Wheel acceleration...

[Jonathan]

>Go to Johns Free-Energy sight and check the "wheel analysis" section and see what these guys have done with a lot of the information. <
You should remember the assumptions made when you read it though, the calculated inertia is only an estimate and they assume d&#945;/dt=0.

[bluesgtr44]

Silver Eyes...I understand what you are saying, and maybe you have been at this a bit longer than I have. I am still at the question asking stage. Personally, I find this a very valuable bit of information...from a fresh perspective. There may be a time when I learn more and understand things a little deeper and can eliminate this as a factor. If the proportionality of the weights were a major factor in the rotation, then I can not see how this can easily be dismissed...from an experimental point of view. Al Einstein was pretty smart guy...read my caption at the bottom...it has served me well in life. ALL questions are relevant.

Jonathan...going to really sound dumb here. I do not see the relevance in the inertia as far as what I am trying to point out here. How much of a factor would that be in reaching maximum speed within the 2 to 3 revolutions in a system with eight weights that were disseminated in such a way to achieve this? Of course, assuming that the weights were the driving force of the wheel...which I am also eager to prove or disprove. Again, back to that "inner mechanism"....And springs, Stewart...or maybe a pendulum of sorts, Ralph...I really can't wait till the books get here. Starting to think I maybe should have ate the WHOLE enchilada and ordered "Das Triumphans" also. Well, thanks to Bill I have his sight to view the drawings...just can't see what he wrote about them.

Steve

[Jonathan]

You were talking about 32lbs on the descending side, that comes from F=T/d=I&#945;/d. In this case both 'I' and '&#945;' are actually unknown, though I have no reason to believe their 'I' is far from the reality.

[sleepy]

If all 8 weights stayed on the same side (32 lbs.),it would take some sort of mechanism that would feed from the torque of the wheel.The 32 lbs. might be the exact weight needed to work this mechanism AND rotate the wheel,which would make the speed self-regulating.Plus there would be a time factor.What is the maximum speed at which this device can move the weights?That would also regulate speed.

[ken_behrendt]

All this talk of weights and leverage and centrifugal force is starting to make me dizzy! Attached is a simple idea that I had the other day which I GUARANTEE will keep more weight on one side of a "wheel" than the other (IF it works, that is!).

The device is not really a wheel, but, rather a circular channel with a "drop" channel connecting its 12 o'clock and 6 o'clock positions. The idea is that there is an external injector mechanism (run by the device somehow...I'll leave the trifling mechanical details of it to you guys) that periodically pushes down on every other ball that approaches its tamping rod from the left.

The purple balls are heavy metal spheres and the yellow balls are light weight plastic spheres. All are coated with a silicone lubricant to make them as slippery as possible.

As the balls circulate around the wheel channel, only the heavy metal balls are allowed onto the descending right side of the apparatus. At the 6 o'clock position, a light weight yellow "spacer" ball is forced down between each metal ball so that an alternating stream of balls, with greatly reduced weight, begins to ascend on the left side of the machine. In theory, the weight on both sides of the wheel channel is chronically out of balance and should result in perpetual circulation of the balls!

Enjoy...

ken

[Jonathan]

That is a really neat design. I've had similar ideas, but the spacer part was always clumsy and unreliable, but I realized why it doesn't work before I had to face the challenge of making my inferior versions. If you study your diagram carefully, you'll see that 52 purple balls per rotation must fall. Because of the spacers, you can see that 26 purple balls per rotation must rise. For the net migration of balls to be zero, then falling purple balls must fall at half the rate of the rising purple balls (they must be more ambiguously connected to the device which they cause to move). As a result one side will always be heavier, but it won't self-start or self-maintain. If you alter it so it does those things, then the net migration is negative and it'll eventually stop. It's like Murilo's avalanche drive in that way.

[bluesgtr44]

Jonathan...can you help me with a bit of understanding? That square root of 5 plus one and divide by 2. I saw that somewhere and can't find it again...so many bookmarks on this subject. Evidently, Bessler had mentioned it somewhere and I really do not understand how that may apply here....Hmmmm....1.618? Just curious as to what it means in general here.

[sleepy]

Ken,
I love your "spacer ball" idea! There are so many reasons why this won't work,but the thought path that got you there is great.My favorite part?
"The trifling mechanical details".I'll bet jim_mich gets the joke.And how!

[jim_mich]

Interesting idea, but like Jonathan says it won't work. It's another 'over balancing wheel' attempt. Overbalancing by itself never works. One needs to couple it with dynamic unbalance. It is not easy getting your mind thinking what weights do dynamically as they rotate about a wheel.

When you finally figure out what the weights must do you have the new problem of figuring out "The trifling mechanical details".

[rlortie]

Ken,

Upon first looking at your injector idea, first thought that came to my mind was Troy Reed.

Are you familiar with his four cylinder magnetic ball point injector motor?

I have not heard anything of him or his motor in some years, any body out there able to enlighten me? Did it not prove up to his claim or did the black coats get him?

Ralph

[Silver Eyes]

Interesting idea, but like Jonathan says it won't work. It's another 'over balancing wheel' attempt. Overbalancing by itself never works. One needs to couple it with dynamic unbalance. It is not easy getting your mind thinking what weights do dynamically as they rotate about a wheel.

When you finally figure out what the weights must do you have the new problem of figuring out "The trifling mechanical details".

How's yours going Jim. anything you can share?

[Jonathan]

Steve, what brought that up? Also, I don't think Bessler ever said anything about that, maybe you're thinking of these threads by Epi:
http://www.besslerwheel.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=724
http://www.besslerwheel.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=831

[rlortie]

Steve,

The "golden mean" or 1.618 can be trace back to approx. 5000 BC.

It first represented moderation or balance as taught in ethics and represents a balance of nature and all things.

The mathematical portion comes from the pleasing look to the eye of such proportioned architecture and art forms. The most dominate is the three classes of Greek architecture dealing with building dimensions and angle of roof pitch.

Ralph

[bluesgtr44]

AHHHH, yes Jonathan. That is why I could not find it it my Bessler bookmarks. That is where I remember seeing it, in that thread. And after looking at that again I am pretty sure THAT is not Besslers wheel. Why ask about that? I have a picture in my head...an idea. I am trying to scale it, but not sure of certain details...especially the geometrics. I know a lot will come through trial and error. That just popped into my head and I thought it might be useful and tried to find it again to reread it. I did think it had something to do with one of Besslers Publications. It appears I am incorrect on this. Thanks a lot for clearing some stuff up Jonathan.

Steve

[ken_behrendt]

Well, Jonathan, you did catch the "fatal flaw" in the "Spacer Ball Injected" device I attached before.

Now, can you find any flaws in the attachment below?

In this device, the mixed spacer and weight balls perpetually rise in the central channel and that column of balls now weighs even less with respect to the right side channel then the left side circular channel did in the last design. While mixed balls constantly ascend in the central channel, spacer balls descend in the left hand circular channel and weight balls descend in the right hand circular channel.

I've now eliminated the crude crank driven injector rod and inserted
TWO mechanisms into the "forks" where the balls join up and then part company. At the 6 o'clock position is the "Mixer" that alternates a spacer ball with each weight ball in the central channel. At the 12 o'clock position is the "Separator" that pushes spacer balls to the left and weight balls to the right.

Surely, this version HAS got to work... Again, I leave the "trifling" details of the internal construction of the Mixer and Separator units to you fellows...shouldn't take more than a few minutes on WM2D to come up with some feasible designs for them...

ken