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

[Fcdriver]

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=W-l7L4DvDt8

[savoniuspiral]

FC Driver,
have you solved a height problem by using levers on a cam that move from 1:30 to 4:30 and vice versa e.g. MT 43 has a gain of roughly 1.6 for the ball on the wheels perimeter compared to the 4 balls being lifted, "only when at the 3 o'clock position" as the gain reduces to a balance around 4:30, this could be improved if the 90 degree downward fall was from 1:30 to 4:30 which creates the aforementioned height issue.

[Fcdriver]

Take the weights off of the wheel! The wheel is only a transfer point. A point of movement

[savoniuspiral]

FC Driver,
Now i'm confused, have been trying simulations on a cam using an offset lever which moved from 7:30 to 10:30 for the lift, the lever pivot was not connected to the wheel though the lever is lifted by the cams rotation of 360 degree.
For the 90 degree fall the end of the lever/weight lays on a block attached to the rim.
Still need to get the correct lever position so the range of movement is the same for the up/down stroke.

From your previous reply i guess that the lever should not be coming down on the wheels rim.

[Fcdriver]

Lift is all 360 turn of the wheel, basically the drop or downward movement follows the wheel down. Yes the downward force pushes down on the rim, further from center. It only pushes down for 1/4 of the movement of the wheel,,,90 degrees the movement of the arm is greater than 90 degrees, to equal the same distance

[Grimer]

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=SncS82GBOQc

The use of vectors as distances is new to me - but then I did all that stuff a long (very) time ago. :-)

[Fcdriver]

I could not get a computer simulation to work, it kept telling me the outer cam was a obstruction

[Grimer]

FcDriver wrote:
"...Something simple like a kids swing or a kids seesaw, is useless unless taught, or learning. With Simple knowledge, either a swing or a seesaw could power a wheel, with neither prime mover making a full circular movement. It is true one simple machine will never be perpetual motion, but a combination of simple machines can be perpetual. ..."

FcDriver's quote above set me thinking about one of the best known Bessler drawings shown below.

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

Here we have a combination of two simple machines interacting, namely, a flywheel and a pendulum. The question arises, is there a positive interaction term, an energy gain in other words?

Well, as I have pointed out earlier, the transfer of 3rd derivative energy to 2nd should lead to an increase in angular momentum, i.e. an increase in rotational energy. Clearly, the action of the flywheel is going to smooth out the angular velocity of the pendulum. For sectors where the angular momentum of the pendulum is higher than the average at around 6 o'clock, say, then energy will flow from the flywheel to the pendulum. Where the angular momentum of the pendulum is lower than the average, near the apogees then energy will flow from the pendulum to the flywheel. Third derivative energy will be reduced and second derivative energy increased.

Could this be a case of hidden in plain sight?

If so Bessler will no doubt be highly amused that it has taken people so long for it to be realised. No wonder he's sticking his tongue out.

[Tarsier79]

There is no transfer of energy from second derivative to third. I am still offended by the term "third derivative energy". Is it the third derivative of energy you are talking about? What energy? What formula are you using for the energy of the pendulum? If I am incorrect, then show me....

[Fcdriver]

F=MA,, the force does not disappear! You can lose it to friction, which creates heat. Controlling the forces can make a sail boat move faster than the wind. The pressure angle, the angle of attack, just the simple controlling of force. The force of gravity, is there, it does not go away, it is free! To claim that this force cannot be tamed, or used,any less than the wind,is false! Yes there is a difference between a sail boat, and a windmill, but not really that much!

[Grimer]

Better than that, the Ventmobil sails directly into the wind - and Bessler's will will sail directly into the NG wind (up, in other words) given an axle mounted pinion and a vertical rack to grip on (analogous the to the sailboat's seawater). The Ventmobil's equivalent to the sailboat's seawater is the ground reaction of course.

I'm sure it won't be too long now before someone's mill is doing the same.

How's the painting coming on by the way? Do you have an ETA for us?

[harry morris]

Hey GRIMER, well done and about time too HIDDEN IN PLAIN SIGHT I should say so, take an overbalanced wheel and Two. Out of balance pendulums and there you have it, if you put a weight on a wheel ( I have such a wheel ) at zero degrees it will fall rapidly right down to 180 degrees and then the sheer momentum and cf it will climb right up to 355 degrees and then it will fall back down and start ossolating until it stops, so we have all spent the last 300 odd years trying to find a way of getting this powerful wheel to move 5 degrees !!!!
Just look at Besslers pendulums, and don't forget there are Two of them, They are the hidden driving force behind his wheels, I believe the only thing Besslers had inside his wheels were removable weights and nothing more.
I tried this experiment a couple of years ago and it almost worked, my pendulums were Triangular Shaped and out of balance I e they did not hang straight down like well behaved pendulums should ( I claim to have invented the triangular pendulum ) unfortunately my engineering is..... to give it its technical term ...crap, just look at the gearing of Besslers pendulums very very low and therefore powerful, and powered by the powerful down stroke of the wheel enough to give the wheel that little shove past the 360 degree mark also the pendulums are Not swinging opposite each other one follows the other but Out of time !!!! cheers Harry Morris.

[sleepy]

Well,it looks like we have multiple working wheels out there,using several different solutions.And it was all so easy!If just half the folks with runners would build them,we would be up to our armpits in free energy.Who else has a runner? C'mon,don't be shy! Step right up into the golden age of free energy!BTW,my recent build failed,(again),but I learned a couple more things from it.So I guess building failures is more beneficial than not building runners.

[Grimer]

Hey GRIMER, well done and about time too HIDDEN IN PLAIN SIGHT I should say so, take an overbalanced wheel and Two. Out of balance pendulums and there you have it, if you put a weight on a wheel ( I have such a wheel ) at zero degrees it will fall rapidly right down to 180 degrees and then the sheer momentum and cf it will climb right up to 355 degrees and then it will fall back down and start oscillating until it stops, so we have all spent the last 300 odd years trying to find a way of getting this powerful wheel to move 5 degrees !!!!
Just look at Bessler's pendulums, and don't forget there are Two of them, They are the hidden driving force behind his wheels, I believe the only thing Bessler had inside his wheels were removable weights and nothing more.
I tried this experiment a couple of years ago and it almost worked, my pendulums were Triangular Shaped and out of balance I e they did not hang straight down like well behaved pendulums should ( I claim to have invented the triangular pendulum ) unfortunately my engineering is..... to give it its technical term ...crap, just look at the gearing of Bessler's pendulums very very low and therefore powerful, and powered by the powerful down stroke of the wheel enough to give the wheel that little shove past the 360 degree mark also the pendulums are Not swinging opposite each other one follows the other but Out of time !!!! cheers Harry Morris.

Congratulations, Harry. If you've got it going up to 355° you've done a lot better than me with my 343° simple billiard ball pendulum. It sounds as though turning it into a compound pendulum which is effectively what one is doing, is the way to go.

I was tempted to think the same about no mechanisms inside the wheels. The only problem is that there is no mention by witnesses of those exterior pendulums so I assume he found someway to internalise the principle.

Since your 355° device is so near going over the top I suggest you persist in experimentation by making small changes and very accurately measure the result each time. If positive add another increment, if negative go in the other direction. If when one has reached maximum point with one variable then move on to another.

Good luck.

[Fcdriver]

There is no transfer of energy from second derivative to third. I am still offended by the term "third derivative energy". Is it the third derivative of energy you are talking about? What energy? What formula are you using for the energy of the pendulum? If I am incorrect, then show me....

I too am trying to understand, as I see it is the difference between a rocket, and a airplane, I don't know if the wing, air, or the lift is the third, or even part of the second? If the third is nothing more than a moving fulcrum or pivot. The dropping arm moves the wheel, the wheel lifts the other arms. separating the forces of lift and dropping, with the wheel in the middle, as a transfer point, maintaining the dropping force. As for a math equation, it is for better than I, that I know!