The secret behind Bessler's wheel...

[raj]

Taking it easy with my Auto Motion Wheel concept. Feeling good about it.
My idea is safe and I can move as slow as I wish. Confidence is high. Looking forward to have something to show by the end of 2017.

Raj

[raj]

Maybe non of you have notice that:

The counter torque, lifting force of the pendulums with their bobs/weights is provided by the DISC rotating clockwise from 6 o'clock position for 135 degrees to 10/11 o'clock position, when the pendulums attain their highest PE position.

The dominant torque, for turning the disc and the flywheel is provided by the pendulums swinging back from their highest PE position at 135 degrees clockwise from the 6 o'clock position, via the 12 o'clock position down to the 6 o'clock position resetting lowest point.

In other words, the DISC turn itself 135 degrees lifting one pendulum, WHILE IT IS forced to turn the other 225 degrees to complete one whole revolution resetting point by the swinging pendulum downwards/falling bob/weight.

This provides the asymmetry of Torque, time and motion that I am claiming.

Raj

[raj]

The following drawings should help understanding my Auto Motion Wheel concept better.

Raj

[sleepy]

Raj,
You know I admire your willingness to openly share ideas. And I know you are very excited about this one. But I see a few serious problems with this design and I will point them out as clearly as I can.
1.Pendulums provide sideways force,not downward force. This means that you will be getting far less positive torque than you think.

2.At the 6 o'clock position,the shortest pendulum will swing through and begin traveling to the right of center. It will not stop and go back to the left,especially when the wheel picks up speed.

3.Because the small wheel is free to move,the sideways push that both pendulums will apply simultaneously will scoot the small wheel to the right instead of turning it or turning with it.
This is an outstanding demonstration of thinking outside the box, but my gut tells me it's a non runner.

[raj]

@Sleepy.
Thanks for your comments.

Frankly, your 3 points you made above, are the least of my worries right now. They are already resolved.

Raj

[raj]

Just concentrating on the TWO PENDULUMS.

Raj

[raj]

It's not easy in a country of 720 square miles like Mauritius in the middle of the Indian Ocean, specially when you are 72 years old, with no means, materials, expertise, building workshop facilities and help.

But those should not stop me from trying to build a concept testing prototype.

Raj

[Sam Peppiatt]

raj,

I think I get the idea of your wheel; that a pendulum could drive it but, what drives the pendulum? What am I missing?
Another thing to keep in mind, Bessle's wheels had maximum torque stalled!

What a problem to have------------------right?

Sam

[john.smith]

It's not easy in a country of 720 square miles like Mauritius in the middle of the Indian Ocean, specially when you are 72 years old, with no means, materials, expertise, building workshop facilities and help.

But those should not stop me from trying to build a concept testing prototype.

Raj

It's not easy in a country of 720 square miles like Mauritius in the middle of the Indian Ocean, specially when you are 72 years old, with no means, materials, expertise, building workshop facilities and help.

But those should not stop me from trying to build a concept testing prototype.

Raj

Raj,
I have gotten into some major arguments in this forum over what you are saying. I have been openly attacked and ridiculed for my work as well. This is the link to my facebook page, https://www.facebook.com/Perpetual-Moti ... 423701405/

I would say that I do have Bessler's wheel figured out and could explain the physics as well. It requires an understanding of conserving momentum. This is done by negating inertia. Retracting a weight costs the energy equivalent to 1/2mv^2/r * d or inertia times distance.
That is equal to the velocity the wheel rotates at created by the over balance. Bessler's grindstone allows for this.
Since this is a hobby I think working cooperatively would make things better. Myself, I have a limited budget to work within. As for building, that is one of my favorite things to do.

[ME]

I have gotten into some major arguments in this forum over what you are saying....

...But those should not stop me from trying to build a concept testing prototype.

I helped you both with some animation/simulation which is nice to see pop-up now and then. (just glad when helpful)
The main benefit of simulating stuff (and to some extend even animation) is that it's a method to help overcome hypothetical speculation which is easy when a concept is just in the mind or remains static on paper, although still less effective than a real build.

Please note that criticism on itself doesn't have the power to make a concept fail.. any critique usually pinpoints that thing what needs to be addressed in case it happens to work instead of explaining every bolt and nut, or otherwise may pinpoint the thing in need of some tweaking.

For you both I hope you are able to build your concepts. I think you both build great stuff.

Good luck.

[john.smith]

ME,
I like the work that both you and helloha do. I used to believe that simulations would help people to understand certain relationships in conservation of momentum. With angular momentum, to keep it simple is p = m*v/r.
That is momentum = mass x (velocity divided by radius). And if momentum is considered as torque which is (as an example) 9.8 nm's (2.2 lbs. x 39.37 in.)
then if that weight's radius is reduced by 1/2 then it has 4.9 nm's (2.2 lbs. x 19.685 in.).
That average would be 7.35 nm's (1.65 lbs. x 39.37 in.). That would be a 90° of rotation. The next 90° of rotation would be 4.9 nm's (2.2 lbs. x 29.527 in.).
A 180° rotation would have an average resistance of 6.125 nm's (2.2 lbs. x 24.606 in.).

I have also let AB Hammer know that he should join the party. He is well liked in here and by his becoming involved would make more people feel comfortable about this.
And ME, there is another way of looking at this if you want. You're not an American, Raj and helloha aren't either. Myself am only 1/2 American. I am constantly reminded of that.
As for the math I posted, it is what a grindstone allows for. This is something that can be demonstrated. There are rules for it to work properly. That's because it is engineering. At the moment I am trying to get into my own place so building will be easier. If I stay where I am at then I can rent a storage locker to work in.
And since this is Bessler's wheel that we are discussing I don't see any real need for competition. This is because who ever builds a Bessler wheel won't be the first person to have done it. And they will probably get some publicity out of it.

[john.smith]

Never mind. I'll get around to it one day. I just need to learn not to use medical hardship as an excuse for not working.

[john.smith]

It's not easy in a country of 720 square miles like Mauritius in the middle of the Indian Ocean, specially when you are 72 years old, with no means, materials, expertise, building workshop facilities and help.

But those should not stop me from trying to build a concept testing prototype.

Raj

Raj,
You have limited resources and I need surgery. The retraction method that I am referring to can be tested using anything round, a piece of string and some tape.
Tape the string onto the round object (even a can of soda). Measure the length of the string then wrap it once around the can and measure again from where the string is taped to the can. And hold the can like it's an axle in a wheel. The simplest way to retract a weight without using energy.
This is because tension is doing the work while the wheel rotates. For some reason it seems no one can understand this.

To quote Bessler once again; http://besslerwheel.com/writings/das_triumphans.html

Around the firmly placed horizontal axis is a rotating disc (low or narrow cylinder) which resembles a grindstone. This disc can be called the principle piece of my machine. Accordingly, this wheel consists of an external wheel (or drum) for raising weights which is covered with stretched linen. The base of the cylinder is 12 Rhenish feet in diameter. The height (or thickness) is between 15 and 18 inches. The axle (or shaft) passing through the center is 6 feet long and 8 inches thick cross-sectionally.


The last part I believe he is saying that his disc is 6 feet in diameter and is 18 inches wide. This makes the disc 1/2 the diameter of the wheel (base cylinder)

I am hoping to get into my own place in 3 weeks. If that happens it will be much easier for me to build it myself. I have a lot of work invested in learning what I know. And for other people a slowly rotating animation with torque and counter torque in inch lbs. or nm's expressed as mass * distance might get other people to understand it. This would allow for net torque to be shown.

The image shows how basic the retraction method is. Building a wheel using this principal will take a little work. And this is if it's about what Bessler knew that we don't.

edited to add more info. And Raj, when I go to build this I'll be using 1.25 cm and 0.6 cm sheets of plywood. I checked where you live and I can understand why you have limited resources. and if you decide to help then it might help to improve your situation as well as my own.

[ME]

Never mind. I'll get around to it one day. I just need to learn not to use medical hardship as an excuse for not working.

I thought about it, and I actually do mind!

I just hope for you, <insert reason>, your medical condition isn't your own fault. It could be a perfectly valid reason for not being able to do certain jobs, or literally invalidate you for doing any job at all.

But group categorizations according to uncorrelated superficial properties, like your mentioned exclusion of nationality for example, is historically known to be the worst excuse and a major cause of hardship in more than one occasion.

[john.smith]

john.smith wrote:
Never mind. I'll get around to it one day. I just need to learn not to use medical hardship as an excuse for not working.

I thought about it, and I actually do mind!

I just hope for you, <insert reason>, your medical condition isn't your own fault. It could be a perfectly valid reason for not being able to do certain jobs, or literally invalidate you for doing any job at all.

But group categorizations according to uncorrelated superficial properties, like your mentioned exclusion of nationality for example, is historically known to be the worst excuse and a major cause of hardship in more than one occasion.


ME,
Nationality does play a part in things. I have been attacked for being 1/2 Norwegian in this forum. And that was when you helped me with a simulation and then you quit helping me. So it did make a difference to you.

The attached image shows how my colon is positioned wrong. When I had surgeries in 2009/2010 for cancer my surgeon got it wrong. Most of the work that I've done on Bessler has been with cancer and it's effects.
And this is why I do not get along with AB Hammer. He does not believe my problem is serious. I have sent him emails trying to be nice and only have received rude responses.


From: john.smith
To: AB Hammer
Posted: Wed Jun 07, 2017 2:15 pm
Subject: Re: You might want to consider it.
I was going to say you might as well come along for the ride. I think you defending your credibility has made other members who have supported you leery. And if it turns out I know what I am doing then Bessler will be pretty much a dead subject.

From: AB Hammer
To: john.smith
Posted: Tue Jun 06, 2017 9:00 pm
Subject: Re: You might want to consider it. Quote message
F.O. and don't PM me no more with this BS