The missing factor

[jim_mich]

Don’t consider anything to be fiction that I have spoken so far about Orffyreus as they contain most important clues about the invention known to me through my power of intuition and transcendental meditation.

In other words, when something is unknown, you simply make up some story from your imagination.

Talk about lying....

[John doe]

If it's on the internet it's got to be true!
Ok I'm an idiot. Strike everything I've said in my last few posts, except I believe My PMM could be modified to make use of magnetism.

[jim_mich]

Magnets are conservative forces, just like gravity. When a magnet pulls toward metal or toward another magnet, then it takes exactly the same force to pull them back apart. This is why there are no real-world magnet motors.

[ME]

It's been awhile since I have put anything up.
. . .
The one factor that surprises me that is not available......is the time. I cannot find any reference as to the time it took for the wheel to reach maximum speed. There are references as to how many revolutions, but nothing about the time.

You asked this before:

http://www.besslerwheel.com/forum/viewt ... 0816#10816

Perhaps I can do some rough guessing...

Let's say the rotation of the unidirectional wheel starts from a fixed position and the Center of Mass lies in the maximum overbalance position; that is: the averaged position for all weights together;
When it accelerates towards maximum velocity (within about 2.5 turns, or 900°) the overbalance keels towards the ground as the mechanism can't keep up with raising some weight.
Perhaps things aren't raised and overbalance is caused in some other mechanical way - which simply takes time until the wheel moves at such a speed it doesn't effect in overbalance anymore.
(sidenote: I don't know if such logic still counts for Jim's motion wheel)

The maximum possible acceleration would be g=9.81 m/s^2, but it should be (much) less because of inertia of the wheel itself; so acceleration a[initial]=f*g, where f is some unknown factor [0<f<1]

As the average overbalanced position keels that acceleration will go to zero, depending on the angle of such overbalance, which depends on velocity;
I think a good guess would become:
a[v] = a[initial]*cos( 0.5*pi*v/v[max]) = f*g*cos( 0.5*pi * v/v[max])
(an acceleration as function of the current velocity, which depends on the lift angle, which depends on its deployment time at the current speed)
-There could be so much wrong with this assumption-

v[t]=a[v[t]]*t

As one can see this is a somewhat circular definition: the acceleration depends on its current velocity (thus also the speed of lifting a weight), and wheel velocity depends on acceleration. Perhaps I should redefine this stuff, but I'm too lazy for that.

It gets slightly more complicated when calculating the initial acceleration to deg/s^2

For all this we need the mass and mass distribution of the wheel to calculate the inertial moment of the wheel;
When we know how much a weight is raised (or some equivalent action) we know the maximum overbalanced position ( h/pi ) horizontally, and we need to know the total amount of weights in CoM - as the weights supposed to work in pairs it is difficult to say what that would do to the CoM of those weights combined, or this should only affect the inertia of the wheel of something in between.

Let's make some rough guesses:
Diameter 5 ft: 0.762 m radius
Just wheel Mass: 40 kg ("easy lift" for two men?)
Mass distribution: Even distribution (probably not)
Inertial moment 0.5*40*0.762^2 = 11.613 kg m2

8 weight-pairs @ 2 kg = 2*8*2 = 32 kg
Max.Rotation: 50 RPM = 300°/sec

Amount of rotations: 2 or 3 --> 2.5*360°=900°

While I use math I'm no math-geek, so I let the computer run the numbers (what else should that thing do).
- - - -
Initial acceleration: a[init]=135.039 °/s2

I have a scenario where a single mechanism lifts 28cm, two times per rotation.
At 900° rotation it reaches a velocity of 285°/sec, which is (my target) 95 % of the maximum velocity.
(In this exercise it will never reach the maximum, but just gets closer)
For the rough calculations I (and my PC) performed, it should do this in 4.576 seconds.

It's likely that only half of the weights are lifted, perhaps each of one pair only lifted once per cycle.
So I did fix half of them at an arbitrary radius of 0.45, and basically they're just increasing wheel inertia.
To get to the 95% max. velocity I had to raise the weights a distance of 0.742 m, basically from rim towards the center of the wheel.
Initial acceleration: a[init]=134.854 °/s2
The time is 4.578 seconds, about equal as before.

This all with the obvious disclaimer my method and/or calculus could be completely or partially wrong; but it's the best I've currently got.

[John doe]

Nm

[Trevor Lyn Whatford]

Who is Deva Ramananda ?

https://www.google.com/?gws_rd=ssl#q=deva+ramananda

Below is from the Tripod Site.

Deva Ramananda's Stand on this Website

Thanks to Deva Ramananda! With such ancient background and Vedic holistic approach in mind, Deva Ramananda wanted my web site and books to be different from others on this subject. In addition to maintaining the factual information about the events in the life of Orffyreus and his wheels, Deva Ramananda also wanted my website to be highly “suggestive� containing in it some “spiritual element� and mysticism in harmony with Orffyreus’ mental attitude, his religious faith, his way of life and his invention. He wanted “heart and soul of the readers of the websites to resonate with that of Orffyreus so that they land more easily into the secret of Orffyreus.� Being trained in mainstream science, when I had expressed my concern over not to incorporate any mysticism in the main story of Orffyreus, Deva Ramananda chided me justifying his point of view. Here, I still recollect his words. He told me somewhat angrily: “Rascal, why you do not understand the esoteric laws of nature, the fact that getting knowledge through process of perception, conception, recognition and understanding of any secret thing involves a “spiritual dimension�? It is unfortunate that you still seem to be unaware of power of intuition based on faith. Here, when we have a challenge of knowing the secret of machine that was lost with death of Orffyreus some 250 years ago, your bad science and your training in it cannot be of much help in revealing the secret. Where is the way except surrendering to the great soul of Orffyreus? Did you forget story of Eklavya and Dronacharya, great master of archery? Make no mistake. Your science which rejects perpetual motion is certainly pseudoscience! Don’t consider anything to be fiction that I have spoken so far about Orffyreus as they contain most important clues about the invention known to me through my power of intuition and transcendental meditation. While making a reading of your website, I want heart and soul of your readers to resonate with that of Orffyreus so that they land more easily into the secret of Orffyreus.�

I think the secret will be found by experiments and trial and error and that is where the heart and soul should be put in, that is how Bessler came to find PM. He did not have misleading clues to get in the way, or the energy laws, or the brain washing that it is impossible, to help people to give up too easily.

If people are told something is impossible enough times then they start to believe it, so never give up and join the impossible preachers.

I found it is possible and have put my case forward, only to be slapped in the face, I do not have the time to prove my theory's, when I think it will be quicker to build a more simple design.

[TGM]

Magnets are conservative forces, just like gravity. When a magnet pulls toward metal or toward another magnet, then it takes exactly the same force to pull them back apart. This is why there are no real-world magnet motors.

I agree with you but there was ONE that was patented. It probably worked well but the patent might of had some key part omitted by Howard Johnson.

http://pdfpiw.uspto.gov/.piw?Docid=04151431

[jim_mich]

I'm well aware of Howard Johnson's motor patent. He lived about 27 miles from me in Grass Lake, MI. He had to prove to the USPTO that his magnet motor worked. He did it by holding a magnet above his rotor. Later he sold the patent to a company (IIRC) in West Virginia, or somewhere in that area. And he moved down there to perfect the motor. He could never get the motor to work except when hand holding the magnets. Thus it seems his normal hand motions were the cause of the rotation.

From eleven years ago...
http://www.besslerwheel.com/forum/viewt ... =9691#9691

[John doe]

When a magnet pulls toward metal or toward another magnet, then it takes exactly the same force to pull them back apart. This is why there are no real-world magnet motors.

This is only true if you apply force perpendicular to the magnets and does not include lateral shear force.
while it is true they are considered conservative forces it is demonstratively false that it requires the same amount of force to pull them apart as the force of attraction. The fact that your first statement is demonstratively false calls into question your final statement.

[jim_mich]

it is demonstratively false that it requires the same amount of force to pull them apart as the force of attraction.

Yes, sliding magnets sideways requires a weaker force. It also requires that the weaker force to be exerted over a greater distance. Thus total force × distance ends up the same either way. There is no free energy from permanent magnets.

[John doe]

One thing I've learned in life is that to get the right answers you have to ask the right questions.

[John doe]

it is demonstratively false that it requires the same amount of force to pull them apart as the force of attraction.

Yes, sliding magnets sideways requires a weaker force. It also requires that the weaker force to be exerted over a greater distance. Thus total force × distance ends up the same either way. There is no free energy from permanent magnets.

That also is no a true statement.
This is a link to a more correct application of lateral shear forces of a magnet.

https://www.supermagnete.de/eng/faq/Why ... n-the-wall

[TGM]

I'm well aware of Howard Johnson's motor patent. He lived about 27 miles from me in Grass Lake, MI. He had to prove to the USPTO that his magnet motor worked. He did it by holding a magnet above his rotor. Later he sold the patent to a company (IIRC) in West Virginia, or somewhere in that area. And he moved down there to perfect the motor. He could never get the motor to work except when hand holding the magnets. Thus it seems his normal hand motions were the cause of the rotation.

From eleven years ago...
http://www.besslerwheel.com/forum/viewt ... =9691#9691

Good to know. Thanks.

[jim_mich]

John doe,

If what you are implying were to be true, then a permanent magnet motor could be made. Simply allow the magnet to be pulled straight inward, then pull/slide the magnet sideways and thus out of the magnetic field. If indeed there is less force needed to remove the magnet than is generated by the pull-together of the magnet, then you have an imbalance of force that can be engineered into a permanent magnet motor.

Men have tried for years to make permanent magnet motors. It can't be done. Magnetism is a conservative force.

When you tell me that I don't know about such things, you are simply showing your own ignorance.

[John doe]

I have not implied anything I have "tried" to show you with data supporting my "opinion" that it should be possible to build a magnetic motor and why I believe this to be so. If I have made any errors in my argument please show them to be so. As you have seen before I have been known to occasionally make mistakes as we all do and would be happy to acknowledge any as such as I previously have.
I have not drawn any conclusions for you regarding my supporting evidence, that is for you to decide. However I have expressed my Opinion that it should be possible and shown my facts as I believe them to be to the best of my knowledge. I do not claim to be a magnetic propulsion expert or really an expert of any sort really.
As for those who tried and failed in building one I suppose they came to the same conclusions that I have that it "should" be possible. Just like a gravity powered wheel should be possible. Now as to why they have not been accomplished I cannot say, but I suspect you have similar beliefs otherwise why would you be here on this forum?