A little history I didn't know about.

[Sam Peppiatt]

Silent, @,

Maybe Bessler's brother is the missing link; to the disappearance of the later or, smaller wheel. To protect the secret as it were---------------------Sam

[Oystein]

Here (attached) is the reason I first became interested in the connection between Bessler and Fred The Great.

I am certain that Bessler wrote Rosicrucian code..

But when I also noticed that the person that even commanded to collect his secret, is today praised as a Rose Cross authority I was amazed.

Could Bessler have "donated" (by "the handshake of brothers") his secret to the Rosicrucian Brotherhood if not sold by the time of his death?

Even applying their code, if they got their hand on MT etc.

Just curious thoughts..

ØR

[silent]

I find it kind of odd that a secret society would use knowledge of a perpetual motion machine as the foundation by which their entire organization exists. I suppose if it makes people feel special and chosen so be it. That being the case, is it reasonable to conclude that right now around the world, there are people using the mechanism to generate electricity and to power workshops and keeping quiet about it since they are sworn to secrecy?

Certainly if Frederick the Great saw inside the wheel and used it for the founding of the Rose Cross soceity, then it would make sense that this is the case.

silent

[Fletcher]

...Those 15 years after Karl died would be interesting because if a working wheel was spied upon by others, why did they never do anything with it? We know steam power was favoured over the weak wheel and maybe that was just the choice of the opulent at the time...

What a very interesting thread. Some good meat on the bones and knowledgeable contributions to the developing discussion.

But I digress .. yes, apparently, burgeoning steam power was the flavour of the month and there was plenty of forests to cut down for firewood, and coal to dig up etc. No shortage of labour. When you consider the low energy density of a B. wheel (say 12 foot diameter by 1.5 feet wide) plus supports etc, putting out about 100 Watts (enough for one old style light bulb or some LED lights) verses a similar volume steam engine (stationary or self-driving), then industry would lean towards the option with more power density, and less constraints to adoption, like resources. Remembering that B's. wheel motive force was still his secret which had a not insignificant price tagged to it.

Nevertheless, if it was squirreled away, it was never commercialized and in open public view, for a reason. I like Oystein's hypothesis that perhaps B. intended that if not sold upon his death it went into the vaults of the Rosi Cross. He is making the case for the connection. Perhaps like the Vatican has a collection that remains very private, even from some of the Jesuits (anecdotally).

..................

There was a member here (Hotzenplotz) who joined in 2008, and posted up till 2019 IIRC (33 posts on checking). I include his posts from the search function as interesting background to what is being discussed in this thread, regarding letter to seize the model etc. He offers a slightly different complexion in some cases, and I find him credible, if not interesting.

search.php?keywords=&terms=all&author=H ... mit=Search

I bring to your attention this paragraph about his finding of the 1745 newspaper article on the 10 zoll diameter model driving 2 hammers etc. Which has never been independently confirmed. If Hotzplotz could find it then so can some one else I should think ?

It's relevance is not only to the back-story of B's. last wheel but to its apparent size. A 10 zoll (10 inch diameter) 'model' with 2 hammers. I put forward the thought that many would be PM wheels just wouldn't overcome friction at that small scale. Especially if relying on a very small CoG/COM displacement for overbalance for example. They would bind up not able to overcome frictional losses imo. Yet, this model may have been capable of being a runner. It wouldn't make much sense to send a model to anyone overseas only on the promise it could work if scaled up etc. That would require a lot of trust and faith in B. But perhaps it was just a static model ? Who knows ? Driving 2 hammers suggests a runner imo.

But carrying on this line of thinking, if it was a self-revolving 'runner', then the asymmetric force that allowed it to accelerate and reach and maintain rpm must be quite profound. More so than one relying on large dimensions and Cf's for example, imo. IOW's at that scale it would have to turn at incredible rpms if Cf based.

Here's what Hotzenplotz said ..

By the way I discovered some announcements in a 1745 newspaper, afaik not known till now. In february we are told, Bessler is now in Fürstenberg and is going to build a PM there, if his weakness ist not going to prevent this. He also announced to build some "Feuer-Spritzen" of a very special kind, so it is not a usual device we were talking about above. He also is looking for a publisher to publish pictures of his machines, drawn in copper (!) by his own hand.
In may the PM is ready, and although it's just a model, driving two hammers, with a diameter of 10 Zoll, he is willing to sell it for a good price. This public offer was published one month after the "last letter" was written.

viewtopic.php?f=1&t=8220&p=169898&hilit=zoll#p169898

Lastly today I include a picture published in 1751 in a gentleman's magazine, titled A Self-Moving Wheel (written in English). It has appeared on the discussion board from time to time. The first pic is as it first appeared, the second where I have coloured in some rope connections etc, as I thought they went (I think I didn't get it right). This appeared just after the period we are discussing, it's origins unknown to me. Tho it has many elements that might fit B's. 'clues' at first glance. Perhaps it was designed from some parts and information that made their way into the sunlight at that time ? (pure speculatory comment) Apparently the designers thought it could work, and published it, for some reason known only to them !

[Tarsier79]

From WIKI

The Rosicrucian manifestos heralded a "universal reformation of mankind", through a science allegedly kept secret for decades until the intellectual climate might receive it. Controversies arose on whether they were a hoax, whether the "Order of the Rosy Cross" existed as described in the manifestos, and whether the whole thing was a metaphor disguising a movement that really existed, but in a different form. In 1616, Johann Valentin Andreae famously designated it as a "ludibrium". Some scholars of esotericism suggest that this statement was later made by Andreae in order to shield himself from the wrath of the religious and political institutions of the day, which were intolerant of free speech and the idea of a "universal reformation", which the manifestos called for.

The dates don't quite match, but other points seem valid. I doubt if a whole order would base itself on a single perpetual motion machine, even though they are heavily involved in science.

Fletcher, thanks for the reminder of this image. I didn't realise it was from the correct period. It looks like something out of MT. I could imagine the comment...."I won't say more about the interconnection of storks bills at this time."

[agor95]

Well I think we need to pack J.C. off to 'Oak Island' for the purpose of linking this 10 inch model to being part of the 'Oak Island' treasure.

It appears all the missing treasures end up buried there at some time or other.

Great to put forward a compelling link to the Rosicrucian so with Oystein being part of the team. I think that will build up more interest.

All the Best

[Fletcher]

Yeah .. it does look right at home from MT.

I pulled that pic from my files. The doctored one above was an attempt by me to begin mapping the ropes etc, many years ago. Then got distracted.

So I took a closer look this evening. Below is how I think it was connected up. Red section of rope runs around the inner radius pivots/pulleys and out to connect to the pulley wheel in the slide groove/slot.

The yellow section (part of the red section) connects directly to the green sling portion of rope attached to the SB ends.

The SB's have a fixed pivot point at the top of the slot.

The red and yellow rope ends have different attachment points so that as the SB expands or contracts there is some give in the system for the parts moving closer or further apart depending on where in the wheel it is at the time. Tension is created.

It is still a gravity activated system as far as I can tell. Whether the ropes would change or modify the behaviour by much is anybody's guess. I don't believe it could be a runner.

ETA : it supposedly turns CW, from overbalance - weights deploying outwards (losing GPE) after 3 o'cl - the ropes apply tension forces which supposedly starts the lifting of the weights back towards the rim (gaining GPE) around 6 o'cl, IINM.

[Sam Peppiatt]

Fletcher,
FWEIW, W.J.G. Ord-Hume shows a picture of this wheel in his book, "Perpetual Motion". The date is September 1749. It's different in that it has three stages of tapered storks Bills for each weight and turns CCW------------------------------Sam

[WaltzCee]

I don't believe it could be a runner.

WISMB.

1 meter dia.

[Fletcher]

Fletcher,
FWEIW, W.J.G. Ord-Hume shows a picture of this wheel in his book, "Perpetual Motion". The date is September 1749. It's different in that it has three stages of tapered storks Bills for each weight and turns CCW------------------------------Sam

Thanks Sam .. do you have a link or picture so that we can see it too ?

I tried to find it on google but couldn't find a free copy of Ord-Hume's book to search. I found a partial snippet which said Fig. 30 on page 74 in the gazzette (as much as I was allowed to read) - a further hunt in google images showed the wheel I showed as 1751 from the Gentleman's Magazine of London, and an engraving picture.

So the one you are talking about ( CCW ) with more SB sections than the 2 shown in this wheel presumably must be based on the same principle. Probably an earlier iteration which was later simplified and had the direction changed to CW rotation.

As we all mostly know the number of SB sections is irrelevant. Unless saving space is a consideration. And you can see this in the pic I posted, where there are 2 sections that taper. Whether 2 or 3 sections it is the distance moved (at the same starting angle) that is important. Probably the same for both pics but hard to confirm without the other picture to look at.

[silent]

One thing that I've noticed about the storks bills, is that people trying to design the wheel seem to focus in on them as if they are some kind of a magic panacea to moving weights. Because they are depicted in several MTs, people go gaga over trying to use them. You don't see people using sledge hammers and drummer toys in their builds. Why? Is it because Bessler didn't actually illustrate them in any of his MTs? One must conclude that since there are no drummer toys featured in any of the MTs, nor jacob's ladders, and no spinning tops that we must first take Bessler at his word about the correct application is not shown and 2nd that it's the principle behind them (as well as the other toys depicted) although I personally believe it's quite a stretch. In fact, it might even be a red herring of sorts as far as the actual mechanism involved. I haven't yet decided if the mechanism involved in moving the weights is what he intended to depict or if he used the storks bills as the timing mechanism.

silent

[Fletcher]

I don't believe it could be a runner.

WISMB.

1 meter dia.

WISMB is a little too cryptic for me Walt :7) What you trying to say ?

I presume that you somehow made a simulation of this wheel (as per your pic). Neat trick to get the program to show you where the system COM/COG is located as coordinates, in a table format as well as the visual icon. I don't know how to do that so please humour me and explain - cheers. I'd like to be able to do that !

If your sim is correct, and the Sys COM co-ords then the System COM icon is about 50 degrees to the right and down of the Center of Rotation (COR - axle). At approx 1.35 mm to the right and 1.23 mm down. Theoretically this should rotate the whole wheel approx 50 degrees CW to let the COM hang vertical below the COR (if it could overcome the frictions). Since the wheel has 12 sectors at 30 degrees between this should be ample to complete a reset.

For those following along the circular weights position is what matters here (assuming negligible mass of other parts). The picture shows that all the top half weights are approx equal radius from the COR, therefore their torques cancel for the purposes of this exercise.

The more interesting portion is below the axle. They weights move outwards at 3 o'cl to a greater radius (with more torque). Most importantly they are drawn as closing up radius again (complete reset) by or just after 6 o'cl. IF it were possible to achieve this with this mechanics then it would definitely be permanent overbalance, and self-moving. Just as the System COM table (approx 50 degs) and icon shows.

As said above I have my doubts that this is actually achievable, with these mechanics. More a wish it were so imo ;7)

Happy to be proved wrong or listen to some other analysis of what we think is happening or is supposed to happen !

[Sam Peppiatt]

Fletcher,
Yes, the picture is on page 74, fig. 30. Unfortunately I don't know how to send it. It was described in the "Gassetteer" June 25th, 1749. More sections of the SBs will give more radial displacement, of the weights. They suggest using six for more power. And get this, they are called Chequers, not stork bills.

Walt is right; there would be an awful lot of friction in all of those ropes and pulleys, plus 7 weights down and six up means it would be bottom heavy--------------------------------------Sam

[Fletcher]

Fletcher,
Yes, the picture is on page 74, fig. 30. Unfortunately I don't know how to send it. It was described in the "Gassetteer" June 25th, 1749. More sections of the SBs will give more radial displacement, of the weights. They suggest using six for more power. And get this, they are called Chequers, not stork bills.

Walt is right; there would be an awful lot of friction in all of those ropes and pulleys, plus 7 weights down and six up means it would be bottom heavy--------------------------------------Sam

If you have right clicked the pic and saved it to your pictures file you can add it as an attachment on a post here. Just click attachments bottom left below the text box, and open, before you submit.

Six sections will increase the radial displacement for the same starting angle, say compared to 2 or 3 of similar size. Or you can replace 5 of the 6 with just one large one and do the same job.

And yes, there would be a lot of frictions unless the pulley pivots were very good. Also the tension in the ropes would tend to stretch them and you'd need some tension adjustment idlers or something. The whole thing theoretically works by redirecting the tension forces as far as I can tell.

Personally I don't think a COG below the axle (bottom heavy) has to be a show-stopper for a wheel. Providing that the System COM/COG can move downwards more degrees than the sector degrees covered e.g 50 vs 30 degs as per Walt's picture.

Whether that can actually be achieved with this design is the question in my mind.

Someone must have worked out the geometry of this design and the range of movements possible for that geometry constraints etc. I wonder if there was a little enthusiastic fudging going on (in rope lengths for example) ?

[Sam Peppiatt]

Hi Fletcher,

Perhaps I should have said, I think Walt is right, and my concern is that it could be bottom heavy. I'm sorry about the picture, I don't have a clue as to how to get it from the book to the computer, -----------------------------------Sam