Mayday! Mayday!!!

[Blitzbrain]

Hello Cheors,

IF the Bessler Wheel was a PM Machine, it had a true advantage, that was as well a disadvantage: Perpetual acceleration. But the way the wheel gave its sounds it seems to hava had an acceleration like a pulse motor. My Assumption is, that a permanent rythm to this acceleration was crucial to a continouus spin. If the acceleration would have worked without any restraint, the wheel would have come 'off track' from its regularly 'bumping rythm'.

The stampers (in my opinon) were free falling, noisy and a permanent energy draw from the wheel. (Like this http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stamp_mill ) This energy draw guaranteed a steady run of it... Besslers intention was not to build a ¨real stonemill¨ but he needed something, that together with the pendula regulated its speed... but still had enough power to lift boxes or pump water...

'S Gravesandes inspection clearly showed, thet the axle of the wheel was situated in two forged iron bearings at both ends with no possibility to influence the wheel in its spin...clearly visible for any kind of inspection.... The wheel had no other contact to the floor. The only way one would have managed to use the stampers as an energy supply, would have been the way via the shaft. But the shaft lifted the stampers and let them fall down later... Ther was no mechanism visible, that re-implemented the force from the stampers...

Bessler did this open bearing thing, because he wanted to be sure, nobody would say anything suspicious about his mechanism INSIDE the wheel... (Like his maiden did later on...who claimed, that she had to pull ropes to drive the wheel...) If some kind of moving technique would have been visible on the outside, it would have been possible, to somehow analyze this mechanism for a clue, how the wheel looked inside... Bessler did not want this at all!

If you look at the drawings, you can even see, that the pillars hat no direct connection to floor and ceiling. They were shaped like bows with the fixage at the end.

Imho the stampers had nothing to do with the moving mechanism... they were just helpers, not the force.

But if your idea will work... try it out... and if it is ¨tha wheel¨... congratulations from my side will be sure.

[cheors]

Hello Blitzbrain,

As far as i know, the problem is that nobody had the idea of looking inside the box under the stampers.
Because everybody was convinced that the secret was only inside the wheel and would have a look.
If you don't believe that the wood stampers also had a potential energy storage function, how do you interpret MT55 and all others MT drawings i was referring to?

Best regards

[Blitzbrain]

Hi Cheors,

MT 55 is definately not stampers... it is a very interesting concept...
Actually has some parts, that I currently use on my model...
But no stampers... it looks like more rotating arms... or with a ratchet mechanism (as I described before...)

Well but this is what I also meant before...: If you are convinced to go that way... do so and try it out... and then... let us see the result.

All tries here in the forum have very interesting aspects on "how to not build a model..."

The theory has a different quality though... in theory, there is a lot of speculation... and even the Working Model software doesn't give you the kick (or the desillusion) of a real model...

But fighting about what is right, is not my intention. We all try the same... and one of us will succeed one day...
All the thoughts and models will finally gi
ve us a working wheel... That is my conviction...

[cheors]

Hi,

I agree with you : MT55 is based on arms with ratchets. It is the main topic of this group MT51 to MT55.
But Bessler told us to mix some drawings to find the working mechanism.
Imagine now to replace armss(MT55) with stampers (MT80) and you get it.
I discovered that the gears ratio could be another key because less force seems to be required to keep the wheel running.
In MT55 ratio is 1/4 (12 / 48 or 49 cogs)
I will try to show in my simulator.

Regards

[cheors]

I like it :

http://youtu.be/bpSU91DcWhI

[AB Hammer]

It looks like using stampers like snail cams.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-tfkApQgMSs

[AB Hammer]

It looks like using stampers like snail cams.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-tfkApQgMSs

[lis_wang]

Dear Raj

Could you please post your drawing and I want to do the animation for you.

Hello Everybody!
Greeting from the tropics.

I have the pleasure to announce to you all that I have made an unexpected but very very important change in redesigning the weights positioning on my gravity wheels, that NOW results in the wheels expecting to have MORE torques, more number of weights at more or equal distances from the axle on the descending side than on the ascending side of the wheels, right through 360 degrees rotations.

For the first time in my life, I feel that I have found the gravity wheel I have been looking for so long.

Raj

[raj]

Thanks lis_wang.
Kindly show me a link to the post referred .

I searched for a link to the post for long. I did not find it.

Raj

[raj]

Hello lis_wang.

I posted the drawing on 11 May 2012.

Thanks for the offer for help.

I'll come back with drawings soon.

Raj

[raj]

Hello to All PM Diehards!!!

Attempts to improve on previous failed attempts continue regardless.

This is what is commonly known as simply ' Obsession'.

So what???
This, at least keeps my grey matter ticking in old age, and memory active.

Well here is my latest find!

1. is a drumwheel.
2. is axle of 1.
3. are wheels rolling freely on axle(5) on rim inside 1
4. is a wheel fix on axle(5) geared to 2 on a 1:1 ratio, so that drumwheel(1) and 4 rotate at the same speed.
5. is an axle on which 3 rotates freely and on which 4 is fix.
6. are belts gearing axle(2) and axle(5) by 1:1 ratio.
7. are swingings weights, connected to 8 and 9.
8. are rigid arms pivoting at 45 degrees intervals on rim of 4.
9. are flexible strings/arms at 45 degrees intervals on rim of drumwheel(1).

There will be always more weights(7) on the descending side further away from the axle of drumwheel(1) as weights(7) are pulled up nearer to axle past the 6 o'clock position of wheels. by flexible arms 9, just in time to rest on axle(5) upwards to the descending side of wheels.

Raj

[raj]

It goes without saying that this gravity wheel concept should rotate in both directions. It is a bi-directional gravity wheel concept. and the prime movers are expected to be the swinging weights, once the wheels are set initially, in motion.

Raj

[AB Hammer]

raj

I see the flaw in your system. The outer wheel to pick up the lower weights causes a negative that IMHO will cancel out what you gained on the inner wheel.

[raj]

Dear Allan,

It is 100 % that you are right in your opinion. Otherwise finding what world science in toto, says IMPOSSIBLE, wouldn't make us all searchers fit to be closed in mad cranks house.

But I repeat to those who want to hear. My PM search pasttime is my mental and physical health insurance, keep fit in old age. It just pleasurable like drug effect, that allows me to do all the other things in in a potentful life day to day.

Just a benign disagreement with your point of view, see the next drawing!

You will see that only 3 weights( numbered 1,2,3) swing/change orbit if and when wheels rotate, while 5 weights are clustered around axle of inner wheel.

Calculating torque by weight 3, is easy, as it hangs perpendicular on its pivot on rim of inner wheel.
Calculating torque by weight 1 and 2 are a bit difficult:
Look at the arcs made weight1 and 2 by moving downwards on rigid arms 1 and 2 on inner wheel (arcs in black ink) and moving downwards on flexible arms 1 and 2 on drumwheel (arcs in red ink).

See the perpendicular distance of weights 1 and 2 (of 1.4 and 1.0 units) from axle of inner wheel, forcing it to rotate towards the ascending side, on straignt lines of action 1 and 2 (in black ink).

And see the perpendicular distance of weights 1 and 2 (of 2.8 and 2.4 units) from axle of drumwheel, forcing it to rotate towards the descending side on straight lines of actions 1 and 2 (in red ink).

Forgetting the 5 weights clustered around axle of inner wheel, How would the net torque by weights 1, 2, and 3 behave? Which way will the wheels turn/rotate?

I say towards the descending side.

Raj

[raj]

I believe some further explanation on this gravity wheel concept/drawing is needed:

Why is the larger inner wheel rolling freely on inside rim of drumwheel included in this concept/drawing???

Well!
1. It helps to keep axle of smaller inner wheel in a fix position in a rotating frame of reference of drumwheel.
2. It also acts as a pair of energy storage/flywheels design to continue rotating freely, should the smaller inner wheel and drumwheel slow down.

So does the larger inner wheel justifies its inclusion in the design of this gravity wheel???

Raj