AP Wheel within Wheel

[agor95]

In Libre it's calc. I think Windows is Excel.

There is no need to work as fast as you can. Best to take time and learn well.

I have access to both Linux & Windows operating systems and these two spreadsheets.

However I have moved on to other products that assist me in 3 dimensional modeling.

It appears 2 dimensional concepts have been well worked over and unsuccessful.

As this is my thread I will show my working in my own time and no others.

Regards

[Soon]

This is an idea that I started on in the late 90's. It uses 3 arms. They advance and retard their motion at an angle.
The plate they are on has its center elevated by a pin. There's a lot of trig in this. When the disc tilts it becomes
three dimensional. And then the arms rotate around an axis that is different than the axis that the disc rotates
around.
As for design drawings, I have used both CATIA and SketchUp. The design I am showing uses gravity to rotate a disc
essentially 90º to the directional flow of gravity. Basically the pin the disc rotates on and the arm on the same surface
creates a tangent used to calculate leverage. And then when the disc is leveraged it will rotate as well so it will be
moving 3 dimensionally in space. Anymore, I prefer simpler until I am healthy and have a shop.
The thread; https://besslerwheel.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=1&t=2180
This is basically what helped me to consider a 2 axis system of rotation for an upright wheel and then understood the grindstone
and drum that Bessler described.

And on an interesting note I was banned when I got cancer. I wasn't allowed to use that as an excuse not to do what I'm told.
When AB Hammer started a thread calling me the world's ultimate fraud, he even mentions that I used cancer as an excuse
not to do what I'm told.

[agor95]

There's a lot of trig in this.

The pain of our lives. Calculating the equations of motion. Circular functions and partial differential terms.

The gut feeling is area to study is 3-axsis motion.

Just read through your recommended reading.

Two amusing highly summarized observations.

The meaning of 'least action' is a postulate. In English - we don't know why - That is the way it is.

The word 'beautiful' this is used when a. They want to side step the I don't know b. They are hiding an ugly true. That being Velocity and position use in Newtonian and Lagrangian do not exist at the same time at the quantum scale. You can have accurate velocity or position but not both.
That is why the Hamiltonian use momentum instead of velocity.

There is a Bessler echo 'Four lazy horses' to 'least action'.

Regards

[agor95]

Hi All

As you can see I now have a T-pendulum and the guide W. Wheel is a ghost of it's forma self.

The manual measurements are taken at 10 degrees of the main wheel's rotation.
The 'Within Wheel' rotation was done to minimize height.

The angle and (X,Y) mass positions are recorded.

So the static work is done.

Note.

When you go through this tedious process you can get a feeling how the T-Pendulum moves.

There is an issue with the angle from the hub to the mass. For it alters as the W. Wheel rotates.

That will need to be studied.

The W. Wheel rotation rate varies during the 360 rotation of the Main Wheel.

To gather the dynamic movement. For that a physical or a mathematical model is required.

Regards.

[Tarsier79]

This is the perfect example of using the Z axis, but it not giving us an "advantage". In truth it does give us an easier way to do it, and in this case less friction.

If you look at your weight path purely along the Z axis, you will get a shape that exists only X and Y. In this case it is a thin flat oval. If I cut out this shape in a piece of 21mm thick plastic, insert a marble and add a perspex front and back, I will get exactly the same movement (except mine will have more frictions). The effect of operation between your 3d movement and my 2d movement during wheel operation are theoretically the same.

Obviously if you do anything other than expect the weight to flop to the bottom as it will do so now, or if you choose to spin up your weight as a gyroscope or brake it suddenly, my mechanism won't be as easy to replicate these actions and that is not my argument.

[agor95]

The effect of operation between your 3d movement and my 2d movement during wheel operation are theoretically the same.

I could create a 2d path trail to illustrate.

There is a difference from this 3d path created from the static measurements and the dynamic operation.

The 2d path does not change only the rate of movement.

There are other effects created by the 3d path that are not present in the 2d projected shadow path.

Regards

[Soon]

The effect of operation between your 3d movement and my 2d movement during wheel operation are theoretically the same.

I could create a 2d path trail to illustrate.

There is a difference from this 3d path created from the static measurements and the dynamic operation.

The 2d path does not change only the rate of movement.

There are other effects created by the 3d path that are not present in the 2d projected shadow path.

Regards

With what I showed you, the wheel in a wheel could be made to have a spherical rotation. What would be an issue is timing the rotation of the sphere
to align with the wheel. Think of the Moon orbiting the Earth with the Sun as the axis of rotation for the wheel. Kind of what you're thinking, right?
The sphere's rotation would need to be timed so it is synchronized with the wheel. People might need to accept that for gravity powered machines
that it will always be about leveraging motion. The mechanics can vary just as you, Shadow and myself have shown. Still, the double oscillating
pendulum is more like the scales someone mentioned. That would show where stopping a weight and controlling its movement allows for optimum
leverage.

[agor95]

Hi All

Now that I have a rig too present changes in the angle of the main wheel.
The three angles of the within wheels are taken into account.

I will start the hard task to create the Lagrangian then the equations of motion.

The focus is to produce a practical device. So a wheel with some depth is reasonable.

Regards

[Tarsier79]

There are other effects created by the 3d path that are not present in the 2d projected shadow path.

Such as?

[agor95]

There are other effects created by the 3d path that are not present in the 2d projected shadow path.

Such as?

How ironic you are waiting for an official statement and we are waiting for an official statement.

It makes a person feel all warm and fuzzy inside. We are all in it together :)

Regards

[Tarsier79]

The funny thing is I don't really care what you perceived your Z movement gives that a 2D equivalent cannot. As far as I know, there is no theoretical "advantage" to Z movement over a 2D movement. A "normal" wheel only cares about X and Y compared to its axle.

[agor95]

The funny thing is I don't really care what you perceived your Z movement gives that a 2D equivalent cannot. As far as I know, there is no theoretical "advantage" to Z movement over a 2D movement. A "normal" wheel only cares about X and Y compared to its axle.

Well that makes it clear, you can go back to 2d plainer study. I will continue investigating 3d volume systems.

I expect not to see a post from you here for your post can only be that of a troll.

P.S. 300 years of investigating 2d plainer. That tell us something.

[agor95]

Hi All

Below is the rig with three within wheels (T-bar Pendulums).

I did a rough Center of Mass check and the static measurements put the average CoM just below and to the left.

So for a clockwise rotation it has counter torque.

Regards

[Soon]

I know a sin 90 = 2 cos 60. sine is rotated 90º from the y axis while cosine is rotated 60º
from the x axis. No torque and no rotation. This is when ab hammer decided to start stalking me.
When I move out of the US it will become known that he was encouraged and supported.
He wanted me to work for him on his "real" American terms. Nikola Tesla ended up giving his work
which is generating and rectifying the a.c. electricity to the American George Westinghouse.
And with a wheel in a wheel, the "inner" wheel would have to move the same way the Moon
does when it orbits the Earth. It would need to have its axis inline with the Earth's gravity while
it spins in the wheel 1 rotation per 1 rotation of the wheel. And then have its axis rotated 90º
so it would be 3 dimensional.
The 2 dimensional drawing I posted is a simplification of the 3 dimensional design. The math
is quite simple. πr1 - πr2 = x. Then to rotate a weight on an inner wheel is πr3.
Each number represents a different radii. Then when mass is considered in newtons then
newton meters of torque generated and consumed will be made known. Just is super easy.
πr3 would be a wheel at top center being rotated 180º while πr1 is its path to bottom center and
πr2 is its path to the top.
If that wheel also rotated 45º to gravity then it'd be 3 dimensional. I am not sure why
simple and working together is such a serious problem.

p.s., ever think about braiding lines for 2 weeks? And agor95, if I build this and patent it, it would be
my invention. And everyone would say that you posted a wheel in a wheel. And yet I was expected
to work for ab hammer at my expense. What watlcy is on about. I didn't give ab hammer an invention.
He made coffee while I learned math. And for people who prefer SAE there is torque in inch. lbs.
which I actually prefer to nm. 1 inch lb. = 0.113nm. It's that mass to distance relationship I think is
better expressed as in.lb. Basically 8 in.lb. = 1nm and I know it'd actually be 0.125nm x 8. And now we're
discussing 1/10 of 0.113nm. Saying 1 in.lb. is simpler.

[agor95]

I know a sin 90 = 2 cos 60. sine is rotated 90º from the y axis while cosine is rotated 60º
from the x axis.

That is the good thing about circular functions you can get to the same place via different rotations.

All the rest of your post is worthy of another thread of it's own.

I am starting the work to calculation the T (K.E.) and U (P.E.) of the system in my last post.

P.S. This thread is about the future not the past.