Besslers prime mover and its enabler.

[Roxaway59]

And here is the simulation to go with those.
Graham

[Roxaway59]

The next screenshots are of the mechanisms. The yellow weights are 20g the blues ones are 3g and the green one represents both these in line so it is 23g.
Graham

[Roxaway59]

Here is the simulation to go with those.
Graham

[Fletcher]

Hi Rox .. I downloaded your sim and changed units from Kg to gms, meters to cms, gravity acceleration from 280.70 cm/s^2 to 980.7 cm/s^2, and air resistance set from LOW SPEED to NONE ..

I added a Red Separator element between the average masses position each side of axle - and made a metering output for position of that end point of the separator for each side - note the y values for each, but you can see the slope on the straight line between them ..

*** fwiw to find the position for the lhs separator end point I changed the disk mass to 0.001 gms and ran the sim with System COM ON - then reset sim - adjusted the end point y value until the line crossed the middle of the Sys COM icon .. then put the disk back to 40 gms ..

So from those y values we can see that the red connecting line is 0.038 cms lhs to 0.025 cms rhs above the X-axis i.e. there is a positional bias that the Sys COM shows as high of axle (Center of Rotation) and slightly to the right of the Y-axis i.e. top and right heavy at starting condition before the one-time impulse motor turns the disk .. without the motor energy and momentum input the disk would swing almost 360 degrees and swing back again like a pendulum, imo .. That's because these masses (lhs blue 25 gms and yellow 20 gms, and the rhs combined blue-yellow masses green 23 gms (i.e. a counter-weight) are unable to move to replicate your side lever-weights mechs which show a top heavy relative to pivot wanting to rotate an lose PE .. also IMO .. and that is difficult to find an intuitive workaround for z axis rotation imo ..

Apologies if I've missed something vital or critical to my understanding .. bit of a rush on here this am ..

[Roxaway59]

Hi Fletcher once again thanks for taking the time to do that. I'm certainly learning more about WM2D from some of the things you have said. When I first started talking about this idea on the thread I didn’t know how well it would work in reality and I was already aware of what could stop it. I’m actually very pleased with the way it operates in reality and even the simulations work better than I thought. It is a very close thing and that’s what happens when something is being optimised and heading for equilibrium. What I like about it is its potential and will be looking for the prime mover from now on. I have a number of things I want to explore with this.
Graham

[Fletcher]

Graham .. here's an up close where I swapped out the LHS yellow 20 gm weight at +0.05 cm Y-axis, and the blue 3 gm weight at -0.50 cm Y-axis - for a single purple weight 23 gm at calculated average Y-axis position of 0.037 cm .. i.e. 20 x 0.050 + 3 x -0.050 = 0.0851 / 23 = 0.037 cm - close to my eyeball of 0.038 cm ..

The RHS remains 23 gm at -0.025 cm ..

Therefore there is s systemic bias (torque) seen by averaging placements this way imo ..

[Roxaway59]

Hi Fletcher yes that makes sense and in my minds eye I see it as a very broad pendulum pointing upwards. As I have said a number of times on this thread I think this basic Idea has a lot of potential and I'm going to spend time doing more of these basic simulations hopefully with your help and others who want to explore the possibilities of this. I'm not a great fan of simulators but in this case they can definitely help point the way that the real machine needs to go.
Graham

[agor95]

Hi Roxaway59

Some times a mix of development practices is better than one on it's own.

Regards

[Roxaway59]

I’ve been spending time simulating mechanisms that I think may be useful but also thinking a lot about the general make up of Besslers wheel and trying to imagine the form it took.

When I do this there are always two trains of thought that enter my mind. One is based on the prime mover which is a definite mechanism doing a specific job enabling the wheel to overbalance. Once this mechanism is seen operating on the wheel there is no doubt about why it works and it is understood.

The second is a lot different and its one of the reasons I spent a very long time experimenting with mechanical oscillators. The thinking is based on some of the things Bessler said giving the impression that the weights moved around the wheel in some kind of swift slightly complicated but coordinated path. Along this path they created a shape that constantly overbalanced the wheel and ensured that they could not change from the path they were on.

Whenever I think about these two forms I find myself wondering about which one is more likely and I’m forced to pick the first one. That’s because if Bessler always told the truth then the first one is the only one that really fits. His first wheel only turned one way and it was self starting meaning the wheel always had the shape it needed to overbalance. So its prime mover was always giving it this ability whether the wheel was moving or not.

Anyone who has ever thought about how to get a gravity wheel working will inevitably end up trying to make the same failed ideas work. We do this for all kinds of reasons and Bessler to a certain degree did this too. He said that he would go back to old designs to see how they could be improved. That is not the same as trying to get an idea that cannot possibly work going. Bessler spoke positively about some designs in his book hinting that they could work with his special principal. In a way I think that Besslers book was an attempt at categorizing the wheels which I think is a good thing to do because I do think that some designs may have more potential than others.

I’m going to continue working to see if I can come up with more unusual mechanisms that are to do with shifting weights. As usual I will post anything that I find that I think may be useful.
Graham

[Roxaway59]

I’m thinking along the lines of reverse engineering when it comes to Besslers special principal. I believe that his special principal is a weight shifting mechanism and I know that weight shifting is the way to get the wheel I've been talking about working. With that in mind I want to post an example of one of the kind of things I’m experimenting with.
Graham

[Roxaway59]

The blue weights can overbalance it but when its outstretched the yellow weight overbalances it.
Graham

[Roxaway59]

Here is another one and if you let this run for a while it will sometimes oscillate as it turns. These mechanisms are just weight shifting experiments.
Graham

[Roxaway59]

I want to demonstrate a simple overbalancing weight shifting mechanism that I think is significant even though in its present state is not that useful at the moment. I have shown similar ones in the past but this Algodoo simulation demonstrates it more vividly when you experiment with it correctly. It also demonstrates what I believe to be some other less obvious principals which could be related to some of the things that Bessler said and realised and as I go along I want to point these out and explain why I find them fascinating.

In this simulation I have deliberately coloured the weights yellow and blue and this is to show that I am thinking about the mechanisms on my wheel even if I can not yet use this idea properly. If you look at the close up of the connections to the crossbar you will see that I have not relied directly on Algodoos bearings and instead have created my own because Algodoo tightens its bearings according to the level of accuracy and I have it set at 4800.

The blue weight is just 0.1g lighter than the yellow one. Yes I know its not very impressive at the moment. Let the motor turn the mechanism until it stops at the bumper then switch the motor off. You will see that the blue weight will lever the yellow one despite being slightly lighter. It has been able to do this because it has shifted its weight further towards the end of the crossbar and there is no other reason. Try conducting the same experiment again but this time before you run the simulation tack the blue weight bars to the main crossbar just like the yellow ones are. Once you release the motor after it stops at the bumper you will see that now it continues around because it is overbalanced by the yellow weight. I will post more about this soon.
Graham

[Roxaway59]

I have talked about this earlier on in this thread but I would like to make the point again because it relates to the experiment just shown.

Imagine a situation where I am suspended by a cord so that my feet are just say a foot off the floor and the cord is connected to a fixture 10 feet above. I am also connected to a fixture by a cord a further 100 miles up but that one is not taking my weight but there is no slack in the cord. I take out a set of scissors and I cut the cord that is suspending me from 10 feet above. Its remarkable when you think that the 100 mile cord takes my weight faster than the speed of sound. In effect my weight has traveled faster than the speed of sound to a place 100 miles up.

Notice how I was careful to keep myself no more than a foot off the floor as I conducted this thought experiment. Always think health and safety -).
Graham

[Fletcher]

Hey Rox .. have you ever studied Braess's paradox with springs in series and parallel ? They are interesting and have some resemblance to your cut the suspension rope thought experiments .. just sayin ..

Anywhoo, sims I made years ago as attachments - and a good video on it I just found on YT ..

https://www.google.com/search?q=braess% ... QYRJc,st:0