Mikes Wheel Idea

[Georg Künstler]

Hi Mike,
yes two systems. One is your wheel, the other system can be a break, or a second wheel. The forces don't cancel out, because you had lifted with the eccentic weights a mass against gravity. And that, you do only on one side. Your WM2D is correct. Advantage at low, controlled speed.

When you use the trouble force on the top, you can also power a second wheel. You have a variable breaking, not a fix. The breaking is depending on the speed of the second wheel. If it is standstill, high breaking. If it begins to turn, lower breaking.

If you have questions, please ask.

the future has begun

Georg

[bluesgtr44]

Awww c'mon Mike.....no insults intended, just some honesty about the system. Now, I have gone over this design...read what the lady had to say about this type of system (a bit arrogant, she was) the problem I have come across is with her statement of "just add more weights till it works"....Think about this, Mike. Adding more weights is adding more "work", right? It is a self defeating system.

Here is a test I use in a system just like this. take the system you already have....way over to the side of your system, draw a circle about 4 or 5 times the size of your axle. Pin this big wheel in the middle and set it not to collide with anything. Attach about a 10 to 12 (what is needed) pound weight at the top...to one side of the big "wheel" (this will set either a CW or CCW rotation) whichever way you want it to go. Now gear the mother to your axle.

The big circle will now "drive" your model through about 4 revolutions with a bit of speed and you can see what it will do if it really "took off". I think after this, you will see what we see and why we say it won't work. I have added an attachment as to how I do these tests on some of my ideas. No insult intended, Mike...want you to stay around and eat crap like the rest of us! No matter if it works...you always learn something.


Steve

[ME]

No matter if it works...you always learn something

If you always do the things the right way at the first time, you are not learning... One can only learn, when one makes misktakes... (hmm I'll put that in my motto)

[Fletcher]

If you have questions, please ask.

There's your invitation Mike. Perhaps you will succeed where others have failed. A starter for 10.

Your WM2D is correct. Advantage at low, controlled speed.

This sounds like a contradiction. Georg now appears to say that the inner eccentric weight wheel actually works by itself (as you have confirmed with your wm2d sim) & only needs the outer braking wheel to amplify the effect ?

Shouldn't that be easy to prove with his eccentric weight model already built (photo's on another thread). This time I'd like to see it on a stand rather than get a push across the floor.

P.S. good luck with your build because that will tell all & I look forward to that.

[bluesgtr44]

Mike, are you kidding?....You do it right the first time when you do something that is already proven. That is not where we are...we are learning. If not, show me the WHEEL! Well, that's why we are here...we don't have one....none of us. But, I sure would like to see one.


Steve

[Dave]

ME
You are not correct about not learning if you do things right the first time. You are mentally learning as you design the item, then you do it right the first time. If you know anything about IC design then you will understand my comment.

[ME]

That's also true Dave. Designing stuff is also designing the brain (like IC).
What is also true: It is hell when there is no progress or other positive feedback.. and so we can go on and on...

[Btw: busy with a sim of Mike's wheel... and it takes a looong time to calculate]

[rlortie]

Me, Dave and Fletcher,

Your three posts hit home with me. I call it the school of hard knocks. One does not learn without trying.

I have now tore down and modified my current project for the third time. I have obviouly learned a lot to know better in the future.

All my misgivings were not something one could design or foresee on a simulation. you start with a model and modify until you change a model "T" into a Cadillac. Some times its just a bolt that can be installed during assembly, but impossible to get at afterwards. So you tear it down and redisign accesiblity and start over. You have just passed another grade of learning.

Ralph

[bluesgtr44]

My apologies to Mike on the last entry of mine, it was ME that had responded and not Mike:

One can only learn, when one makes misktakes

ME...go back to my entry...No matter if it works...you always learn something.

You added a word...ONLY...makes a BIG difference.

Just remove the word ONLY from what you said above...

One can learn, when one makes mistakes, now this sounds like a motto...put YOUR ADDED word, and it sounds like misdirected sarcasm.


Steve

[ME]

ok

[ken_behrendt]

Well, I have never had a success when it comes to my efforts with PM. The many failures I had in the past really taught me, at a minimum, that certain designs just do not work. That, of course, does not mean that they could never be made to work! There might be some trick everybody else missed that could turn a loser approach into a winner. I think this is what happened with Bessler. He eventually settled on over balanced wheel designs and stumbled upon one that could automatically reconfigure the arrangement of its internal weights so as to keep their CG always on one side of the wheel's axle. It's probably a simple design that requires some fine tuning to make work.

I think that every PM seeker should, at a minimum, keep a record of the various designs they have tried over the decades. Each failure should be given as close a scrutiny as possible with regard to why it failed. If one truly understands why a design failed then he will be in a far better position to avoid that cause in a future design and, with great luck, might even come up with an effective way to neutralize the cause of the failure in a present design.

ken