Zeroing in on Bessler's wheel

[eccentrically1]

That's a flywheel. What every design becomes at the right rpm's.

[Sam Peppiatt]

ecc1,
No. You are wrong. It's only two moving parts, you should be able to figure it out. This also explains how the wheel was reversible. The bell crank would be more in the shape of a "T". A weight sliding on the top of the "T" ,(sort of two bell cranks back to back), would change the direction of rotation------------------Sam

[eccentrically1]

I answered your previous post before you edited to add the bell crank stuff.
If weights don't rise and fall then you simply have a flywheel.

Adding a bell crank wouldn't solve the energy deficit, it's just a mechanism that needs to be cranked, and gravity can't do that.

[Sam Peppiatt]

Wrong again.
It's not obvious; it took me 9 months to figure it out----------------Sam

[eccentrically1]

Ok. Good luck.

[Sam Peppiatt]

Thanks!!-----------------------Sam

ETA,
I still have to verify every thing.

[eccentrically1]

You’re welcome, Sam. You’re going to need more though.
Sorry.

[agor95]

I see the members are jumping over hurdles; as I am myself.

They are frustrating things in various sizes and masses. Even transparent to some degree.

I have posted on the communication hurdles those awkward messy drawings that are required to
convey your thoughts.

Then the need for understanding that other members are not in your head.

Thus the ability to say who is right or wrong can only be an opinion as a definite understanding requires rigger
to allow replication and validation.

The other hurdle is within our minds as we spin around our conceptual cage. Ever learning to define our reality.

It looks like Bessler pushed the cage wall and found a counter intuitive reality.

Shame he did not pass the hurdle of the need for understanding with the other members of humanity.

[johannesbender]

The weights are never lifted and never fall------------------------Sam

ETA,
Looks like no energy required. All that's needed is the force of gravity. Gravity keeps a constant force on the bell crank. The bell crank keeps a constant force on the roller and, the roller keeps a constant force on the wheel. Around and around it goes.
Does that answer your energy problem, jb-----------------------Sam

Sam you should just do whatever you want to , i don't want to project my opinion on to others , i just happen to share it, but to me certain things are facts unless shown that they aren't , i have an open mind so i would love to see anything that does something it should not.

To be honest i don't know exactly what your design is , but what is pictured in my imagination though , is that you want to push or pull the rollers from the side with a linkage on a bell crank connected to a weight , but if the roller is to be pushed or pulled towards a side or away from a side then the weight must fall (it must move) , so i imagine you want the weight to be set up to drop a little until it ends up horizontal where it managed to push or pull the roller towards a side , here is the issue i see though , when the wheel manages to turn the weight will need to reset to fall again .

If we accept that it is impossible to avoid all energy losses in a build in the real world , then we have to accept that energy out would be less than energy in , and that to solve such a problem requires to adress the energy loss .

If you think about it , if the wheel was not fraud it would be based on an energy solution , and if it was fraud then it turned because energy was provided by some other fraudulent means.

The irony of it is , if you want to build a fraudulent self sustained device or a real self sustained device you need energy for both cases.

What does everyone think a genuine energy solution would be?

i guess something where the energy math works out to be enough and i guess have left over .

[Sam Peppiatt]

Hi jb!,
It's not easy to visualize. The interesting thing is the bell cranks don't rotate; they have translating motion. Right; they would have to raise up a little initially but, then after that they never fall. As the wheel turns they keep shifting. It's diabolically simple. It's a constant force deal.

I'll get pictures of it---------------------Sam

[agor95]

Using imagination is the last resort.
Even when a person does not know what a Bell Crank is?

I know it is hard to visualise. Can you draw your version?

[agor95]

I don't want to project my opinion on to others

I value other's projected opinions. Even more so when it is supported with some logical framework.

Without members contributions how can we test the veracity of our own projected opinions?

Keep up the good work.

[Sam Peppiatt]

agor,
A bell crank is a simple lever, usually a 90 degree lever, used to ring church bells, hence the name. It's very old.

I'm using it to change, what would be the constant downward force of gravity, to a force that is continuously applied to the tangent of the wheel------------Sam

[WaltzCee]

Waltcy,
I think I figured it out. Maybe you can draw a picture for me. Like so: The . .. .. .

Things were slow in your thread a few pages ago so I thought I'd put an idea up, then it hit the fan, Sam!

Mostly I'm working with a mechanical pencil! It's a brilliant machine. When it breaks or wears, you just push a button on the top & voila!, the lead reappears.

I haven't figured out how to get it to draw pictures yet, but I working on it

[Sam Peppiatt]

God love you Waltcy!!
Thanks for keeping me going--------------------Sam