See my set of drawings on page 8 that ME (Marchello) used, for his gif animation.
Thank you for your effort, anyway.
Raj,
Jonnynet's representation is perfectly fine, because in the end it shows the results of all of these various configurations. They won't work, which is what I've been trying to tell you all along. You've had three people now build simulations for you, and you just don't seem to want to except the results. Each time saying you see something in the results that proves it will work. :D
Until you start doing a bit of your own analysis, you are going to be stuck relying on others or on your gut. If your gut isn't well versed enough, then you will end up with more Auto False Start Wheels.
I have NEVER EVER said my concept will work. I have said it LOOKS to me (RAJ) promising it will work.
I am NOT relying on forum friends free simulations to boost my ego.
I am working non-stop on my OWN analysis, actual concept testing builds and so far I am more than happy.
Out of the three simulations that you are referring, ONLY Marchello's gif animation has used my drawings specifications, which I am very happy with. It shows me (Raj) my concept looks promising.
N.B: I have NEVER asked any forum member to do any concept simulation for me. But I am grateful that they did simulations without my asking.
I am VERY surprised you didn't have anything to say after ME (Marchello's) last replies. See his animation below and REREAD his last two replies on page 10 and page 11 of this thread.
SO PLEASE STOP worrying about me. If you don't like what I am saying, Just IGNORE me.
Thank you.
@ Jonnynet.
After reading Ed's comments above, if you still want to do a simulation of my concept, using the drawing specifications below, I shall be obliged to you
Hello Raj, I see you want the pendulum's summary mass point more on the right side. I'll make a new simulation based on your specifications from the last drawing - there's enough time I can spend for experimenting! Also, I notice how the linkage to the pendulum weight is off-center. Within the next hours, the result will be there.
I didn't expect to get an interesting effect here. As it seems, the wheel wants to keep going in CW rotation, as long as the pendulums could maintain the right action. That means, there's that point where the linkage seems to have too much mechanical tension and then there're two different ways how the pendulums can continue acting. One of them is the right to keep the wheel moving! But in this simulation, the pendulums cannot maintain the right movement by itself. They come to an inconvenient position where their movement blocks more or less.
That's an interesting device! If we can find a way to control the right movement, then these pendulums could keep the wheel turning, as far as I can see from the action happening here.
Maybe it's worth trying to adjust something on the linkages to avoid high tension - to ensure smooth and secure movement of the pendulums, without blocking their swinging (?)
In the screenshot you can see I kept the ratios of the parts among each other, as your drawing suggest. 2 grid units are 1 cm in your drawing.
Just did a test by connecting the left rod to the outer side. This destroys the result completely and the wheel oscillates.
Raj's configuration has something special. Most of a 360° revolution there's positive torque and enough momentum to overcome a complete revolution, ...if the linkage wouldn't suddenly block the movement. It could be a simulation fault, remember on such effects from earlier tests with WM2D.
Jonnynet, this a problem of linkage length. I have seen it often during my physical built attempts.
There are two things you should check.
1. The pendulums are in the form of an inverse "T". The length of the "T" is not taken at where the Bob/weights are but at where the crank rod connect to the pendulums, so that this connection points are directly in vertical line when the small wheel pivot points are at the 6 o'clock position.
Or you achieve the same effect by shortening the length of the crank rods to the right length.
The crank rods must be VERTICAL when the pivot points on the small wheel are at the 6 o'clock position.
2. The larger wheel must be a proper flywheel with its mass concentrated on the rim, and should be given reasonable initial push force.
In fact I was able to remove the blocking only by changing one rod's length a tiny bit. Managed the weights to swing in the desired manner, also the contrary and both variants offer some more rotation but...
Worst scenario regarding to the blocking! Both wheel and pendulums oscillate permanently. On the other hand, that's the most promising configuration for enough torque, if we can control those pendulums better. I really suggest adding something to the setup. Should think of it! If you really want to see the simulation, will show you tomorrow. Have to go sleep now.
I would like to see the simulation.
I shall try to show how I see the motions of the wheel and pendulums in a set of drawings, so that you can compare your simulation with them.
