JUBAT wrote: ↑Thu May 25, 2023 3:47 am
A reaction lags the action - hmmm interesting - much like when you wind up clock - a few quick spins of the winding mechanism results in about 8 days of clock operation.
. .. .. .
That might called a power stroke, there needs to be enough power to cover the energy loss of frictions, latency, losses as a function of 2LoT, etc.
These are real design constraints. I think it's doable, if PM principle(s) are embodied in the design.
Bessler potentially mislead people because if it's just weighted levers winding a spring and gradually releasing that tension into said weights, thats the very clockwork he denied using.
Another thought popped into my head this morning: Has anyone tried MT21, but with lengthened arms? The idea being that on the ascending side, the pendulums fall inward and smack the hub. That alone removes the weight and also gives a somewhat forward push of the wheel. Then as it comes around, the weight falls off the hub and swings out. Use an odd number of pendulums so nothing is ever straight across from each other. In fact, using the Apologia wheel as a guide - one hammer hits the center, one hangs, and the other one lays dormant in the bottom until its turn comes up to hammer.
At least as an encore performance people could see it and feel stupid that is all it took to make it run. Just a little flick of finger to encourage the hammer to fall sooner by an errant stage hand willing to work for peanuts and be part of the overall play.
It's balanced regardless of the lever length but if you add a spring it will keel before reaching the balanced position driven into position by the spring. The spring might drive the wheel if it's already turning a little bit before the spring reaches its position because the force of the spring should be equal to the keel before it activates because it's balanced in the static position where the spring can move and moves the weights into position balanced. How can I describe this better? I want to. The wheel is balanced after the spring activates and moves into position. So if it's moving the spring will impact on the right side and should be equal to the keel that it had before being allowed to move the weight. Without the spring it is balanced and then once the weight flips over it's unbalanced. But the unbalance and the same as the keel before unbalance is the same. With the spring there is no unbalance only a keel and a balanced position but the spring pushes as hard as the keel and the extra force from the weight falling should be the prime mover in the balanced position. Plus the spring naturally applies force to a vertical position and it will apply greater force if the wheel is moving by placing it into a more horizontal inclined position. Where the wheel is drawn here if the wheel is on a ratchet so it doesn't turn CCW, the spring would push the top left weight into the vertical position and give a little tug to the wheel CW. That should then just be enough to reach the same position again if no friction. However if the wheel is pushed a little the springs would transcend downwards on the falling right side and apply torque to the wheel and this should be a working gravity wheel because of the spring. It would possibly reload itself with no friction and it would possibly be an overbalanced wheel with a little bit of a push. Sure play with this modification to your idea JUBAT. Newton strikes again! I think each MT could hold a working wheel design secret.
I actually used JUBATS idea as a model for the design on conception. It actually works a lot better if the lever lengths are the diameter of the wheel rather than 4x the diameter of the wheel.
Last edited by preoccupied on Fri May 26, 2023 11:06 pm, edited 1 time in total.
"It's not the size of the dog in the fight, it's the size of the fight in the dog." - Mark Twain
Actually it's the same longer than diameter and short as diameter. The larger model would have a stronger spring and if the spring is the prime mover then it would be faster and stronger with the longer levers. Practically though you could just make this proportion of a wheel larger. The spring is probably the prime mover because it will add to the torque if it hits on the right side of the wheel. If the wheel were allowed to sit on the position where spring would start moving the weight upwards, it would without friction push back into the same position and do it again. But if the wheel is moving the spring will apply torque extra.
"It's not the size of the dog in the fight, it's the size of the fight in the dog." - Mark Twain
Sam Peppiatt wrote: ↑Wed May 24, 2023 11:29 pm
A new "Idea", I want to try a 'toggle' link to push / slide a weight out at 3:00 and draw it back in at the 9:00 position, for CW rotation. The action of the link reverses every 1/2 turn of the wheel, resulting in what could be considered a mechanical alternator,( to drive the wheel). Also, the toggle link is a part of a storks bill, if that means any thing.
As usual, the link(s) will be driven by the heavy discs-----------------------Sam
This seems somewhat like Calloway's design, yet he was trying to trigger a pendulum.
Hi Waltcy,
I've been gone two days,(other problems to deal with). I agree, it does look like what Calloway was working on. The build. Haven't made the changes yet, got side tracked. However, if I could elaborate on it a little; especially the toggle link.
Go to Process Restart by SHADOW, page 16, post Thu. Feb. 02 2023 7:43am. You can see the 'toggle link',(that I want to use), for shifting the weights. It, the toggle, does shift the weights in on one side and back out on the other, for every half turn of the wheel. The toggle reverses the direction of movement of the weights. A mechanical alternator if you will. The small yellow dots / weights work the toggles but, they cause problems.
The main difference will be the discs, (ring & rollers), they will work the toggles instead. Maybe the two working together will succeed. Like Robinhood46 said, "what could go wrong, other than every thing"-----------------------Sam
PS Waltcy, could you post the link for me?
Last edited by Sam Peppiatt on Sat May 27, 2023 2:22 pm, edited 1 time in total.
I was thinking more about this damn wheel and it dawned on me what might be the reason why all of his previous designs failed is because the solution involved constantly moving weights. All of Bessler's MTs have weights that move and stop move and stop and that failed everytime. But design something where the weights are constantly swinging and we might just have something.
Maybe it's not a profound thought, but substantial enough worth mentioning.
JUBAT,
Continues operation by it's self is no guaranty that it will work. For instance, the bell cranks were continues but caused the discs to roll back wards at 12 and 6. However, continues operation does have the best chance of success----------------Sam
Last edited by Sam Peppiatt on Wed May 31, 2023 6:00 am, edited 1 time in total.
Sam Peppiatt wrote: ↑Mon May 22, 2023 1:14 am
Hi Waltcy,
I don't have a clue what you are talking about but, it sounds good.
. .. .. .
------------------Sam
I took a very good but basic idea, and started thinking, what if it won't work. Then I went for the kitchen sink!
I'll get things resonating!
Fire up some Fletcher's® & sling mass everywhere!!
WHoT® ricocheting third derivative power up & down the z-axis!!
so the ink is dried on the simple idea, going to hold back on the kitchen sink, see what the simple idea does.
I plan on using the old copper pennies for mass.
The new pennies are zinc.
