Zeroing in on Bessler's wheel

[Sam Peppiatt]

Can't sleep, Hi leafy! Fletcher, it just dawned on me, this wheel is never OOB!! I know there are some small changes but, normal if you were to shift 7 pounds 2 inches on a wheel it would be horribly OOB!! That I think, is the most amazing thing about it. Do you see what I mean? The weights shift all around but, the wheel is stays balanced, (or very nearly so)---------------------------Sam

[Leafy]

ETA : All bodies in the sim have Elasticity Factor set to 0.5 (range 0.0 to 1.0 (energy lossless bounce back)) - all bodies have static friction and dynamic (rolling) friction set to 0.3 (range 0.0 (no friction) to 1.0)

Can someone explain to me why we set .5 and .3 instead of .0000001 and .000000000000001?

[Leafy]

Can't sleep, Hi leafy! Fletcher, it just dawned on me, this wheel is never OOB!! I know there are some small changes but, normal if you were to shift 7 pounds 2 inches on a wheel it would be horribly OOB!! That I think, is the most amazing thing about it---------------Sam

Sam, the bigger the better.lol

If you try to extract energy from a falling feather, you may never get any. Lol

[Leafy]

I wonder…

What if Waltz has a working sim
What if Fletcher has a working sim
What if Sam machine is running

Nah lol

[johannesbender]

ETA : All bodies in the sim have Elasticity Factor set to 0.5 (range 0.0 to 1.0 (energy lossless bounce back)) - all bodies have static friction and dynamic (rolling) friction set to 0.3 (range 0.0 (no friction) to 1.0)

Can someone explain to me why we set .5 and .3 instead of .0000001 and .000000000000001?

Because in the real world they matter , for example rolling friction ,are different depending on the materials in contact and lubrication , for example here are some coefficients of rolling friction .
It would not be a simulation if values were unrealistic , unless it is the aim to simulate unrealistic results .

[Leafy]

ETA : All bodies in the sim have Elasticity Factor set to 0.5 (range 0.0 to 1.0 (energy lossless bounce back)) - all bodies have static friction and dynamic (rolling) friction set to 0.3 (range 0.0 (no friction) to 1.0)

Can someone explain to me why we set .5 and .3 instead of .0000001 and .000000000000001?

Because in the real world they matter , for example rolling friction ,are different depending on the materials in contact and lubrication , for example here are some coefficients of rolling friction .
It would not be a simulation if values were unrealistic , unless it is the aim to simulate unrealistic results .

So if we reduced losses and the sim run, it’s not good?

[johannesbender]

Well i wont say its not good , but the question becomes how would you remove or reduce those loses in the real world in a practical manner.

[Leafy]

I think that would be a question of engineering.

I used to operate a turbine generator that weights tons. Yet we wait forever for it to stop because the bearing is lubricate with oil and it’s in a vacuum.

Super conductivity is out there.

Make the machine bigger.

The point is we maybe knowledgeable on PM concepts, we’re no where near the professionals in the field of making it efficient.

[Sam Peppiatt]

To @, My feeling is, that solving how Bessler's wheel worked, has very little, if any thing, to do with friction------------------------Sam

[WaltzCee]

I wonder…

What if Waltz has a working sim
. .. .. .

Nah lol

I've made a few sim, nothing left of them but the experience.
one self started and in no time at all spun up to more than 9.2 million rpm.

you ask, I'll say.
I've learned a lot by mostly sim-ing, some from building.

[Leafy]

I’ll take your word for it. Really thought we cracked it. Time to wake up, or go back to dreaming lol

[Fletcher]

To @, My feeling is, that solving how Bessler's wheel worked, has very little, if any thing, to do with friction------------------------Sam

Right Sam .. the first sim I made of your tri-roller I zeroed out the static and dynamic (rolling) frictions to give it the best chance of long running (the perfect situation - I didn't post that one up). Frictions are a physical drag on a mechanical system, where energy is dissipated into the 'nothingness' by sound, molecular deformation (elasticity), and some heat etc. The two types we deal with are the usual parts contact frictions and air drag. If we get a sim that looks like it can pass first muster then I usually add a quick and dirty load in the form of mild air drag to simulate real-world events and Loads while not doing any lifting etc.

Anyhoo .. the point is that any mechanical Work (e.g. water screw) done by a runner is a Load, and Load also includes all frictions. B's. wheels were runners and able to cope with doing Work which included the frictional energy losses.

Therefore other than minimising frictions as good practice for better efficiency they were not a "Show Stopper" of B's. wheels. There was a superior motive force turning his wheels well able to cope with a few frictions. As you said, "very little, if anything to do with friction".

[Sam Peppiatt]

I agree Fletcher. Friction is the least of our worries. We have to find some thing a lot bigger-----------------Sam

[Fletcher]

Can't sleep, Hi leafy! Fletcher, it just dawned on me, this wheel is never OOB!! I know there are some small changes but, normal if you were to shift 7 pounds 2 inches on a wheel it would be horribly OOB!! That I think, is the most amazing thing about it. Do you see what I mean? The weights shift all around but, the wheel is stays balanced, (or very nearly so)---------------------------Sam

If there is no physical unbalance Sam (re conservative OOB wheel) then there is no torque because the system COM is directly below the axle. It needs to be one side or the other to create torque. All OOB wheels do that but they have areas of positive (forward) torque and equal negative (backward) torque.

What is required to convert an ordinary conservative OOB wheel into a runner is more positive torque than negative torque.

Wagner described B's. motive force as a superior force (as apparently said by B.) - torque comes from weight-force, while unbalance means from any unequal forces but not confined only to weight-force. IOW's there was an undefined superior force and that's the only concrete thing we know about it.

** And all evidence says that strictly gravity-only weight shifting wheels are conservative with no enduring superior force causing the self-moving motive force and ability at the same time to cope with Work and Loads as B's. runners did.

[Sam Peppiatt]

No No Fletcher!
That's the beauty of it!1 It's always balance! Don't you see? It doesn't have to be OOB!!! To have torque. Always being in balanced, as the weights shift, is a good thing. I don't mean to say if I'm right but, now all the weights / rollers have to do is, drive a balanced wheel! Which shouldn't take very much. The falling of the rollers generate the torque.
It's a totally different concept. Please ask me more questions-------------------Sam