Part Three is the Charm
Moderator: scott
-
- Devotee
- Posts: 1897
- Joined: Tue Dec 01, 2015 4:12 pm
Re: Part Three is the Charm
FWEIW,
I will try to clarify something I suggested earlier. It's the 'shifting' of the weights, shifting, shifting, shifting of the weights that has to be, or occur, faster than the acceleration due to gravity. I. E., faster than what the wheel can turn. I will further stipulate, that as the weights are falling, they do indeed travel at the same speed of the wheel.
Are the weights pushing or pulling? I think I'll let you guys decide on that one---------------
Anyway, If I'm right; it means you probably can't rely on the force of gravity to shift the weights. It's simply too slow; I'm sorry to say------------------Sam
I will try to clarify something I suggested earlier. It's the 'shifting' of the weights, shifting, shifting, shifting of the weights that has to be, or occur, faster than the acceleration due to gravity. I. E., faster than what the wheel can turn. I will further stipulate, that as the weights are falling, they do indeed travel at the same speed of the wheel.
Are the weights pushing or pulling? I think I'll let you guys decide on that one---------------
Anyway, If I'm right; it means you probably can't rely on the force of gravity to shift the weights. It's simply too slow; I'm sorry to say------------------Sam
Last edited by Sam Peppiatt on Mon Feb 13, 2023 4:28 pm, edited 4 times in total.
Re: Part Three is the Charm
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/fe885/fe8850e59959ce0675a80debb9202eeda026ce1d" alt="Image"
I've made pendulums that would track that CoM, Fletcher.
The same laws that protects Mary Evans 'work' entitles any to use it for educational purposes.You might owe them some clams Walt !
I sure was educated, hope others were too.
........................¯\_(ツ)_/¯
¯\_(ツ)_/¯ the future is here ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
Advocate of God Almighty, maker of heaven and earth and redeemer of my soul.
Walter Clarkson
© 2023 Walter W. Clarkson, LLC
All rights reserved. Do not even quote me w/o my expressed written consent.
¯\_(ツ)_/¯ the future is here ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
Advocate of God Almighty, maker of heaven and earth and redeemer of my soul.
Walter Clarkson
© 2023 Walter W. Clarkson, LLC
All rights reserved. Do not even quote me w/o my expressed written consent.
Re: Part Three is the Charm
Yes .. its just a fancy pendulum too Walt - in that it loses GPE and regains it.WaltCee wrote:I've made pendulums that would track that CoM, Fletcher.
Apologies to ECC1 in particular, I will get back to you asap .. Day 3 of a severe cyclone here - big rain, major flooding, and massive winds not often experienced here in NZ. Power and internet outages etc everywhere.
Re: Part Three is the Charm
Good luck from across the ditch, Fletcher. Hope you didn't get hit too hard.
Re: Part Three is the Charm
Fletcher's special forces combat vet,
Thinking about you Fletcher.Like the eye of the storm
You remain in control
And in the middle of the war
You guard my soul
You alone are the anchor
When my sails are torn
Your love surrounds me
Like the eye of the storm
........................¯\_(ツ)_/¯
¯\_(ツ)_/¯ the future is here ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
Advocate of God Almighty, maker of heaven and earth and redeemer of my soul.
Walter Clarkson
© 2023 Walter W. Clarkson, LLC
All rights reserved. Do not even quote me w/o my expressed written consent.
¯\_(ツ)_/¯ the future is here ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
Advocate of God Almighty, maker of heaven and earth and redeemer of my soul.
Walter Clarkson
© 2023 Walter W. Clarkson, LLC
All rights reserved. Do not even quote me w/o my expressed written consent.
Re: Part Three is the Charm
Very difficult time, we are all thinking of you Fletcher!!!
A++
Not everything I present is functional, but a surprise can't be completely ruled out.Greetings.
Re: Part Three is the Charm
We are seeing the devastation of 3 days of rain and 90 Miles per hour winds.
Stay safe.
Our world appears to be Fire, Water, First Quarter year Quakes & Third Quarter year Meteor events.
Regards
[MP] Mobiles that perpetuate - external energy allowed
Re: Part Three is the Charm
Thanks fellas for the kind thoughts .. the jet engine above my house has now stopped and the roof is still on :7) - lessons learned in Fiji (keep some windows open). We got off lightly this time around straight after the tropical atmospheric river event 3 weeks ago that dropped 240 mm rain in 4 hours and super saturated the ground to full capacity causing massive slips and floods nation wide - powers on again here, count the blessings as they say.
Back to business .. will give my thoughts on what ECC1 and Sam brought up on the previous page, but I have to make a sim to show you first in relation to the context of those thoughts. ** some of the analysis I do for myself is just second nature to me and I don't bother with a sim (like for MT19/20) but in this case it may help the conversation.
Back to business .. will give my thoughts on what ECC1 and Sam brought up on the previous page, but I have to make a sim to show you first in relation to the context of those thoughts. ** some of the analysis I do for myself is just second nature to me and I don't bother with a sim (like for MT19/20) but in this case it may help the conversation.
Re: Part Three is the Charm
Regarding specifically MT's 19 and 20 .. and OOB weight shifting wheels in general ..
eccentrically1 wrote:
...Rather than the weights lead the wheel, did he mean the weights should pull the wheel instead of push it?
How would the weights lag behind the speed of the wheel?
Everything turns at the same speed inside there, which means the weights can't shift faster than what the wheel is turning. ...
Am I the only one that thinks this?
................
Nice sim, fletcher, the pantograph helps to show that flip.. As you say it reaches a force balanced position as the driver drops to an under balanced location.
But I don’t see how it addresses my question about what B meant re the horse before the cart: did he mean the weights should pull the wheel rather than push it?
Also how would it be possible for the weights to lag behind the wheels when they were turning so fast?
These were responses to Sam’s comments earlier in the thread page 40.
Simming and response in progress, taking a break ..Sam wrote:
Maybe that's what Bessler meant by;---" putting the horse in front of the cart". I.E., The horse or weight, has to lead the wheel,(cart).
IOW, the weight or weights can't lag behind the speed of the wheel. Which means the weights have to shift faster than what the wheel is turning and there for, faster than the acceleration due to gravity.
About the only other thing that could be, is centrifugal inertia forces; what say yee-------------------------Sam
...................
FWEIW, I will try to clarify something I suggested earlier. It's the 'shifting' of the weights, shifting, shifting, shifting of the weights that has to be, or occur, faster than the acceleration due to gravity. I. E., faster than what the wheel can turn. I will further stipulate, that as the weights are falling, they do indeed travel at the same speed of the wheel.
Are the weights pushing or pulling? I think I'll let you guys decide on that one ---------------
Anyway, If I'm right; it means you probably can't rely on the force of gravity to shift the weights. It's simply too slow; I'm sorry to say------------------Sam
Last edited by Fletcher on Tue Feb 14, 2023 9:44 pm, edited 2 times in total.
Re: Part Three is the Charm
John Collins MT wrote:Digital .. No. 19 This figure may be called a mere demonstration. There are nothing but levers with weights at the front ends of the levers, and if they are not very useful, they are also not harmful most of the time. A good friend, however, was violently injured by them. I cannot discuss it further. He endured more than I can mention here.
Earlier Hard Copy .. No. 19. This figure may be called a mere demonstration. It has nothing but levers with weights at the forepart, and whether or not it is of any use by itself, it usually does no harm; it did, however, severely injure a good friend whom I could not persuade otherwise, and he thought more of it than I wish to say here.
Digital ..No. 20 Here the previous levers work somewhat more peculiarly and raise up special weights and turn outward to the over balance. For this reason side A is always heavier, my friend supposed but I denied. I then reminded him to harness the horse in front.
Earlier Hard Copy .. No. 20. Here the previous levers work somewhat differently and lift special weights and turn them outwards to over (balance) so that side A is supposedly always heavier, which my friend believed but I denied. I then reminded him to put the horse before the cart.
I think I am correct in saying that B. did not build every wheel in MT .. MT's 19 and 20 seem to reflect this. They appear from the accompanying notes written by B. to have been designed and built by his "good friend". His friend thought highly of them while B. did not, and could not persuade him otherwise.
I think most of us here would instantly conclude that MT19 is unworkable, and agree it is a "mere" static demonstration - the Effort mass (horse / driver) lever-weights (lws) loses some GPE and causes a temporary torque and the wheel turns a little - then it stops when forward and backward torques are equalized, which is the wheels position of least COM GPE i.e. the COM can not physically get any lower in vertical height.
Then next in MT, B. includes his friends second wheel MT20; the one with the same Effort (driver / horse) lws which this time are connected thru a rope and differential pulley system to 'special' outward flipping lws to cause imbalance. He adds a bent-arm A and says his friend thought it would always be heavier at side A but B. denied this could be the case.
.. Most of us would agree with B's. assessment ! Adding 'special' lws et al makes absolutely no difference and the wheel still keels .. no matter where or how the drivers are located or where or how the 'special' appendage weights are located, or move, imo. The wheel will always keel using the components of MT20.
Then B. says in his comment to this MT ..
"I then reminded him to harness the horse in front .. or .. I then reminded him to put the horse before the cart."
It seems B. is giving a strong indication of a metaphorical physical process that could always make side A heavier. But is it chicken and egg or egg and chicken to stick with animal metaphors ?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Mryy has suggested that the Effort lws are the horse but need to be in the reverse direction i.e. pivoted near the axle rather than near the rim. What are advantages and disadvantages of reversing the lws direction like this ? In either case the drivers fall only a short distance - when a wheel is turning at a higher rpm this can become operationally problematic. Velocity of the wheel (and weights) at any radius is proportional to the radius they are at e.g. at 1 radius the linear velocity is 1v, at 1/4 radius they have 1/4v - it is a linear relationship between v and radius. Therefore when pivoted near the axle with the drivers near the rim the wheel perimeter will be traveling fastest and so will the Effort weights before release - thus when the driver lws are ready to 'fall' they will still fall the same relative internal distance but the wheel is moving away from it quite fast - and 'g' remains the same. When the Effort lws are pivoted neared the rim and point inwards so that the weights are nearer the axle they still fall the same relative distance but the wheel closer in is turning slower compared to the rim, and 'g' is still the same. Does this make any difference ?!
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
So when I come back let's look at a static sim of MT20 to see if it could really make side A always heavier, or was B. correct. In which case what did he mean by put the horse before the cart (in-front) ?
** To me the horse was well established in MT19 and reinforced in 20, being the Effort lws. They lose the GPE. Therefore the cart must be the 'special' lws or the Load.
So it seems to me B. is telling us to reverse the process and have the former 'cart' pull the former 'horse'. IOW's his friend had it about face .. the special weights are the horse that pulls the cart which includes the driver lws and the wheel itself, to have side A always heavier i.e. asymmetric torque / excess impetus / excess weight / preponderance continually produced to make the wheel self-moving.
Back with the sim and comments when I can .. somethings come up ..
Re: Part Three is the Charm
Here is the sim (in animation) I made today - it is a static view of the moving bits of MT20 .. I built it with very similar proportions to B's woodcut in MT.
Note that the yellow driver / horse lw (Effort) is an arbitrary 2.0 kgs, and the green flip lever / cart (Load) is only a 10th of that @ 0.2 kgs.
Everything else has negligible mass but still functions as it should. I have left out Outputs such as comparing KE gained and GPE lost because it will clutter the animation. You can follow the velocity graph to see what is happening and interpolate the energies.
To simulate the reduction pulley and rope B. drew I did not use a complicated chain mechanism because it was too many parts and that was also problematic when a reduction gearing had to take place - so I made an 'internal' gear mech instead with a short rope pull to operate. The important part is that the gear ratio is 1 : 6.5. Why ?
^^ In B's woodcut we can see that the driver loses very little height (same in sim - about 0.65 seconds) - yet the flip lw gains much more physical height. On top of that the flip lw has to travel a far greater distance to its rim stop where it gives up its KE / Momentum on contact in the same 0.65 seconds.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Bottom lining it .. The yellow driver loses GPE ... but ... the green flip weight can not gain KE above what the driver can lose at any vertical height lost by it. It is a physical constraint in mechanics and why mgh = KE (m1/2v^2) for any height loss in a 'simple machine'.
So I could play around with an even lighter flip weight and also change the gear ratio so it has a faster velocity but it would make no difference at all. [sim attached for those that want to change inputs for themselves etc]
^^ Basically the driver can only lose mgh (GPE) [i.e. and move] when the flip weight gains less KE than the driver has lost for a given height - and that is a combination of gearing for distance needed to be traveled (up and across) to its stop, and its mass.
This is the limitation to all trading width for height scenario's. The result is we have no Net Surplus of directional torque in order to be a runner. And whether we use felt, cushioning, of hard steel with high elasticity (springiness) in the contact area we can not have the flip weight arrive with more KE than the driver lost. And this means 'side A can not always be heavier / provide a preponderance' !
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/074c0/074c01ac8bc0a46c130d40ce1a2538b49df68756" alt="Image"
......................
Time to get back to the clean-up ..
......................
Note that the yellow driver / horse lw (Effort) is an arbitrary 2.0 kgs, and the green flip lever / cart (Load) is only a 10th of that @ 0.2 kgs.
Everything else has negligible mass but still functions as it should. I have left out Outputs such as comparing KE gained and GPE lost because it will clutter the animation. You can follow the velocity graph to see what is happening and interpolate the energies.
To simulate the reduction pulley and rope B. drew I did not use a complicated chain mechanism because it was too many parts and that was also problematic when a reduction gearing had to take place - so I made an 'internal' gear mech instead with a short rope pull to operate. The important part is that the gear ratio is 1 : 6.5. Why ?
^^ In B's woodcut we can see that the driver loses very little height (same in sim - about 0.65 seconds) - yet the flip lw gains much more physical height. On top of that the flip lw has to travel a far greater distance to its rim stop where it gives up its KE / Momentum on contact in the same 0.65 seconds.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Bottom lining it .. The yellow driver loses GPE ... but ... the green flip weight can not gain KE above what the driver can lose at any vertical height lost by it. It is a physical constraint in mechanics and why mgh = KE (m1/2v^2) for any height loss in a 'simple machine'.
So I could play around with an even lighter flip weight and also change the gear ratio so it has a faster velocity but it would make no difference at all. [sim attached for those that want to change inputs for themselves etc]
^^ Basically the driver can only lose mgh (GPE) [i.e. and move] when the flip weight gains less KE than the driver has lost for a given height - and that is a combination of gearing for distance needed to be traveled (up and across) to its stop, and its mass.
This is the limitation to all trading width for height scenario's. The result is we have no Net Surplus of directional torque in order to be a runner. And whether we use felt, cushioning, of hard steel with high elasticity (springiness) in the contact area we can not have the flip weight arrive with more KE than the driver lost. And this means 'side A can not always be heavier / provide a preponderance' !
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/074c0/074c01ac8bc0a46c130d40ce1a2538b49df68756" alt="Image"
......................
Time to get back to the clean-up ..
......................
- Attachments
-
- MT20Test3.wm2d
- MT91-20 Static Test 3.wm2d
- (20.64 KiB) Downloaded 110 times
Last edited by Fletcher on Wed Feb 15, 2023 1:23 am, edited 2 times in total.
- eccentrically1
- Addict
- Posts: 3166
- Joined: Sat Jun 11, 2011 10:25 pm
Re: Part Three is the Charm
Great stuff fletcher. Thanks for taking the time to do that for us. I’m going to go ahead and guess the results would be equally unimpressive if the driver became the load and the load became the driver.
I don’t think we’ll ever know what he meant.
I don’t think we’ll ever know what he meant.
Re: Part Three is the Charm
Yes, you are right. Neither, as they are, is going to change the basics - both ways are non runners. Chicken or egg, egg or chicken. B. clearly high-pointed this one for a reason that wasn't just frivolous idle banter.
And to directly address Sam's question about weight speed at the rim when the wheel is turning fast we CAN make the flip weight arrive fast and hard against the rim stop while at full rpm - it just doesn't have much mass and no extra energy / momentum.
And to directly address Sam's question about weight speed at the rim when the wheel is turning fast we CAN make the flip weight arrive fast and hard against the rim stop while at full rpm - it just doesn't have much mass and no extra energy / momentum.
-
- Devotee
- Posts: 1897
- Joined: Tue Dec 01, 2015 4:12 pm
Re: Part Three is the Charm
I think you are wrong Fletcher. The weights have to shift outward faster than what the wheel is turning but, never mind------------------Sam
Last edited by Sam Peppiatt on Wed Feb 15, 2023 2:46 am, edited 4 times in total.
Re: Part Three is the Charm
I think you are wrong Fletcher. The weights have to shift outward faster than what the wheel is turning but, never mind------------------Sam
In MT20 they are Sam .. the flip weight first moves up as it moves across and outward, then it moves down with additional speed from its own mass losing GPE as well as the driver losing its. You can see the velocity vector increasing to contact point with the rim stop where it must be moving faster than the wheel itself when dynamic.
Everyone is entitled to their opinion Sam .. you to yours and me to mine .. that's the point of a discussion board .. horse cart > cart horse -- egg chicken > chicken egg. A few eggs may have to get scrambled before we solve this puzzle.
Good luck with your build as always.