Ralph
Your opinion describes how I as a none user, would expect the program to function. Could we say that ectropy (tendency of a dynamical system to do useful work and grow more organized)will upset it?
Or for that matter, would you consider a gravity stimulated machine "Ectropic"
The Second Law of Thermodynamics says that in a closed system, ectropy will decrease. It needs ectropy coming from the environment to keep living.
Ralph
I'd like others opinions about jim_mich's comments please, like Gregory with programming experience, or some first hand knowledge rather than anecdotal.jim_mich wrote:One note of caution about WM2D.
Its internal programing assumes conservation of energy. This is how it determines motions of complex assemblies. It makes a guess as to how fast or slow the motion should be, based upon how fast or slow objects were moving in the previous step. If the internal energy of the assembly changes, then it makes another guess. After two guesses, the internal program knows which guess is the better for maintaining conservation of energy. It then makes more guesses, and soon zeros in on the most accurate guess. The accuracy parameters determine how accurate the guesses must be for the program to stop guessing.
Now what happens if the PM assembly were to actually work and gain energy? The program will keep making guesses to bring the motion back to conservation of energy. It either filters out any excess energy when the parameters are loose. Or if the parameters are tight, it keeps trying until the assembly explodes.
It is my opinion that WM2D will never correctly show a working PM wheel. The program will either explode or filter out any energy gain.
It is my opinion that WM2D is a great tool for understanding weight movements, but is a horrible tool when seeking perpetual motion.
Just my opinion.
My comment is that I can always do the math on a spreadsheet to check a result & the math formula doesn't require a guess.
ETA: Yes, I do know what iteration is & what iterative steps are.
Last edited by Fletcher on Tue Aug 06, 2013 2:46 am, edited 1 time in total.
re: W2MD... A great way to build absolutely nothing?
Additional Note for Users:
Often I measure PE against KE to gauge the overall system increase or decrease in energy.
Beware of comparing the PEG of an object against KE etc in certain circumstances.
In geometries you can change the moment of objects [CoM position] - this is taken into account in the KE Outputs formulas etc - it does NOT take the moment change in the PEG Output, so can be grossly misleading if you're unaware of this bug, leading to you believing you have a system energy increase, though that's exciting ;7)
For this reason I don't use the Geometries change COM [moment] & use pinned masses instead.
Often I measure PE against KE to gauge the overall system increase or decrease in energy.
Beware of comparing the PEG of an object against KE etc in certain circumstances.
In geometries you can change the moment of objects [CoM position] - this is taken into account in the KE Outputs formulas etc - it does NOT take the moment change in the PEG Output, so can be grossly misleading if you're unaware of this bug, leading to you believing you have a system energy increase, though that's exciting ;7)
For this reason I don't use the Geometries change COM [moment] & use pinned masses instead.
re: W2MD... A great way to build absolutely nothing?
Thank you for the comments Fletcher, rlortie, Gregory, Jim, all!!
You have all convinced me and if what you all say is true, I'm sure that it won't take me too long to get a handle on most of the particulars...
Okay, I will go download it and learn how to use it. But on my own advice, and knowing how easy I get 'addicted' to new 'hobbies', I will definitely have to limit my time to one hour a night; now I just have to FIND that extra hour...
Does anyone have any favorite quick and dirty tutorials that they could point me to?
If you don't see me posting anything for a while, you have only yourselves to blame... ;) j/k
Thanks again everyone for your input!
Happy (sim) building,
PC
You have all convinced me and if what you all say is true, I'm sure that it won't take me too long to get a handle on most of the particulars...
Okay, I will go download it and learn how to use it. But on my own advice, and knowing how easy I get 'addicted' to new 'hobbies', I will definitely have to limit my time to one hour a night; now I just have to FIND that extra hour...
Does anyone have any favorite quick and dirty tutorials that they could point me to?
If you don't see me posting anything for a while, you have only yourselves to blame... ;) j/k
Thanks again everyone for your input!
Happy (sim) building,
PC
re: W2MD... A great way to build absolutely nothing?
A good exchange was heard here ...
http://www.besslerwheel.com/forum/viewt ... 3272#53272
... about CoE hierarchy & wm2d calculations protocol from a programmer who uses it.
http://www.besslerwheel.com/forum/viewt ... 3272#53272
... about CoE hierarchy & wm2d calculations protocol from a programmer who uses it.
- Attachments
-
-
re: W2MD... A great way to build absolutely nothing?
Here's a tutorial I found on line.
- Attachments
-
- working model tutorial.pdf
- (1.98 MiB) Downloaded 395 times