Besslers prime mover and its enabler.

[SHADOW]

Bonjour Graham,
Deux sugestions spéculatives:
Les impacts peuvent servir à récuperer de l'énergie lors de la chute des poids comme peut le faire penser les jouets forgerons ou mineurs.
L'utilisation des ressorts peut faire penser à une pince retenant les rouleaux dans une position et permettre leurs dégagement pour une autre position.

Le concept de Sam reste d'actualité concernant la trajectoire de réarmement.

Pour reprendre la pensée de Daniel si la roue avait un potentiel d'emballement, les pendules peuvent servir à réguler mais un régulateur de Watt est plus aproprié.

Hi Graham,
Two speculative schemes:
The impacts can be used to recover energy during the weight drop as can be thought of by blacksmith or minor toys.
The use of springs may suggest a clamp holding the rollers in one position and allowing their clearance for another position.

Sam’s concept remains relevant regarding the rearmament trajectory.

To take Daniel’s thought if the wheel had runaway potential, pendulums can be used to regulate but a Watt regulator is more suitable.

[Roxaway59]

Hi Shadow / Daniel, I thought I would give this example of what I am saying about the impacts.

In this example shown in Algodoo the wheel is standing still and the two pendulums balance one another out normally.

The roller on the right pendulum is resting against the slope that is attached to the artificial horizon so its weight has shifted further out from its pivot.

When you run it you will see the wheel rotate clockwise at a very low speed.

Eventually it free wheels around until the other pendulum makes contact with the slope.

In order for this to reset the grey roller needs to be able to get past the edge of the slope.

There are a number of ways in which this might be arranged but however it happens when it comes back into contact with the slope once again there is going to be a knocking sound.

Notice that although the knocking sound is not needed in any way it happens because the roller has to make contact with the slope.

You can liken this to a mechanical clock mechanism where the noises are just a consequence of what the mechanism has to do to work properly.

Graham

[Daniel.R]

That is a good point, Graham.
But how could an accelerating wheel self-regulate without an actual brake (meaning frictional contact between two materials)? Would one try to introduce a self-regulating counter-torquing system of some kind?
Bessler wrote, 'In a true Perpetuum Mobile everything must, necessarily, go round together' (AP 347). So, a brake or impact against something static would not exist in Bessler's wheel.

The two external pendulums are often thought of as a regulating mechanism, but according to DT, they were employed to keep the wheel running true (DT 246). I’m not sure what to make of that, also considering the first wheels didn't have external pendula.
Bessler's wheel was powerful, so I find it hard to see how external pendulums could self-regulate it. It was able to lift 70 pounds, and free-moving external pendulums would have no effect on slowing down such a wheel. Air resistance or bearing friction couldn't be the cause of self-regulation; if they were, the wheel wouldn't be able to lift 70 pounds.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Thinking more about my ingredients, I believe the impacts and noises might come from the reactionless structures hitting fixed positions of latches or stops. Additionally, the feedback mechanism gains its movement and force from these structures impacting the stops or latches. Therefore, the prime mover, impacts, and feedback system should be connected and work in tandem. The noise from such a system would be rhythmic thumping and clattering, meaning the impacts would indeed be part of the energy recovery process as Shadow speculates.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Watching your simulation in Algodoo, I see that the impacts are more like taps rather than forceful blows. However, if the wheel were to gain momentum, the impacts would become more forceful. I understand your method of creating imbalance and see some resemblance to MT12 with the ramp. I also see that the impacts are a byproduct of the mechanism and not the driving force. I would try to harness the energy from these impacts. Perhaps creating an impact some time before the weight hits the ramp could impart an oscillation to the pendulum about to enter the ramp. Timing the swing could help the pendulum weight enter the ramp more effectively.

/Daniel

[Roxaway59]

Hi Daniel, you raise some very important questions and they deserve an answer so I will try my best to do that.

Bessler wrote, 'In a true Perpetuum Mobile everything must, necessarily, go round together' (AP 347). So, a brake or impact against something static would not exist in Bessler's wheel.

I think some things Bessler says are open to interpretation and sometimes he seems to contradict himself.

Yes you could take it quite literal that nothing is hanging from the axle or you could take it that he just meant all the moving parts all moved around together.

I do admit that he does make it sound as though there was no artificial horizon but I remain unconvinced at the moment that there wasn’t one.

The other thing I should point out is that the artificial horizon has the potential to play a very large part in the working of the wheel or very little. This is one of the beautiful things about it in my opinion. In effect it behaves like a reference point.

But how could an accelerating wheel self-regulate without an actual brake (meaning frictional contact between two materials)? Would one try to introduce a self-regulating counter-torquing system of some kind?

If you take a 12v motor and connect it to a 12v battery it may probably do say 3000 rpm unloaded. It doesn’t require a load to limit its speed it does this itself. This happens for a few reasons but the bottom line is there is a limit to how fast it can go before natural limitations comes into play.

Besslers wheel was no different from this and if you imagine that there has to be some kind of breaking mechanism or else the whole thing will run so fast it just breaks apart you are mistaken in my opinion.

Lets imagine that gravity is driving it because it is a force. I say imagine because gravity is not suppose to be a force.

Gravity is powering it but gravity is also acting on every part of the machine and as the wheel picks up speed the dynamic layout of the weights begin to change and presumably more swinging is taking place. There is going to be a limit to this and the machine is going to reach its resonant frequency where it becomes stable. A frequency that it is happy to remain at.

Before I continue just have a look at this graph I have quickly made in Algodoo.

It shows how I believe Besslers wheel behaved when someone began to turn it from a standing still position.

There is a slight curve at the bottom as they turned it then the wheel itself took hold and it began to increase its speed in an exponential manner. It very quickly reached its maximum speed and then quickly reduced its acceleration shown at the top as a curve.

[Roxaway59]

The two external pendulums are often thought of as a regulating mechanism, but according to DT, they were employed to keep the wheel running true (DT 246). I’m not sure what to make of that, also considering the first wheels didn't have external pendula.
Bessler's wheel was powerful, so I find it hard to see how external pendulums could self-regulate it. It was able to lift 70 pounds, and free-moving external pendulums would have no effect on slowing down such a wheel. Air resistance or bearing friction couldn't be the cause of self-regulation; if they were, the wheel wouldn't be able to lift 70 pounds.

I think you can look upon the external pendulums like a flywheel. They just simply helped the wheel run more smoothly. Both pendulums and flywheels can be used to store energy fairly efficiently. What you appear to be doing is thinking along the lines of they most be there to stop the machine running out of control. I don’t believe this is the case.

Thinking more about my ingredients, I believe the impacts and noises might come from the reactionless structures hitting fixed positions of latches or stops. Additionally, the feedback mechanism gains its movement and force from these structures impacting the stops or latches. Therefore, the prime mover, impacts, and feedback system should be connected and work in tandem. The noise from such a system would be rhythmic thumping and clattering, meaning the impacts would indeed be part of the energy recovery process as Shadow speculates.

There is always going to be room for speculation as to what the impacts did but Bessler does make it sound as though it was the weights swinging that gave the wheel its power. He mentions using felt to reduce the noise. It would make sense to have the impacts helping to turn the wheel but I am not sure that was the case.

Watching your simulation in Algodoo, I see that the impacts are more like taps rather than forceful blows. However, if the wheel were to gain momentum, the impacts would become more forceful. I understand your method of creating imbalance and see some resemblance to MT12 with the ramp. I also see that the impacts are a byproduct of the mechanism and not the driving force. I would try to harness the energy from these impacts. Perhaps creating an impact some time before the weight hits the ramp could impart an oscillation to the pendulum about to enter the ramp. Timing the swing could help the pendulum weight enter the ramp more effectively.

Daniel just bear in mind that there is nothing telling us just how much force these knocks had in Besslers wheel. Sound can be deceptive and there may not have been much power in the knocks.

In the example I gave yes swinging the artificial horizon in sync with the pendulums may be one way of resetting.

All the best

Graham

[Fletcher]

Graham et al, fwiw .. the pendulums that we talk about are shown in the familiar engravings - there are 2 external pendulums per wheel - one each side of the wheel in question and attached via a separate crank to the axle - these dual pendulums are 180 degrees out of phase - i.e. when one is at its highest point and about to begin falling again so is the other, but on the opposite side of the axle, and in the opposite direction ( i.e. they come together, cross over, and move apart, to repeat ) - this raises some questions and observations in my mind ..

Since the dual pendulums are exactly 180 degrees out of phase they both fall and rise up in synchronized swing and movement, but in opposite directions - at any time they both have the same Potential Energy ( PE = mgh ) and the same Kinetic Energy ( KE = m 1/2 v^2 ) , therefore just a single pendulum with twice the bob mass would do exactly the same job of the supposed speed regulating, or rpm "smoothing", or acting like a speed governor ( top rpm limiter ) .. additionally the wheels were noted to maintain a "regular" speed without any pendulums, either one or two, attached - however this observation was a visual one confirmed by a watch per revolution - there was no finer analysis to note an absolute constant rpm or whether the wheels had an "average" rpm ( perhaps not easily discernible to the naked eye ) ..

Graham, here is an exercise I think you should do to gather some facts together about external pendulums - it may assist your ramp entering problem for instance - sim in Algodoo a standard 2 meter diameter disk with the dual external pends attached like the engravings show via a crank to axle - motor run it up to an rpm and turn the motor off - plot the rpm of the wheel as it rotates after coasting - Q. is the rpm constant or sine wave in appearance ? - how and why do the pendulums affect this plot shape ( and rpm ) ?

I have sim tinkered with it in the past but I think it would have more value and relevance if you did it in Algodoo and independently of me .. I would be interested in your results and discussion ..

[Roxaway59]

Hi Fletcher I’ve been a bit busy today with some things so I haven’t had much time to look at the pendulums you are writing about. I will certainly look at it tomorrow when I have more time.

Just I few things that I was thinking about when I read your post though.

If Bessler had put just one large pendulum on one side of the wheel rather than splitting it up and having them swing 180 degrees out of phase then the wheel structure would certainly have been less stable. The biggest danger it has with the way you describe it is that it could twist.

Another thing that struck me is that Bessler was trying to demonstrate the usefulness of his machine. By having two pendulums attached in the way you describe it he may have been showing how work could be done by people using his wheel in a number of ways that involved impact devices worked by the pendulums. On his demonstrations the pendulums may have even been there just for show and not heavily weighted at all.

Tomorrow I will have another look I do find it interesting.

Graham

[Fletcher]

If Bessler had put just one large pendulum on one side of the wheel rather than splitting it up and having them swing 180 degrees out of phase then the wheel structure would certainly have been less stable. The biggest danger it has with the way you describe it is that it could twist.

Hi Graham .. yes, I agree that it could twist and be less stable with just one pendulum on one side - as I've said previously all his wheels were firmly anchored floor to ceiling, presumably for overall stability reasons - and we know from Gratner and Borlack that the Merseburg wheel still "hopped" once per revolution even tho securely anchored floor to ceiling - this means there were internal forces in play whilst in rotation that caused an up and down movement - the floor to ceiling supports may have minimized and/or disguised this otherwise unwanted action .. thus it may be a clue or indicator of something mechanically happening inside his wheels .. note that he never displayed his wheels in stands or crates that did not extend to the ceiling ..

Another thing that struck me is that Bessler was trying to demonstrate the usefulness of his machine. By having two pendulums attached in the way you describe it he may have been showing how work could be done by people using his wheel in a number of ways that involved impact devices worked by the pendulums. On his demonstrations the pendulums may have even been there just for show and not heavily weighted at all.

That's the thing Graham - the pendulums were in all the main engravings but were never recorded as being physically present or seen, either in storage or in use with the wheels - they were completely absent - no proof of existence - all we have is his mentioning them in his legends ( and what they supposedly were for ) and others reporting on them in the context of what he told them they were for - they never actually saw any themselves ..

As you know I propose that they were the first iteration prime mover coupled to his prototype runner, which was changed out for an internal and hidden prime mover in his public wheels, that worked along similar "influencing movement" principles - hence why I say that altho we all know about the pendulums their oscillating action and its likely effect on a wheel has not be studied in any great detail, if at all, imo - and why he included them so prominently in his engravings and drawings, if you believe that he would want to show and link a first mechanical prime mover back to himself for later priority ( prior-art ) and provenance i.e. insurance reasons ..

Let's see what your sims show in relation to a variable or constant rim speed etc ..

[Daniel.R]

Thanks for taking the time to answer my speculations and many questions. This is an interesting and important discussion, in my opinion.

Yes! Bessler seems to contradict himself at times, but altogether, I find his writings very important, and I like to look very carefully into both what he writes and does not write.

I'm aware of the clues presented on this site (about the weights gaining force from their own swinging), but having recently read both DT and AP for the first time, I can't find Bessler mentioning swinging weights. I don't want to shoot the messenger, but I question where some of the clues come from.

I guess the word 'swing' comes from Ted of Chicago's translation of the German text in DT, pages 19-21:

"These parts are enclosed in a case and are coordinated with one another so that they not only never again reach an equilibrium (or point of rest) for themselves but incessantly seek with their admirably fast swing to move and drive on the axis of their vortices loads that are vertically applied from the outside and are proportional to the size of the housing."

Now, with the help of ChatGPT, which after all is a language AI, I translated the Latin text of the same exact passage and got this (which also is presented in my thread named: My thoughts and questions about Bessler's writings):

"Once such a machine is enclosed and arranged in such a manner that it never attains equilibrium or a point of rest but perpetually seeks it, and with remarkable speed, in proportion to both its own magnitude and that of the enclosed machine, it should also carry and move other weights simultaneously, attached externally to the vertical axis of rotation."

And to be thorough, here is the translation version from John Collins' book. Same exact passage:

"To this end, they are enclosed in a structure or framework, and coordinated in such a way that not only are they prevented from attaining their desired equilibrium or ‘point of rest’, but they must forever seek it, thereby developing an impressive velocity which is proportional to their mass and to the dimensions of their housing. This velocity is sufficient for the moving and raising of loads applied to the axis of rotation."

There is no mention of swing in the two latter translations... So taking all the clues for granted on the clue page may be a slippery slope. But there may be texts where Bessler mentions 'swinging' that I am not aware of?

The word 'swing' directly makes us think of pendulums or oscillation of some sort. I've looked into pendulums (mostly because of the mentioned clue, to be honest) more than I care to tell, and I have found no energy at all to be gained from them. All they are to me is efficient oscillatory mechanical systems if they are left undisturbed and undampened, but you can't extract any energy from them without depleting its swing (losing GPE). And we need energy, lots of energy to replicate the behavior of Bessler's wheel.

I do not worry about the machine accelerating indefinitely and in doing so, violently flying apart. I worry more about the synchronization between the inner separate structures and the main wheel's rotational speed. I think Bessler's wheel was a 'the sum is more than its parts' type of deal, and that there was synchronization taking place between its separate inner mechanisms and the whole system's rotational speed. So, if the wheel would rotate too fast, it would lose its synchronization between its internal parts in relation to the wheel's rotation.

Losing synchronization may be a method of self-regulating, now that I think about it. The wheel edging between being in phase and being out of phase, and that edge would be the max RPM of the whole system. Put a load on the wheel, and the synchronization between the inner structures and the sum (wheel) grows stronger.

Of course, this is all speculation, and it may have become too abstract.

In my opinion, guessing how Bessler's wheel worked only through the sound it produced would be kind of equal to guessing how an internal combustion engine operates only by hearing the sound of it.

I think you misunderstood me, Graham. I do not believe the external pendulums were necessary for the self-regulation/slowing down of RPM.
I think the wheel was too powerful to be slowed down by two external pendulums alone. The pendulums having an effect of smoothing of RPM or neutralizing of torques/twisting on the axle seems more plausible in my book.

All is indeed well!
Enjoying a fly fishing trip in Norway this week. Having a good time!

/Daniel

[Roxaway59]

Hi Fletcher I’ve been thinking a lot today about pendulums and their use and I have started to do some simulating based on what you said. So far I haven’t yet got things they way I want them but I will keep trying.

Am I right in thinking that the pendulums Bessler shows are a mixture of fly wheel and pendulum? He has three weights on them. One at the bottom and two at the top either side of the pivot.

The two at the top may be used to govern the frequency of the pendulum rather than the one at the bottom.
What do you think?

Graham

[Roxaway59]

Hi Daniel, yes sorry for the misunderstanding.

The trouble with me when I write long posts is I start to lose the plot --)

At the moment I am thinking that they were there just to smooth the running of the wheel out but that might change after I have experimented more with simulations.

In electronics A.C ripple on a D.C voltage is usually smoothed out with a reservoir capacitor. So the pendulums could have been doing something along these lines but I'm not sure. Something just doesn't smell right about it.

I can understand Bessler putting a few bells and whistles on his machine but would he really put something unnecessary on it if it ran ok without it?

Fly fishing?..... I didn't know that flies swam...bum bum.
I hope you have a good catch.

Graham

[Roxaway59]

Oh I forgot to say Daniel that the translation problem is one that we must not forget and it does need to be questioned just as you have done from time to time. If it does turn out that Bessler did not mean "swinging" in his writings then that is something we all need to know.

Graham

[Fletcher]

Hi Fletcher I’ve been thinking a lot today about pendulums and their use and I have started to do some simulating based on what you said. So far I haven’t yet got things they way I want them but I will keep trying.

Am I right in thinking that the pendulums Bessler shows are a mixture of fly wheel and pendulum? He has three weights on them. One at the bottom and two at the top either side of the pivot.

The two at the top may be used to govern the frequency of the pendulum rather than the one at the bottom.
What do you think?

Graham

Hi Graham .. it has always been my opinion that the 2 additional weights on the top and ends of the "T-pendulum" don't have any practical contribution to the pendulum action other than to add/change inertia ( Moment Of Inertia [ MOI ] ) of the pendulum arrangements - as you suspect, to modify the pendulum period or frequency, since it would be difficult to lengthen or shorten the vertical pendulum shaft to achieve the same result with a fixed height pendulum fulcrum and ground clearance constraints .. and yes, it is my understanding that pendulums do no more and no less than act as flywheels in the normal mechanical sense and application i.e. they store and release Kinetic Energy, once that KE is first given to them - n.b. they are incapable of generating or creating KE ( energy is the capacity to do Work ) - this excess energy comes from the internal imbalance mechanisms that give a Net Positive Torque once in rotation imo - thus, imo, the pendulums if attached as shown in the engravings etc could have flywheel energy/momentum smoothing properties and pendulum properties, if B.'s regulator explanation is to be taken literally and be believed ( which I am skeptical about ) ..

A moderately heavy wheel at 26 rpm etc would have a lot of angular momentum and not need any smoothing assistance - and as noted were never seen physically attached to any wheel at any time - therefore even in the Work tests they just were not required for the purpose stated by B. imo ..

[Fletcher]

Oh I forgot to say Daniel that the translation problem is one that we must not forget and it does need to be questioned just as you have done from time to time. If it does turn out that Bessler did not mean "swinging" in his writings then that is something we all need to know.

Graham

Hi Daniel and Graham again ..

You may find the Rupert Gould accounts " interesting ", if not informative, in relation to the swinging comment etc .. there is also a wealth of other information in this extract form his " Oddities " book of 1928 ( see attachment ) - it is well worth the read and saving on your computer for future reference material alongside John Collins works etc ..

n.b. I once copied down the section of Gould's book on B's. wheels etc, and saved it to a personal " word " file - any highlighting, underlining, italics etc are mine - I think it will add needed perspective and illuminate the logical thoughts of a horologist ( refurbished Harrison's sea going chronometer ) and professional navy career man, who would not be fooled easily ..

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rupert_Gould

.....................

ETA .. would not accept a docx extension file so changed it to .txt extension to attach to post - change it back if required ..

[Sam Peppiatt]

Oddities is right. I down load it and all I get is gibberish--------------Sam