BW in no gravity

[Tim Cochran]

Hi everybody,
It's been a while so I'm not caught up on all the discussions. For two reasons, I wanted to contribute to the idea of no gravity. First, I always thought it wasn't really necessary in its natural form. Specifically you could just have a big spinning room with all your bessler wheels inside contributing to keeping it going. Of course it would actually gain torque with higher RPMs. Anyone got a working wheel I could borrow to test this out?

Secondly, another thought experiment I remember was having a single pendulum continue to revolve in an environment where gravity was always decreasing. Although this would work, the work output would also be diminishing toward zero as well. However, this concept seems to be more relevant right now as a working gravity wheel design may use apparent weight variations to produce rotation.

I'd like to share the design I'm working on now and hopefully get some critical feedback. It has six arms with a pair of rigid pendulums on each. One is near the hub and one is near the rim. I'll get a crude drawing posted to show the specific angles and gear ratios of everything.

So far it seems like all my internal torques are balancing out and I still have a constant 3.6% more weight on the one side of the wheel. Usually, anytime I get extra weight, I also get counter-torque. Maybe my process is wrong.

[Tim Cochran]

This has lever pairs geared together on each arm. outer weight is drawn as round and inner as square. they are same weight and lever length. they only change in gear ratio as shown in the drawing. connections aren't shown and timing mechanisms aren't shown. Parts can overlap.

I'll walk through. (Observations relative to each arm, not an outside observer.) -- Levers are fixed to the arm from 1 o'clock to 11 o'clock.
-- Then from 11 down to 7 o'clock outer lever rotates CW 180 degrees while inner lever rotates clockwise 120 degrees.
-- Then from 7 to 5 o'clock they are fixed again.
-- Finally from 5 to 1 o'clock the outer lever rotates clockwise 180 degrees while the inner rotates 240 degrees clockwise to complete the cycle.

notes: outer levers are at 90 degrees or parallel to arms in picture. inner levers are shown as 60 degrees or parallel to arms. when wheel is rotated 30 degrees, the numbers are all still biased toward more C.O.M. to the left of the hub.

[WaltzCee]

I'd like to share the design I'm working on now and hopefully get some critical feedback.

This is what I think

• The wheels rotation causes varying torques of the arms
  *The sum of those torque cause
  *an imbalance which causes
  *a miracle to happen? which causes
  *the wheels rotation which
  *cause varying torque of the arms which. . . .

Can an effect be greater than its cause? I think no.

[Tim Cochran]

Hey WaltzCee,

My thought process is this:
There are two categories of torque for this application:

1. torque generated by levers based on their own frames of reference. (for example: the wheel is fixed and the levers which are supposed to be free to move are only geared to each other.)
2. torque generated by the total center of mass in respect to the wheel axis.

Most importantly, those two types of torque need to be independent and one or both need to be non zero in only one direction for a continual imbalance.

I started this design with one objective to be that the levers can essentially be geared together to maintain their desired positions. So all the torques generated by the levers = 0. This means they don't need any torque from the wheel. even though they would eventually be geared to the wheel for timing, they would not directly require torque from the wheel to get to the position they are in.

I hope to get some peer review about how I measured all my internal torques.

Is it true that if 1) all the moveable levers' torques balance out without the aid of 2) any overbalance from the wheel's COM then it has potential to function?

[Tim Cochran]

YAY! I found the error in my torque calculations. I have to rerun the numbers.

[Tim Cochran]

Well, another dud. I ran all the numbers the right way and the internal negative torque from levers equalled the positive COM torque.

Lessons learned, at least.

[Tarsier79]

It is always both disappointing, but also rewarding to find your own mistakes. Good work.

[WaltzCee]

I hope to get some peer review about how I measured all my
internal torques.

I like to let wm2d to put a pencil to things. Some times one has a model that would work,
but it's the wrong color. You can change that. Or a part is 2 angstroms too far to the left.
You can move it. Or it's too small. You can make it bigger than the visible universe!

There is nothing you can't SIM. If the earth's gravity is too weak, you can simulate the
sun's!! Holy cow!!!

Did some work on a prime mover yesterday, and it was near perfect. Unfortunately it was
the wrong color. Opened up Appearance menu and it crashed. Save often with this flakey
piece of geek-ware. Other than that you can measure all the way down to fractional knat
butts.

c.w. & c.c.w. rotations of a tweaked prime mover.





ETA
Totally mechanical.

[WaltzCee]

I just ran the SIM at 1 degree a second. The sys Com looked about how it would if some
one measured a bunch of static torques and positions.

I believe if the pattern holds up at higher velocities, there's a good chance the design has
promise. The pics I posted were 25 degrees a second.

It's a SIM of back to back parametric Oscar Later's. Gravity is pumping them. I couldn't
wait for the flux-capacitators so I went old school.

[Fletcher]

Is there a gradual or fast acceleration over time ?

Just askin :)

[WaltzCee]

There are 3 bursts of power. Since I posted I've put 2 of one design and one of another,
total of 3 mechanisms/movements. I could make a graph.

I've been thru most of the ideas I've had. I wasn't impressed with any of them. This is the
essence of the 9.2 m rpm wheel. The question is can I engineer a connection between the
power and the bistable multi-vibrator.

That drives the electrons of LSAM to jump energy levels. At least that's the theory.
I've given up on hydrogen. This is carbon and I think I need a molecule.