MT 24 and MT 25

[Nobody]

Dear all,

I have studied the MT 24 and MT 25 drawings during the last days and like Bessler recommends
quite extensively and build also a model of MT 25.

Beside the inventions I do believe in a strong way that he want students to recognize and study
the great benefit and easiness of the knee-lever (toggle-lever) principle which is vicariously a part
on both drawings.

For the moment I have the impression that knee-levers might be an important part of the working
mechanism in Bessler´s wheel.

Would appreciate any opinion?

Thank you in advance and with best regards,
Nobody

[Tarsier79]

MT 24 and 25, and the comments that go with them have intrigued me since I was introduced to Bessler by JCs books. Obviousely there are other MTs that have attracted my interest as well.

I have looked for an advantage in the knee lever, as you aptly call it, but am unable to find anything that would contribute to a working model. What I did find though:

1. The knee acts logarithmically to the "foot". This means you could use a spring, (which normally provides a varying tension), to provide a near linear/constant force through a portion of its operation.

2. It changes the direction of force. This mechanism is not efficient at doing this though, as a lever attached at right angles would be easier to assemble and operate. Bessler also shows on the toys page changes of application of force, and reaction.

[Nobody]

Hello Tarsier79,

the german "Wikipedia" text says more or less: The knee lever is a genius implementation of an easy system,
the lever is sometimes also called power (force) amplifier and there are several effects going along with it.

The comments of MT 24 and MT 25 track me since a couple of days, they are good indication for the very high
intelligence and genuineness of Bessler and his machine.

Beside the principle of the knee lever, what else could it be that is hidden in the MT 24 and MT 25 drawing?

Thanks for any reply and with best regards,
Nobody

[Nobody]

Dear all,

hopefully the assumptions in this thread do not sound far too naive but for a learner in this field you will hopefully not crucify me...... Also
it is not possible to read everything which was ever written in this forum.

While studying MT drawings I realized the machines with the so called "stork´s bill" design. To my perception the stork´s bill principle is
based on the knee lever and it is just a series connection of that lever (in tongs, scissors).

I have also build a model and made a few test´s with it. While testing the model the impression came up that there might be an energy
gain possible with the principle of the stork´s bill.

With every tong (scissor) it is possible to increase the operating range in a linear way while operating force seems to grow less and non
linear. Since mechanical work is the product of force and way the suspicion of an energy gain with such a machine arouse.

In order to proof that assumption it would be necessary to build up a proper test bench to determine exact forces and performed work
when operating a stork´s bill invention.

Before time and money is spend and maybe wasted I would appreciate any comment (positive and negative) to the thoughts above?

Thank you in advance and with best regards,
Nobody

[jim_mich]

Nobody,

A scissor-jack or stork's bill is nothing more than a folded lever. The torque or force required to move the end of the lever is the algebraic Cosine of the angle of the lever.

Think of it this way... Open the stork's bill to full length upward. Now imagine locking or gluing all the joints. Then rotate the whole thing sideways keeping is extended. Now pull on the short handle to cause the long solid "lever" to rotate back upward. The force on the handle will be maximum at the start and will get easier as the "lever" gets nearer straight up.

When the stork's bill is operated in the normal manner (no glue) then the force is the same, while the direction of travel is in a straight line upward instead of a long curved upward arc.

Cosine at 0º (horizontal) is 1.
Cosine at 90º (vertical) is 0.

If you consider vertical to be 0º, then the Sine of 0º (vertical) is 0, and the Sine of 90º is 1.

And obviously a lever with a short handle and a long arm follows the law of levers which requires a force that is relative to the ratio of the handle length to the arm length.

Hope this helps.

[Nobody]

Hello Jim,

thanks a lot for your answer and blowing off slim hope;-).

Probably or definitive it is not that easy, but what could it be that is so special about the stork´s bill? Refer to the MT 41 comment:
I can assure the reader that there is something special behind the stork's bills.

I don´t know if this question was ever asked or discussed in this forum?

Thanks for any reply and with best regards,
Nobody

[justsomeone]

Hi Nobody, you could do a forum search for stork's bill or storks bill or scissor jack. I think you will find plenty to read.

[Nobody]

Hello justsomeone,

thanks for your help, it seems there is a lot to read.

At the beginning I have searched for MT 24 and MT 25 and unfortunately nothing showed up.

Most probably I did not see the forest for the trees, sorry for that.

Many thanks and best regards,
Nobody

[ruggerodk]

... what could it be that is so special about the stork´s bill? Refer to the MT 41 comment:
I can assure the reader that there is something special behind the stork's bills.

'Behind'...not 'about'.

The important item are not the stork bill themselves, but what's behind the stork bill?

ruggero ;-)

[jim_mich]

Ruggerodk, you might have something there. Might be interesting to see what German word Bessler used. The English term "behind" does not always mean positioned behind, but can mean like: "An automobile engine is the force behind its motion."

[Nobody]

Thanks for that input, Ruggerodk and Jim.

It is very difficult to read the handwriting of Bessler......To me it seems he uses the German word "hinter" in that MT comment.
In my opinion this word is to a 100 % equivalent to the English word "behind" and it can also be used in the same way.

Best regards,
Nobody

[sleepy]

could also mean literally behind,as in physically placed behind.

[Nobody]

Dear all,

I have attempted to find out and learn more about MT drawings during the last few days and get stuck
a bit on the MT 40 drawing.......Now deciding to ask next question to the forum. Hope it is alright to stay
within this MT 24 and MT 25 tread with that and maybe also upcoming questions instead of opening
each and every time a new topic?

I like the MT 40 drawing and in my opinion there is also a lot of Apologia Poetica text and clues that would
match to that drawing, for example AP part 1 page 81, 82, 89 or AP part 2 page 77 and 88.

Bessler says: No MT drawing itself shows the working mechanism, but also says in MT 40 comment:
Whoever thinks it proper, can make (construct) these figures on an axle.

I like that invention and hopefully there is no hoax or even better a clue in it, but before making model and
spending time and money I would appreciate any comment / experience from your side? A forum search did
not exactly indicate if someone has practically build a model of that machine.

Thank you in advance for your help and with best regards,
Nobody

[zoelra]

Nobody,

A storks bill usually has one fixed pivot point, so when one side is expanded or contracted, the opposite side follows, and depending on the number of links on either side of the pivot point, a mechanical advantage can be produced. In the MT40 illustration, there is a storks bill shown to the right of the wheel. I have highlighted (with red dot) where I think the fixed pivot point is implied to be.

Neither of the storks bills in the wheel appear to have a fixed pivot point.

[AB Hammer]

zoelra

The fixed points are as you have shown in the sample. You have your arm mount and the second one it the fixed points. A simple measurement of a ruler should shows it very quickly.

Alan