Q 4 JC , Ovyyus, Scott, others re One-Way Wheels "Prime

[Fletcher]

Hi Guys,

This is really a question about the reliability of observation of the witnesses. I'd like to hear your opinions regarding the one-way wheels ?

It is said that the one-directional wheels were tied down (by rope) & the retraint released to start the wheel rotating. Also that the one-way wheels were "always out of balance" (is this comment actually attributed to JB ?) which was why they needed restraining I assume, but was this a true statement ?

My line of thought is this ... did JB make the offer to witnesses to explore the use of the one-way wheel as long as they didn't over speed it as he did for the bi-directional wheels ?

Did JB have the wheel already tied down (in private) b4 exhibiting it & then he released it for demonstartion purposes, or did he allow others to stop the wheel & restart it again as in the bi-directional tests ?

If it was always out of balance then the one-way wheels would not need a slight push to start as did the bi-directional wheels of later periods, therefore perhaps JB had already "primed" them in private for demonstartion i.e. the wheel is stationary, he moves it by hand cocking it past a trigger point which then needs restraining as it is now out of balance. He releases it when in public so giving away very little about the mechanism & supporting the assumption/statement that the one-way wheels were always out of balance ?

Fletcher

[Stewart]

Hi Fletcher

That is a really good, infact crucial, question and I think it has been asked on this board before. I can't remember if there is a definate answer though. I have been assuming, perhaps wrongly, that the wheel will self start from any position after it has been stopped. I'm hoping this is the case as I've been dismissing certain ideas if there is no way they could make the wheel self start in this way. If the wheel did self start without any priming, then I think it makes finding the solution much more of a challenge! I'm hoping John will know the definate answer to this question as I think it is fundamental to figuring out how the wheel worked.

All the best
Stewart

[ovyyus]

Hi Fletcher,

Bessler's first two wheels could only rotate in one direction and required restraint when not in use.

The first wheel at Gera was reportedly controlled by turning a bolt at the axle (I assume some sort of friction brake) and that Bessler would allow his friends to screw the bolt in and out as desired in order to control the speed and/or stop this 6.5 foot diameter wheel.

Bessler's second wheel (Draschwitz) was reported as being restrained by a cord attached to the rim and that once the cord was released the 9.3 foot diameter wheel would immediately rotate with great force and noise.

Accounts indicate that these two wheels would immediately begin to self-rotate once their restraint was released - without any push start. I am of the opinion that there was no 'pre-cocked' position set by Bessler, in order to achieve self starting - it appears he allowed examiners to stop and start the wheels as they desired.

Both of Bessler's uni-directional wheels apparently exhibited a constant, uniform, overbalancing force. The overbalancing forced was maintained evan at rest and at very low RPM.

Interestingly, I would further suggest that these wheels could maintain an overbalancing force even while being forced to rotate in reverse direction.

[John Collins]

I agree completely with Ovyus, the one-way wheels were always out of balance. The two-way wheels would necessarily require a push to start them if, as I maintain, they had duplicate, but mirror images of the internal mechanisms inside them. Each mechanism tried to turn the wheel in the direction it naturally wished to go, but was held back by its opposing mechanism. This would lead to a balanced position.

A gentle push must therefore have overcome the natural balance between the two mechanisms and given an initial advantage to one of them. Once rotation was initiated, the mechanism which caused a weight to fall in its favoured direction overcame the resistance coming from the one being forced to turn the wrong way. This action resulted in a wheel which could only turn at half the speed of the one-way wheels.

I duplicated this sequence of events by making a model of a Savonius wind mill firstly with one rotor on a vertical axle and then two opposing rotors fixed to each other on one axle. With one rotor it turned at a particular speed, and started spontaneously. With two on one axle, the double rotor needed a push to start it, after which it accelerated to full speed and it could only manage half the speed of thr single rotor. Try it for your self.

Again as Ovvyus says even wheels being forced to run backwards exhibited a restraining force.

John Collins

[grim]

Hi John

A while back I asked you (old board) about the info that was sidebarred here as "New Text Translation", and you gave a couple of different versions of the same paper as examples. Were his description in those translations applying to the bi-directional wheel, and if so, to that wheel version only?

Also, for the sake of clarity, which woodcut(s) on this and other sites depict the one-way wheel?

Thanks much

grim

[John Collins]

Hi Grim,

That's a difficult one to answer precisely. The text in question accompanied the proposed sale of the Kassel wheel - a two directional wheel - but reading between the lines I think that JB was referring to the concept behind all of them, both uni and bi-directional. I say this because there is no way of identifying which one he refers to by reading either piece of text.

I think that all the woodcuts depict two-way wheels. This is because the first publication "gruendlicher bericht" came out in 1715 and in the title is the word Merseberg and we know that the Merseberg wheel was the first two-way wheel.

John Collins

[MrTim]

Interestingly, I would further suggest that these wheels could maintain an overbalancing force even while being forced to rotate in reverse direction.

Again as Ovvyus says even wheels being forced to run backwards exhibited a restraining force.

Okay, now that's really interesting information......