I'm looking for a way to build real world one-way latches that will hold a swinging pendulum at the end of its swing just as it starts to reverse its swing direction. This would be like a one-way clutch or ratchet that slips or turns easily in a first direction and binds up or grabs in a second reverse direction. It could be at the pendulum pivot or out on the end of the pendulum.
The latch must release when the wheel has rotated around to about a certain angle. The release mechanism should be actuated by gravity in some way, while not being affected by centrifugal forces. That is difficult to accomplish.
Each pendulum needs two of these latches, one for each swing direction. Once they are engaged they need to hold a few pounds of force and then require very little force to release them.
If anyone has any ideas that might get me thinking in the right direction then I'd appreciate the help.
Hi Jim,
I saw in community board that someone opened your old thread. Is the above posting related to the new idea you talked about on your other thread?
meChANical Man.
--------------------
"All things move according to the whims of the great magnet"; Hunter S. Thompson.
[...] I had wanted to do this as quietly as possible but due to recent developments I have decided to announce this now. Within a week to a week and a half I will have my already tested gravity driven free energy machine fully built, and will at that time be contacting James Randi to claim his prize, and Eric of course to. There are not too many details I wish to give out at the moment, but will soon if I feel I need to. Darren Houle can attest to the fact that this is something I've been fabricating for a while now, as I have been in contact with him through email.
Sincerely,
Michael Cameron Olson
absolute ego.../...ultimate SPLASH
Last edited by racer270 on Tue Nov 08, 2005 4:23 am, edited 4 times in total.
Jonathan wrote:First make a circle, bar, or whatever you want to only go one way. I'll refer to it as Body[1]. Then attach a rod between a point on this body and a point on the background. Double click the rod, and uncheck "Active when: Always". In the dialog below that, type: "Body[1].v.r<0". This will activate the rod when the object turns cw. If it ends ">0", then the rod activates when the object turns ccw.
Jonathan's WM2D formula works when the rod is attached to the background. But I can never get it to work when the rod is attached between the wheel and a moving object on the wheel. I'm good at writing formulas that determine 'when' I want something to happen. But I just can't seem to make the rod (or pin or whatever) to become fixed and hold the weight at its current position on the rotating wheel. As soon as my formula activates then the rod pushes the weight back to the position where constructed. When the rod activates then its length should become the current length, not the original constructed length, or if using a square pin it should become the current angle, not the constructed angle. But this never seems to happen. It always twists the object back to the original orientation.
I need some means to allow an object to move freely in one direction relative to the wheel while preventing movement in the opposite direction relative to the wheel, until certain conditions are no longer met, at which point it releases completely until the next cycle. How can you prevent one object (a weight) from moving relative to another object (the wheel) when the first object (the weight) tries to move one direction relative to the wheel and certain conditions are met? It should be free to move in the other direction all the time and free to move any direction when the conditions are not met.
It most likely can be done but so far I've not figured out how. As I say, the formula is the easy part. How do I make the 'connection' between the two behave and not push the weight back to its constructed position? Maybe WM2D doesn't like me?
Michael,
I've found a way to make a real world latch that I think will work for my current wheel project. I'm going to try to fabricate a 'ratchet' using a knurling tool with very fine teeth, much like the ridges on many plastic bottle caps.
I can see where a spring might be handy for this;
>It most likely can be done but so far I've not figured out how. As I say, the formula is the easy part. How do I make the 'connection' between the two behave and not push the weight back to its constructed position? Maybe WM2D doesn't like me?
But I can almost see it as a case where you would need the tension of the spring to be variable, setable by load. Something I gave some regard for for one of mine a while back but then I didn't pursue it.
Edit;
Just for clarification Jim I didn't mean a spring that has a variable for when it latches but one where the springs tension is variable.
meChANical Man.
--------------------
"All things move according to the whims of the great magnet"; Hunter S. Thompson.
My quoted ratchet solution must be altered to work on a moving device. But even if it was, it would not meet your needs.
Disclaimer: I reserve the right not to know what I'm talking about and not to mention this possibility in my posts. This disclaimer also applies to sentences I claim are quotes from anybody, including me.
Just a thought Jim.. I thought about the old Grappling hooks that fishermen use to pull up big fish from a jetty etc. The essentially slide down the line over the fish and when pulled up they gravity latch onto the fish to pull it up. Now I think I read somewhere that you needed a variable catch mechanism that could latch onto the weight at variable positions? This principle could easily do that!
I looked and saw some very interesting art. It was real cute.
A. Gene Young
ps: shiver me timber maties it appears we have some more bootie. Ye fought long and hard to arrive here; might as well 'ave 'er. I've taped 'er mouth shut so she doesn't envoke the right of parlez.
Attachments
Modern Art
Working Model 2D
[It is] the glory of God to conceal a thing: but the honour of kings [is] to search out a matter.
What might appear to be an extreme ego for some actually might be an honest attempt by others to govern their ego. Not everyone can fit a pair of size 13 shoes yet they might be tight on some. and .....nothing great was ever done by a reasonable man.
It's obvious that a lot of people are working on ideas that aren't quite what bessler had. For one point he had a wheel that turned. No one seems to be approaching that idea. Yea, obvious. Another point is he used a flywheel. Anyone making a wheel without a flywheel is making a wheel that would have been a novel idea for bessler. For what ever reason he felt one was necessary yet what did he know about making a wheel turn by gravity.
A. Gene Young
Working Model 2D
[It is] the glory of God to conceal a thing: but the honour of kings [is] to search out a matter.
Bessler's wheels did not really require an additional flywheel because, in a sense, they already were flywheels! By placing the weights near the rim of a hollow drum, he would have maximized the moment of inertia of the wheel.
There is mention by one of the witnesses of the Kassel wheel that if a man were to suddenly grab hold of the 12 ft wheel's rim, then it would lift him several feet off of the floor before it stopped. I've done calculations and models of this effect in the past and believe it is due to the inherent flywheel properties of the wheel's drum.
ken
On 7/6/06, I found, in any overbalanced gravity wheel with rotation rate, ω, axle to CG distance d, and CG dip angle φ, the average vertical velocity of its drive weights is downward and given by:
A true flywheel need not be large to be effective. Any one with a bench or floor mounted grinder can attest to how long it will spin after the motor is turned off.
A flywheel can store large amounts of kinetic mass. While growing up I seen wind up toys such as cars evolve into what we called friction toys. They contained a small 1" to 1-1/2" solid wheel about 3/16" thick. upon first pushing them to get the rpm's wound up they would travel as far as the older wind up versions.
This takes us right back to the argument of a wheel within a wheel that looked like a grindstone. The concensus of this forum seems to believe that it was not present. I for one do not always follow the flock and still believe the concept holds merit.
The only thing contradictory is the eyewitness report that states the wheel gained full rpm within the first two complete revolutions. With a massive flywheel this would, I admit would be quite a trick. The only explanation is that there would have been some sort of centrifugal clutch allowing the wheel to pick up speed before the transference to the flywheel.
Relph :
two terns of the outside rim........... aaa = how many terns of a grindstone that at best could be .45 times the size of the rim, i count more then 4 + terns of the grindstone...?
gordy
In 1717 Bessler built his largest wheel, which the Landgrave of Hessen permitted to be constructed and set running in a closed and locked room, secured with the Landgrave's seal on Nov 12, 1717. On Nov 26, the room was opened and the wheel found still running. The room was closed, and not reopened until Jan 4, 1718, and the wheel was still running, apparently at the same speed it had when started in November. Many came to observe this machine with admiration and wonder. Bessler describes this wheel as follows:
I put all in fresh order, and began work in all possible haste, doing everything in the manner of those I had already made and destroyed, with only a few changes in the dimensions of the so-named turning-wheel. For as a grindstone may be called a wheel, so may the principal part of my machine be named. The outward part of this wheel is drawn over or covered with waxed linen in the form of a drum. This cylindrical basis was 12 Rhenish feet in diameter, the thickness from 15 to 18 inches, the middle axle 6 feet long and 8 inches in thickness. It is supported in its movement on two pointed steel balance-pegs, each 1 inch thick; and the wheel is vertically suspended. The movement is modified by two pendulums, as shown in the engraving at the end of this book. The inward structure of the wheel is of a nature according to the laws of mechanical perpetual motion, so arranged that by disposed weights once in rotation they gain force from their own swinging, and must continue their movement as long as their structure does not lose its position and arrangement. Unlike all other automata, such as clocks or springs or other hanging weights which require winding up or whose duration depends on the chain which attaches them, on the contrary, these weights are the essential parts and constitute perpetuum mobile itself; as from them is retrieved the universal movement which they must exercise so long as they remain out of the center of gravity; and when they come to be placed together, and so arranged one against another that they can never obtain equilibrium, or the punctum quietus which they unceasingly seek in their wondrous speedy flight, one or other of them must apply its weight vertically to the axis, which in its turn will also move.
Bessler called the principal part of his machine a grindstone. There could be something lost in the translation yet I'm not of that opinion. I'm building a grindstone or flywheel.
Gene
Working Model 2D
[It is] the glory of God to conceal a thing: but the honour of kings [is] to search out a matter.
