Zeroing in on Bessler's wheel

[Sam Peppiatt]

Tarsier,
With out a runner or proof of concept you have me over a barrel. You are probably right and probably always will be---------Sam

[spinner361]

Tarsier79, I was not referring to you. Thank you for providing me with correction and pointing out my lack of understanding.

[Tarsier79]

Sam, I might be, but if you don't question and test the status quo, how do you know the accepted story is actually the truth?... And FYI, I don't always even take my own advice or accept my own logic...

Tarsier79, I was not referring to you.

I am sorry if I misinterpreted that. It honestly looked like you were specifically targeting me, and like I say, I am not perfect, proper or always correct.

[Sam Peppiatt]

Tarsier,
I missed that too! I thought he meant you. I had no clue, (I guess he meant me). Sure, I can elaborate a little. I have to go to Sacramento; I'll get back to you-----------------------Sam

[Sam Peppiatt]

Hi Tarsier,
Back, back from the river. I have no idea where to start-----------maybe the lifting is as good of a place as any. First off you have to let go of the old ideas of parodically lifting and than falling weights. The Ring & Rollers,(R&Rs), are very close to a pendulum, not exactly the same, but close. By comparing them to a pendulum should help to understand how they work.

To repeat, understanding a pen. will help to understand the R&Rs. They act almost exactly the same way, but, better In that they can lift them selves all the way back up to the top of the wheel, unlike a pendulum,(they don't have to reset part way). Also, like a pendulum they are or can be perfectly balanced as the wheel turns. When they, the rollers, are centered on there rings. The rollers follow the wheel faithfully, much the same as a pend. does.

A pendulum pivots on a pin, the rollers instead, roll inside of the pin. It's like the ring is a giant hollow pin, with the roller inside of it. A pend. can hang far below the axle and still be balanced so can the rollers.

Do you see Tarsier? That's how the lift is done, exactly the same as a pendulum. I'm dead; will continue tomorrow-------------------Sam

[Tarsier79]

They act almost exactly the same way..

Agreed

but, better In that they can lift them selves all the way back up to the top of the wheel, unlike a pendulum,(they don't have to reset part way).

OK, you might need to explain what you mean here.

Also, like a pendulum they are or can be perfectly balanced as the wheel turns. When they, the rollers, are centered on there rings. The rollers follow the wheel faithfully, much the same as a pend. does.

....

When your roller does work, work is also done on the roller. It is much heavier, so its movement is much smaller, but its negative effects will be equal to any positive effects. So although it looks free, it actually isn't. As your "wheel" rotates CW, your roller will roll inside its track slightly lagging, and this lag will increase whenever a load appears on the roller/s.

Whenever a pendulum, or a roller does work, ie lifting a weight, they are pushed backwards against rotation. This creates an equal negative torque on the wheel.

[Sam Peppiatt]

Tarsier,
Right, I have to correct my self. I realized it later but was too tied to fix it. The "lifting" is the same for both. And, the lifting is free or more or less free, neglecting ordinary losses do to friction. Are we in agreement on that?

And both can be perfectly or at least very well balanced. One counter balances the other. Which is all well and good but, doesn't turn the wheel.

Next step is to turn the wheel. The weights be it pends. or rollers have to shift out on the down side and or in, on the up side. For pends; they have to swing up and LOCK to the wheel temporarily but, they do work and they will drive the wheel. However, it takes a lot of effort to do that, to swing them. And, as far as I know, it's impossible to do it continuously.

This is where the rollers are different and far superior to pendulums. They only have to roll a short distance say, maybe a half a inch, and it only requires a minimal effort to do that. The best part is; the shift can be continuous, un like a pend. That means, they are capable of giving the wheel continuous torque! No matter what phase or position they are in. This takes care of the falling part of the weights or rollers. Agreed?

The problem is I don't know how to displace them continuously. It can easily be done temporarily in several different ways but, so far I haven't found a way to hold them over continuously. Are you with me so far?

That's where it's at. My contention is that there must be a way to do that. If that makes me a freqing idiot, as every one on this forum seams to think, then so be it-----------------Sam

[Tarsier79]

And, the lifting is free or more or less free, neglecting ordinary losses do to friction. Are we in agreement on that?

I think we might have to agree to disagree on this one.

This is where the rollers are different and far superior to pendulums. They only have to roll a short distance say, maybe a half a inch, and it only requires a minimal effort to do that. The best part is; the shift can be continuous, un like a pend. That means, they are capable of giving the wheel continuous torque! No matter what phase or position they are in. This takes care of the falling part of the weights or rollers. Agreed?

Ok, I understand. There are two possible ways to use a ring and roller setup. One where the roller lifts another weight, which is what I thought you were doing, and one where a weight or mechanism lifts the roller, which is what you seem to be trying to do. Pushing the roller across is lifting it. lifting a mass costs. So you need to determine where you are getting energy from to push the roller across(and up). This feels quite like the hamster wheel type devices I have seen. Additionally a pendulum can be utilised in exactly the same way. If you push it across and it interacts with the wheel in any way, the pendulum will power the wheel.

Ultimately, you still need to lift weight, and lifting weight is not free. If you constantly push the roller/pendulum, it needs to be pushed off the wheel, not off a static structure...again, sure you are aware of that one and why....

[Sam Peppiatt]

Tarsier,
One good thing about gravity is, there is plenty of it to go around. The difficulty is in applying it. No the rollers don't roll off the wheel neither do pendulums. And, by the way, A pend. HAS TO LOCK TO THE WHEEL, either when it swings out and down or in and up to drive the wheel. I'm really surprised that you didn't know that.

The rollers do lift up for free. I still say you are in denial on that one; at the risk of being called an arrogant SOB. I'll say one thing Tarsier; your pessimism is unwavering-----------------Sam

[Tarsier79]

A pendulum can be locked to the wheel, but any interaction with the wheel will give the same result.

the rollers do lift up for free. I still say you are in denial on that one

OK, I won't push too hard on this one.... Please explain how it is free.

[Sam Peppiatt]

Think of it this way Tarsier, I have simply replaced pendulums with R&Rs. If you consider that pends. can be lifted for free, or nearly so, then so can a roller. In this regard they are virtually the same. Except a roller would have more friction then a pendulum, other things being equal.

If this is so, (which I have demonstrated on a real wheel that it is); then it is the best way, maybe the only way to circumvent the so called, zero sum game. It could mean that perpetual motion or a gravity wheel is possible. It will still be difficult, as I am finding out but, maybe not impossible.

The lifting, has always been the biggest obstacle, don't you think?-------------Sam

[Tarsier79]

The lifting is the biggest problem.

I still disagree that your lift is free, or even nearly so. I also believe the R&R lift suffers from the same problems every other lift does.

I guess I will leave it there. All the best Sam.

[Sam Peppiatt]

You aren't alone Tarsier. Every one else thinks so too. I doubt that even a runner, would make any difference--Sam

(I think I will do the same. I'll leave it at that)

[Sam Peppiatt]

Update,
Have to find a way to shift the rollers. I'm thinking there should be three rings and three rollers. A large heavy roller in the center, with a backstop clutch and; two small rollers at the rim to turn the wheel. The center roller(prime mover) displaces the small outer rollers that provide constant torque to the wheel.

The rollers are held in the usual way with a crank shaft and drag link. Which are connected by roller chain and sprockets.

The work begins and the bull shit ends-------------------Sam

[iacob alex]

…..starting with the introductory post of this topic : (Sam P./jul.05 2021) …”the pendulums do everything….and drive the wheel “ and connecting with an old proposal (2002) of Oynstein : https://www.besslerwheel.com/wwwboard/messages/657.html , regarding spring slide mass pendulum…..can we unlock the mistery of the missing “prime mover “ ? !
Everywhere,anytime spinning ( variable angular velocity…increasing…decreasing ) a spring sliding mass pendulum , we have a continuous “connection” (rotational “effects”…) with inertia.
Playing an alternate changing angular velocity of this “elastic” pendulum , we can organize a continuous charging-discharging game…so easy on the vertical frame of gravity ( think of pile drivers…).
So….rethinking..zeroing in on Bessler’s wheel ?!
Al_ex