Gravity wheels with a fundamental difference

[agor95]

Hi RH46

We are walking around a minefield. We know were some of them are.
Like doing work costs, delay to inertia and springs.

Then there is the act of communicating. Also the medium we use can blow up and error.

How what fun.

All the Best

[Robinhood46]

I'm having difficulty achieving what i want, as usual the programme starts playing up.
The Rs interacting in the manner they do, in my last video, creates the same effect as with the crossbar being slightly curved (or broken), with the advantage of the switching of the offset. The toy page hammer men, being applied differently, could give the mechanism needed, to either synchronise the rotation of the crossbar, with it's pair of Rs, and the wheel frame, or lift weights vertically around 6 and 12, Or maybe both, with the swivel points not being the heavy weights, just swivel points.
To visualise the mechanism, you need to rotate the toy page 90° clockwise, and then rotate the left hand set (the ones with the twisted body) 180°. The hammer men will then be actuating a central rod, which is created by connecting both sets of hammer men to the same rod. Both sets of hammer men are down, with the central rod raised, and once the whole thing rotates the falling of the light weight on the down side of the wheel would switch the offset of the arms and raise the central rod, with the heavy weights.
I have already tried something very similar, without any success, but the swivelling wasn't going on as it would with the interconnected Rs.

[agor95]

Hi RH46

Getting a simulation to act properly is a fight in itself.

A notion that came to me related to your endeavors.

When B. stated the crossbar barely went round.

That may have been an instruction and not an observation.

So as the top pendulum overtops the final angle between the two is just off 180 degrees.

This echos the 'too greedy' comment.

All the Best

[Robinhood46]

When Bessler spoke about only having 1 crossbar, it was the wheel that was barely going round, if I'm not mistaken. I cant see any indication from the translation that the crossbar itself was barely going round. If he was speaking about the crossbar barely going round, it could mean it was barely moving in relation to the wheel. Maybe a translation could imply he was instructing (as you say) that the crossbar barely moves in relation to the wheel.
I have frequently shared my thoughts that when Bessler spoke of greed, when discussing greed which didn't have anything to do with the mechanism, he was keeping his thoughts to himself 'you are so damned greedy trying to create a force, you will create nothing'. I think it is as though we can't create a force, we can only enhance movement. Enhanced movement will give us a force.
I'll have a go building the R's in real life, it shouldn't be too difficult. A couple of plywood versions of JC's YIn and Yang with a stick screwed to them for the extended weight and some bolts and bearings for the interconnection. I'll play around with the simulation to find the best shape to create a reasonable peacocks feathers opening one side and closing the other, effect first.

[Robinhood46]

Getting a simulation to act properly is a fight in itself.

It most certainly is.

I have managed to get this one to act properly, now that i have the ability to simulate a third dimensional move.
Every time a collision layer changes (which simulates a movement in the third dimension), the colour changes so as to show when it happens.
I think many aspects can be modified in a favourable manor. The size of the movable pegs, the things that change colour and cause the accentuation of the natural swinging, could be considerably smaller in the real world. This would be better than the huge great bulky things needed in the magic world of Algodoo. In the sim they are 6cm in diameter and 6 mm would probably be enough to resist the weighted arm swinging in the real world.
In the top right quadrant, when the weights swing over, they swing out and then come back in during the descent. This needs to be accentuated by correctly timing the interaction between the swinging arm and the movable peg. The arm needs to be held at the perimeter of the wheel, or as near as the swinging can get it. The holding out of the weights should be relatively simple and have little cost energetically. There is also the possibility of the weights not swinging over to the right at the top under their pivot, but letting them rest against the central hub and then swinging them over above their pivot.
The red and blue lines are just references so as to show the "about" 8 knocks per revolution.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MArHaazzyUs

[thx4]

Very nice idea, that said a bit confusing, I have trouble seeing the details the module and a bit loaded!
I see a MT 22 ++, with a surprising weight movement around 18/19h...
To be continued.

A++

[preoccupied]

I think it's funny how the mechanism in the simulation explodes in algoodo that happened to me a lot I can't even use the software I got so frustrated.

This is a good thread and I think you guys are very creative. I am focusing on concepts and trying to fit the mechanics into the concepts. If you cause something to produce a lot of friction sometimes it no longer becomes a load on the wheel. So in a zero friction environment using friction would cause an unbalanced wheel to be possible. Like if you set a weight on a ramp or push it against a ramp the weight no longer becomes a load on the wheel, instead it's a load on the ramp, right? Which resists the wheel turning but technically the weight itself is not part of the load on the wheel anymore. If you can find a scenario where mechanically you have a runner but it produces extra friction if you could somehow create a lesser friction environment then the wheel would run unbalanced. If you think that my design in my thread about grease could somehow be done by algoodo i will give algoodo another chance but I am super bad at that software. I don't know what's wrong with me with that.

[Robinhood46]

Algodoo is a pain in the butt, when it starts playing up. I too get very frustrated, sometimes i need to record a video many times before i actually get one that doesn't explode after a couple of turns.
The most annoying is when i just can't get it to do something that it should do, but it just doesn't want to, a mechanism will work fine for two or three times and then for some reason, unknown to man, decides it wants to behave in a different manner and the components no longer interact as they have been designed to. All of those attempts you don't get to see, because making a video to show them is impossible.
I'm no too sure what you mean by your idea being done by Algodoo. If you want to simulate grease you can turn friction down to zero, that simulates top quality grease.
Good luck.

[preoccupied]

I meant that the main component to simulate is a wheel rolling along a horizontal ramp. I don't know if algodoo has that utility. Can algodoo create ramps that part of the mechanism can interact with while letting other parts like the lever in my design pass over it? Well I feel like sharing a picture of my design you know what I'm referring to. Maybe you can help me understand what algodoo is capable of.

The wheel positions at the bottom need to roll along the ramp like a bicycle wheel with just high enough of a ramp to support the weight off of the wheel. It only needs to support the weight any amount to take the weight off of the wheel. FEEL FREE to adopt my design features into yours as you wish. There is possibly a variation of what I am doing that might work. Although I think that i worked out a very efficient version of what this is. By being on a horizontal ramp the weight no longer is a load on the wheel so the top weight is able to freely drive the wheel.

[agor95]

Algodoo is a pain in the butt, ...

I understand your pain only to well.

When a software product becomes painful. That indicates it has reached it's design limit.

I have seen people fill spreadsheets with transaction history until it freezes were a database should be used.

All the Best

[Robinhood46]

A slight modification to a previous attempt and things are looking promising.
About 10 months ago i posted a video with this type of swinging mechanism. The difference being that then i tried to get the lighter weight to swing in "x" and then raise up "x", which failed miserably just like my other attempts. The distance the weight swings in determines the loss on that side of the axle, and therefore the force with which the arm will raise, but it also determines how much force is then needed to raise the weight, for the resetting.
This method appears to be far more promising, even though i can't get the thing to actually function correctly, because Algodoo is in a bad mood today for some reason.
I didn't show the weight of the weights in the video but the light weight is 0.25 kg and the heavy weight 1.0 kg, for a wheel of 2.76 meters Diameter.
My thinking is that the force needed to move the light weight laterally somewhere on the descending side, (probably around the 2 o'clock region) shouldn't make it an insurmountable task.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v885GlX9c8Y

[Robinhood46]

I hope this image is going to be visible.
THX4 posted a link to a video of mine in another thread, from many months ago, which got me thinking. The video is the one of my suggestion of Jon Sutton's work (which he still hasn't shown us), where i thought he was gaining momentum at the cost of losing height.
Fairly early in this thread, when i was trying to get my thoughts out there, i spoke about the weights needing to go somewhere and then to go somewhere and then to go somewhere, etc, etc, and never to do any coming back. This is the heart of the difference that i think fundamental.
The image below (hopefully), doesn't show very well what i am trying to do, and it may not make a lot of sense even with the explanation, other than for THX, because of our frequent telephone conversations.
The first 7 images, show the position of the crossbar, with the two heavy weights, one each end.
If we say that the wheel starts at image 1, then image 2, and each subsequent image up to 7, show the movement of the crossbar in relation to the wheel, at every rotation. Image 8, 9 and 10 show that the wheel is simply rotating to re initialise the set up.
I am trying to simulate this, with MT24 style arms lifting the weighted arm each increment, with little success. I have abandoned trying to do it with a "crémaillère" (rack in English) and am hoping to be more successful with stepped supports, which could be interpreted as " broken columns".
So we will have the small children, the eight lightweight MT24 arms, swinging the heavy clubs over the columns, and when one end of the club reaches the base of the column, the other end will swing over to the newt column. This can be seen between images 9 and 10, image 9 has the weight near the centre to the left and image 10, to the right.
Image 11 would be identical to image 2, but one can see from the images that the position of the wheel is 120° out.
Anyone who has been following will see that i have already tried this, the only novelty is the addition of increments.

[SHADOW]

Bonjour Robin Wood,
Comment avez vous déterminé la trajectoire du bâton, est-ce un souhait fonctionnel?

Hi Robin Wood,
How did you determine the trajectory of the stick, is it a functional wish?

[Robinhood46]

It's not Robin wood, it's Robin woodn't.
I was hoping to have a simulation to show that it was a bit more than a functional wish, but it appears you were correct, it is just a functional wish.
Maybe I'll have something to show tomorrow.
Bonne soirée.

[Tarsier79]

Hi RH.

I think you mean Jon Hutton.

where i thought he was gaining momentum at the cost of losing height.

Correct, but not in a way that "gains". More so in the way a clock drops a weight to drive it. The mechanism gained height by dropping a weight down. It was not sustainable, and reset requires more than you get, as usual.