NEWS FLASH!! Fcdriver has a working wheel!!!!

[Fcdriver]

Be patient all will be answered. I am not as young as I used to be. My knees are weak, I have a 1/2 repaired Achilles tenon, and the back of a 93 year old plumber. I will be posting my video soon, not tomorrow but soon.

[WaltzCee]

OK, I'll be patient. And as I'm sitting here being patient I'll never forget you did not answer my question.

That's cool.

[Fcdriver]

I had to go back and reread your post, no I have not lied! Don't worry my wife is a lot less patient about me going public, than anybody on here!

[Grimer]

Contemplating the above diagram I thought,

"That looks terribly unstable with all that mass concentrated at the top. There's an awful lot of potential energy between that and a uniform distribution of mass around the perimeter, the redistribution of 3rd derivative energy in other words."

And then I imagined it toppling over to the right and the peacock's tail opening up like a fan.

This would lead to the kind of mass distribution one gets with the Rubber Band Motor, a distribution where the centre of mass is displaced from the centre of rotation of a casing (see attachment).

There will be continuous rotation since half the angular momentum is passed to the earth.

In effect there is a permanent eddy being formed by the shear between the NG wind blowing down and the earth reaction wind "blowing up".

Now to achieve this most desirable outcome one would need a mechanism for keeping the masses on the required path as they progressed around the reaction pivot.

If Frank's claim is correct he could have devised just such a compound lever mechanism.

[Fcdriver]

The key is the offset leverage point, where the levers pivot from a different point than the wheel. This allows them to be lifted by the wheel closer to the axle, than the pushing down pivot point which become further from the center of the wheel. But they are two separate locations on the arm. Lifting say at 12 pushing down at 20. So it is like lifting a 43 inch arm, but pushing down with a 53 inch arm, basically

[AB Hammer]

Frank Driver

In a since the change in distance of pressure on the down and up stroke have relative effects to this device of mine except I am using slide instead of cams.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A5pPaTqd-4w

[Fcdriver]

But your motion is still circular, same lift as down stroke, the cam allows to lift slower, this makes makes the force path or harmonic motion non circular

[AB Hammer]

But how the weights effects on the arms change with each rotation. The slide arms are constant changing lever points. There is greater weight on one side and less on the other between the slide points and the lever mount points.

[Grimer]

Contemplating the above diagram I thought,

"That looks terribly unstable with all that mass concentrated at the top. There's an awful lot of potential energy between that and a uniform distribution of mass around the perimeter, the redistribution of 3rd derivative energy in other words."

And then I imagined it toppling over to the right and the peacock's tail opening up like a fan.

This would lead to the kind of mass distribution one gets with the Rubber Band Motor, a distribution where the centre of mass is displaced from the centre of rotation of a casing (see attachment).

There will be continuous rotation since half the angular momentum is passed to the earth.

In effect there is a permanent eddy being formed by the shear between the NG wind blowing down and the earth reaction wind "blowing up".

Now to achieve this most desirable outcome one would need a mechanism for keeping the masses on the required path as they progressed around the reaction pivot.

If Frank's claim is correct he could have devised just such a compound lever mechanism.

I've been looking up some old posts and I came across this:

I don't believe that the weights turned the wheel, it would be too hard for a carpenter of that time to make a balanced 10 foot wheel, yet alone one that is turned by 4 lb weights. I feel the weights were hammers to move wedges, on the spokes off setting the 300 lb wheel. While the movement of the wheel reset them. A 4 lb weight could hammer a levered wedge, extending the spoke causing it to be put of balance. Either that or a second wheel held in place by springs, making it easier to wedge the off balance.

I'm not sure I completely follow this but I can see that if you have a spoke hinged at the middle, say, then one would have a great mechanical advantage in using a weight to straighten the spoke and so get the same effect of displacing the centre of mass from the centre of rotation as in the Rubber Band Motor. We know that works and I can see where the energy come from there, or rather where the angular momentum which is simple to convert to K.E. comes from.

I've always approached things from the theoretical end. It show the usefulness of having hands on experience since the idea of straighten out a bent spoke is not something which would occur to a theoretician. :-)

If a simple way of altering spoke length has been found then I can well believe that NG has been harnessed.

[Fletcher]

About 15 years ago Grimer I tried something similar with a real build.

I had been fascinated with the vertical wheel rubber band motor. The one where rubber bands made up the spokes from an axle to a rim. A candle heated the rubber bands on one side causing them to contract and pull the rim over to an unbalanced position. It would rotate and the rubber band would then elongate back to normal length as it cooled naturally.

My version was a similar principle of unbalance by using steel coil springs for spokes and pulleys at the rim. Basically a weighted lever attached to the rim was activated which pulled a rope around the pulley and stretched the coil spoke. This in turn pulled the rim off center from the axle creating unbalance like the rubber band motor.

For a reason I couldn't quite fathom at the time it always keeled. I later figured it was the ol' trading width for height syndrome because the levers had to lose GPE the way I had it.

Anyhoo, I like FCD's idea all the same. Bessler said his idea was so simple he was terrified a buyer would want their money back.

Wouldn't that be a face palm moment and take the prize for share practical simplicity, if it worked.

It's gotta be way out there in the next county left field thinking to be that simple.

.............

It never occurred to me to use the lever and weight to drive a wedge to temporarily lengthen the spoke (telescoping, not straighten it) and deform the rim to cause imbalance.

ETA: perhaps a variation on this theme is driving a hydraulic or pneumatic piston to lengthen the spoke ?

[Grimer]

Most people dismiss the RBM as a heat engine and can't see it as a potential gravity mill.

One member of the NOT THE STEORN FORUM was utterly convinced that gravity was irrelevant and that the motor would work in a horizontal position.
Some time later he had the good grace to admit that he was wrong but he obviously still considered that the energy put in by the heat is greater than the energy given up by gravity. So he viewed it as a bit like pumping water up into a dam. The energy used in raising the water is greater than the gravitational energy gained from the falling water.

The reason I don't see it that way is because there is an internal oscillation within the band between rotation of the atoms and rotation of the long chain molecules. This action is adiabatic, i.e. no external heat has to be supplied for it to take place. Therefore, in principle, if one insulated the band it would oscillate freely and external energy would only be needed for losses and to keep the oscillation drifting from the horizontal. Also, the unusual stress-strain characteristic suggests that the hysteresis is possibly endothermic. I don't know if this is essential but it must help.

[Grimer]

Oops! Double post.

[Fcdriver]

When I started out I made a test bed, to try various methods, I tried 7 to 8 different methods of shifting weights while they rotated around with the wheel. Drawer glide rollers mechanisms, weight control similar to Windows and garage doors. Tried spring controlling movement, cables, levers, cams, three inch wheel roller vs nine inch wheel rollers to move weights, all of the methods I found that to move the weights I had to find something to push against to move the weights. The pushing against the axle or the rim, but not against rotation, became easier than I first thought. While setting up a chain drive method, on a cam similar to a compound bow, with a free wheel clutch to change the harmonic motion forces. While ordering parts, of chains and sprockets, I could not find the gear ratios I desired. I reviewed the test I had done, came up with a idea kiss, keep it simple stupid. I found that once a thee hundred pound wheel started moving it was very hard to stop it. Similar to the starting out on a bicycle in the wrong gear. I found that the lifting of a weighted arm, slowly greatly reduced the forces against rotation, I tried a inner and outer cam, with a outer cam I found I had to push against something moving in the other direction, so I setup to push against a stomper type mechanism. It worked great the timing was difficult, but I got rotation. A scissor type mechanism being shoved in by a cam, divided the lift forces, but I could only get a limited amount of downward force. In keeping it simple I made a small change, offsetting the pivot point of the leverage arm, changing to a inner cam, and removing the need to push against stompers, or frame. The offset multiplied the downward stroke, but limited the degree turns of push on the wheel. A weighted lever can put a lot of downward force, compared to just pushing down at the rim, when offset. The closest in comparison would be pliers and bolt cutters.

[Grimer]

"I found that to move the weights I had to find something to push against to move the weights. The pushing against the axle or the rim, but not against rotation, became easier than I first thought."

That's the key, isn't it. That's the Law and the Prophets - employing not only the vertical reaction at the pivot but also the horizontal reaction to provide two balancing couples, a Newtonian Gravity acceleration - Vertical Earth Reaction as one couple and a Ersatz Gravity acceleration (towards the centre) - Horizontal Earth Reaction as the other. This give the classic shear balance of forces.

The Ersatz Gravity acceleration is the difference between the opposite horizontal centripetal forces.

I look forward to the video.

[Grimer]

Here's a relevant thread on the subject of angular momentum partitioning which was started by greendoor 6 years ago.

http://www.besslerwheel.com/forum/viewt ... highlight=

In view of FCDriver's build it's worth a read.