bolt to restrict rpm

[andyblues]

Besslers first wheel was controlled by a bolt that could be loosened and the wheel would rotate, surely the simple answer to this clue is that the wheel had two sides one side moved in one direction and the other the opposite , ok so i could be wrong but the simplist solution is generally the best one , what do you think guys and girls ,this may of been talked about before but i have not come across it, any thoughts on this approach/thoery are most welcome Andy

[Fletcher]

Quotes from John Collins AP ..

So it was that at the house of the Richters (On the hill called Nickelsberg) in the year 1712 I achieved the discovery of the wondrous device that has amazed the world so much. My industry was spared the curses which accompanied the earlier efforts. The machine stood 3 feet high, and was mounted in such a fashion that anyone could walk all around it. On unfastening a bolt [ mine .. Lock ], the wheel immediately began to revolve. Whoever wished to push it or touch it at any point was free to do so. People could see there was no trickery involved, so I didn't suffer in any way!

I soon found all I was looking for at a place called Draschwitz, on the Knights Estate. Here I eventually did construct a 5 ell high wheel, and anyone who wished to could come and see it, revolving between two narrow wooden beams. The bolts which regulated the motion were screwed into and out of the axle by many people, for I allowed all my friends to operate it.

[Fletcher]

Known wheel facts - note, Gera one-way wheel was 4.6 feet diameter .. Draschwitz one-way wheel was 9.3 feet diameter ..

https://www.besslerwheel.com/forum/view ... 82#p207582

[Fletcher]

Pg 62 JC's AP ..

Die Korben in die Welle waren
The bolts ( korben ) were in the axle/shaft ( welle )
Von vielen aus - und eingeschraubt
Screwed in and out by many .. i.e. aus - und ein = out and in - geschraubt = screwed - vielen = many
(Denn allen Freunden war's erlaubt)
(For it was allowed for all friends)

[gravitationallychallenged]

Thank you for the known wheel facts and the German to English translations, Fletcher! You've been one of the most friendly and helpful members of this forum and have been a positive influence, counteracting some of the more negative attitudes in this community. If I built a runner you would be one of the few people I would consider sharing the solution with.

The narrowness of Bessler's wheels in relation to their diameters has always seemed like an obvious clue to me. It limits the type of mechanisms that can be engineered to fit inside the wheel. The solution has to be very simple because a complex mechanism would be difficult to fit into something that narrow. It makes me wonder if he may have used the flat sides of the wheel to interact with the weights. He did make a comment 'from the side' to describe one of the concepts of how it worked. The 'bolts in the axle that regulated the motion' is another obvious hint.

[Robinhood46]

It makes me wonder if he may have used the flat sides of the wheel to interact with the weights.

I have often thought that too GC.
It would be nice to know how much space there was each end of the cylindrical weights.
I am pretty convinced, if the weights couldn't fit in the wheel, with a specific orientation, the witnesses would have made the remark.

So the wheel was, probably, just thick enough for the weights with a bit of play.
Maybe the weights were held by the two faces of the wheel, and the weights themselves were also swivel points for the crossbars, or arms, to swing other weights on.

[thx4]

counteracting some of the more negative attitudes in this community.

If I built a runner you would be one of the few people I would consider sharing the solution with.

A part pomper les idées des autres qui eux partagent, je me demande ce que tu fous ici, c'est affligeant comme comportement.
Il y en a qui mérite ton partage ton bon vouloir, va te faire foutre.

Apart from pumping the ideas of others who share them, I wonder what the hell you're doing here, it's appalling behavior.
There are people who deserve to share your good will, fuck you.

[Sam Peppiatt]

thx4, G.C. is a good guy-------Sam

[gravitationallychallenged]

There are people who deserve to share your good will, fuck you.

I apologize thx4. Yes there are more than a few people on this forum who deserve my good will. I shouldn't have used the word 'few.' The majority of forum members are open with their ideas and try to contribute something to the forum. I haven't contributed computer simulations and CAD drawings because i'm older and there were no PCs when I was in school. It would take me forever to master those skills. The best I've been able to do is provide a hand drawn diagram and written descriptions of mechanisms. I admire those like Fletcher who have the knowledge and ability to use digital tools to illustrate their ideas. Once again, I apologize for making such a condescending remark.

[johannesbender]

Well the thickness and rpm surely affects what is considered to be inside , high cf and limited space.

[Fletcher]

... The narrowness of Bessler's wheels in relation to their diameters has always seemed like an obvious clue to me. It limits the type of mechanisms that can be engineered to fit inside the wheel.

The solution has to be very simple because a complex mechanism would be difficult to fit into something that narrow. It makes me wonder if he may have used the flat sides of the wheel to interact with the weights.

He did make a comment 'from the side' to describe one of the concepts of how it worked. The 'bolts in the axle that regulated the motion' is another obvious hint.

.. thank you for the kind words gc - I do what I can to hopefully inch us all a little closer to the finish line ..

I have often thought that too GC. It would be nice to know how much space there was each end of the cylindrical weights. I am pretty convinced, if the weights couldn't fit in the wheel, with a specific orientation, the witnesses would have made the remark.

So the wheel was, probably, just thick enough for the weights with a bit of play. Maybe the weights were held by the two faces of the wheel, and the weights themselves were also swivel points for the crossbars, or arms, to swing other weights on.

Well the thickness and rpm surely affects what is considered to be inside , high cf and limited space.

Yes, when you see the wheel dimensions in stark reality, in the cold light of day, it is very sobering - and hard to draw any other conclusions or observations than we arrive at ..

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

Below as attachments are quick sim-pics of the GERA One-Way wheel dimensions I made - in the wheel width view I included an allowance of just over 1 inch width wooden struts/spokes for structural strength and stability - as can be seen there is virtually no space available for any articulated ( passing ) or complex levers and weights, or structures - and as has been asked, is the narrowness for more than just structural strength ? - B. could have easily made it wider than 4 inches ( length of your middle finger ) and given himself plenty of hand room - but he deliberately didn't, which begs the question already asked, did the side walls "hold" or aid in "latching or catching" something internally ? - maybe, or something like it ..

Or .. as I have proposed, was the wheel so simple it just contained basically 2 dimensional swinging Lever-Weights with One-Way Bearings ? .. I call them " Swingers " ..

That would handily reconcile the narrowness to diameter ratio - and the 'empty of weights at the exterior' - and allow internal room for a prime mover structure to be added closer to the axle .. also obvious CW torque bias and instant start from any position, providing the swingers can be repeatedly reset in a feedback with the prime mover structure ..

The first of my pics generically illustrates an OOB factor from placed One-Way Swingers ..

The second of my pics illustrates an OOB factor from strategically arranged " Swingers " ..

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

[thx4]

@gravitationallychallenged, pas de soucis 🙂

La vérité tourne autour d'un mixte entre le MT13 et le MT21, j'y pense depuis toujours et je ne dois pas être le seul ?
Réinventer la forme et l'articulation des poids, aujourd'hui nous sommes toujours dans la même représentation, ce qui bloque l'imagination d'aller plus loin.

@gravitationallychallenged, no worries 🙂

The truth revolves around a mix between the MT13 and the MT21, I've been thinking about it forever and I must not be the only one?
We'd have to reinvent the shape and articulation of the weights, today we're still in the same representation, which blocks the imagination to go further.

[SHADOW]

Bonjour Fletcher,
Je préfère la seconde version car elle ne crée pas de centre virtuel!

Hi Fletcher,
I prefer the second version because it does not create a virtual center!

[MrTim]

Still trying to find the time to build my own wheel framework* (it's going to be 50" dia x 4" thick. (4.5-ish with the outer casing.)) With 1/4" thick spokes, it will leave about 3.5" of space between them. Subtract a further 1/2" for clearance, and it's closer to 3" inside. It may not seem like a lot of space, but a lot can be fit into it. Bessler built his wheel skinny to be more impressive, and with good woodworking skills, that is even more so...

* The parts are made, the trouble is they almost all have to be assembled into a 3D structure all at once. That's going to be fun... ;-)

[Fletcher]

Hi Fletcher, I prefer the second version because it does not create a virtual center!

... Or .. as I have proposed, was the wheel so simple it just contained basically 2 dimensional swinging Lever-Weights with One-Way Bearings ? .. I call them " Swingers " ..

That would handily reconcile the narrowness to diameter ratio - and the 'empty of weights at the exterior' - and allow internal room for a prime mover structure to be added closer to the axle .. also obvious CW torque bias and instant start from any position, providing the swingers can be repeatedly reset in a feedback with the prime mover structure ..

The first of my pics generically illustrates an OOB factor from placed One-Way Swingers ..

The second of my pics illustrates an OOB factor from strategically arranged " Swingers " ..

Hi Shadow .. yes, that is an astute observation - the first shows a uniform swinger arrangement that requires some unknown MA technique to continually lift and shift the swingers into place ( repeating every 30 degrees of wheel rotation ) and restoring GPE each sector/30 degs of wheel rotation ( it looks the same ) - imo it might be a bit greedy to have that expectation, and that much torque produced on demand - its system COM would still need to circulate entirely to the right side of the axle, if that kind of lifting technique was doable .. the second is an "arranged" placement that forms a repeating pattern of repeated lifting ( from a prime mover intervention ) - the system COM is a lesser distance to the right of axle and would have less wheel power from the overbalancing swingers - btw, imo power was a problem for B's. big wheels, only producing about 100 Watts - that translates to just a small but constant imbalance i.e right shifted and circulating system COM, possibly only a few inches on average - anyhoo, imo this is a major mechanical design constraint limiting the power density potential, with imo no real 1712 workaround to it - the system COM also circulates but more irregular shape to it ..

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

Adding to what I said earlier, tho possibly with less direct context - many will harken back to my personal importance of MT51 - the half page illustration dedicated to a detailed pendulum-like structure, incorporating detail of ratchet and pawls ..

And flash back to the early part of MT where B. says ( paraphrased ) ( MT 9 ) nothing can be achieved without his hang together principle, and ( MT10 ) that there must be a correct-handle construction ..

And also remember Wagner's comments about B's. M. wheel stopping one day - and B. supposedly saying it must have rubbed on something and then reaching inside a small viewing portal in the side wall to move something inside, thus freeing it and then giving it a small push start again .. Wagner said one viewing portal was insufficient to make a fix across the wheel ( unless it was extremely simple ? ) as you couldn't reach that far with your hand to the other side .. B. in AP denies he said that or that it happened ..

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