Hypothesis .. Raising GPE without using Law of Levers ? ..

[Fletcher]

Me: “How are you going to assure impulse at the top? Doesn't his wheel under load reach a constant velocity”

That was a dumb question Fletcher by me. I should have thought that through more with a little coffee.

So your last SIM lets see it with the ratchets on. Inquiring minds need to know.

Naahh .. can't do it dax .. you must have been away that day ;7)

I said previously that one-way bearings are the devil themselves for me ( or maybe anybody ) to sim - easy to find a workaround in a standing or horizontal moving rig as some of my sims show, but as the swingers rotate around a radius with the rotating wheel that workaround for practical reasons went right out the door and on the junk pile - a while back after weeks of intensive work I nearly gave myself a brain-bleed trying to finally put together a reliable substitute - I have tried many times over the years, got there in the end, sort of, IIRC lol - will have to try and find it or remember what I did to get it across the line, but not looking forward to it ..

Kinda hoping some of you programmers or mathematicians can step up and take a swing at it ..

[daxwc]

Fletcher: Naahh .. can't do it dax .. you must have been away that day ;7)

More than likely, I saw a squirrel while reading your thread and ran off in hot pursuit into the physics forest, hoping to tree it; I just never came back.

[Kattla]

I just wondered, what happens to bouncy stuff when the ground moves away, like the downgoing side in a wheel?

You know, the height of the bounce depends on distance of the fall, accelration (of gravity) and i guess, bouncyness of the material. Whatever that latter is called. Will it gain energy, or will it loose it , or will the falling ground just even out stuff with no overall change?

edit: Yes, i know i get some absolutly crazy thoughts from time to time.

[daxwc]

https://besslerwheel.com/forum/download ... &mode=view
Your design is a real easy build for someone Fletcher.

Buy 8 ratchets wrenches. Buy 8 sockets for same. Screw and glue the sockets to the wheel. Insert your ratchet wrenches and duct tape weights to the wrenches.

Or 8 one-way ratchet combination wrenches and a lag bolts screwed into the wheel.

I am not in a position right now to build it; maybe summer. If anybody builds it lets us know the results

[Fletcher]

https://besslerwheel.com/forum/download ... &mode=view

Your design is a real easy build for someone Fletcher ...

** A Machine so Simple and Easy to Understand and Construct .. **

"It more than fulfils the requirements of an almost countless number of learned prescriptions as to what any credible device laying claim to Perpetual Motion status must perform. (page 30) Indeed, this long-sought and much desired machine, or so-called Perpetual Motion. (T.N. - pure artificiale quoad durantem materiam is added after P.M. – this Latin phrase is then described a few lines later, marked *) is a revolving wheel, which is able to run, by means of its own innate momentum, *…" DT 195 Karl Proclamation 27 May 1718

His Highness, who has a perfect understanding of mathematics, assured me that the machine is so simple that a carpenter's boy could understand and make it after having seen the inside of this wheel, and that he would not risk his name in giving these attestations, if he did not have knowledge of the machine...' - letter from Joseph Fischer to J.T. Desaguliers, 1721.

His Serene Highness assured me to the contrary, and that the machine was very simple...' - letter from Willem Jacob 'sGravesande to Sir Isaac Newton, 1721

From : JC’s PMAAMS? (pg 143) .. Jean Bernoulli (1667-1748) responded to 'sGravesande's publication. ...his Serene Highness was quoted as saying to his ministers, that he believed the machine to be a true perpetual motion machine, and in addition, it was so simple and easy to construct that he was amazed that no one had managed to invent a similar machine before Herr Orffyreus. – letter from Jean Bernoulli to ‘sGravesande ..

Comment .. The one-way swingers assembly very easy indeed dax .. either as you say using off-the-shelf ratchet devices, or buying one-way bearings and fitting a lever-weight to them etc - it is absolutely no effort to prove that you can put your hand on the rim of a vertical disk with any number of equally radius spaced one-way swingers and give it a quick shove to full arms length ( while not letting it go ) - i.e. the 'pump and dump cycle' - some bottom swingers will swing up and latch on the pump gaining GPE, and some will swing up and latch on the dump also gaining GPE - at completion of that manual cycle test there is torque about the axle from the swingers GPE gained and wheel COM displacement overbalance ..

As stated it does not involve any overt MA and Law of Levers lifting - it requires 2 sequential Inputs of equal but opposite Momentums to the wheel disk - I proposed that the very first private wheel prototype used the external pendulum connected to an axle crank to achieve this Momentums Inputs by speeding up and then slowing down the wheel rpm ( 2 halves of 1 cycle ) ..

And could I have been able to reliably sim a one-way bearing action it would be easy to optimize the pendulum length and crank ratio and placements etc to find an optimal smooth sine-wave rpm pattern .. at this time it is not reliable but I will continue to work on it - I can build individual ratchet and pawls etc but that adds huge complexity to my sims which will crash them, hence looking for a proxy method that works and doesn't crash the sim thru complexity issues ..

But of course that is not the problem here - many will be waiting for me to reveal my MOI changer device that also pumps and dumps the system momentum by actively cycling MOI .. that will be my next step in this thread, as I explain my Toy's Page analysis resulting in my second and internal all-goes-around-with-the-wheel ( AGAWTW ) Prime Mover mechanism ( crosses, pulls, and weights ) - which has a more familiar feeling to the public display wheels with no visible Prime Mover ..

I have to say that my biggest problem here was always going to be explaining where the excess energy came from, and 90% of my thinking over a long time was around this - and why I developed the simple comparison sims with metrics that I shared to show that in certain 'local' situations energy can be effectively annihilated or manifested - knowing full well the potential ramifications to the COE Law and WEEP - as I said previously the math to tie potential COE 'anomalies' to earths rotational momentum and balance the books is above my pay grade ..

Saying it and showing it are one thing - to reset mine, let alone anyone else's thinking, to understand and accept the possibility is another thing entirely ..

Have a great Xmas and NY to all ..

[daxwc]

Fletcher: waiting for me to reveal my MOI changer device that also pumps and dumps the system momentum by actively cycling MOI ..

That a boy. A Christmas present.

[Kattla]

Did a quick and dirty test today of it. Just with swingers and lego ratchets.

It looks promising, that much i can say. Even with the high friction in lego ratchet mechanism (springloaded "thingie" on a gear)
Tested with 2 and 4 swingers. Don't start turning on its own, but by shaking it to encourage the pendulums to swing, it do turn.

With the prime mover , it may actually be a runner.

However, there is a certain speed limit on it, going above that one, whatever it was, and the centrifugal force will make the swingers stay out all the way around. Which made for a good flywheel btw. Then again, maybe one can make use of that trick for something. Hmmm..

[Roxaway59]

Hi Fletcher, I’ve been thinking a lot about your device and how you hope to tap into the earths energy.

As I said before I am simply not sure about what you are doing and I have serious doubts about us being able to tap into the earths rotational energy.

Aside from anything else its not just the earth that moves.

Rotational Speed: ~1670 km/h at the equator.
• Orbital Speed Around the Sun: ~107,000 km/h.
• Solar System's Orbital Speed in the Galaxy: ~828,000 km/h.
• Milky Way's Motion in the Universe: ~2.1 million km/h.

It certainly doesn’t feel like I’m moving at over 2.1 million km/h and you would certainly think that any mechanism made intentionally or unintentionally that tapped into that movement would declare itself pretty sharply.

I’m sure I have said this before but at the very least Bessler must have believed that what he was doing was basically a novel way of overbalancing a wheel and Karl must have thought the same but of course its possible that they were both fooled.

I have to say though that I don’t really believe that but I would be happy for you to show how tapping into the earths rotational energy to the degree that you can lift large weights is possible.

If your device is doing something special as you believe then I’m going to predict that its not going to end up tapping into the earths energy but rather help overbalance a wheel in the traditional way.

I look forward to you showing how your mechanism can work.

As for me I plan on going into doing more real experiments in the New Year.

I wish you and everyone else here all the best,

Graham

[Fletcher]

... However, there is a certain speed limit on it, going above that one, whatever it was, and the centrifugal force will make the swingers stay out all the way around. Which made for a good flywheel btw. Then again, maybe one can make use of that trick for something. Hmmm..

Thanks for your thoughts Kattla .. there is one important consideration in B's. wheels - the "weights" were not out in the periphery ( near or close to the rim ) - the outside regions were empty of any weights ( said by Wagner upon examination and confirmed by B.in his rebuttal of Wagner's critiques in AP ) - "weights" at a closer radius would not be effected by Cf's as much as rim ( circumference ) weights swinging about, that is, would tolerate a higher rpm before becoming "pinned" by Cf's - this concept of pinned weights at a higher rotation goes someway to explaining some of the witnesses statements that the Merseburg wheel had the exact same rpm whether empty OR doing work - iow's there was a 'compensatory ability' to the wheel to "adjust" to doing work which would normally reduce its rpm noticeably under load - it appears a load helped it perform more efficiently ( helped reset the weights to maximum NET overbalance ), up to a point, and that was why the rpm stayed constant even under load - let's say for analogy purposes like a Watts fly-ball governor increases the fuel flow at higher rpms ..

Wolff also commented on some structures occupying the outer radius, that were perhaps expandable etc - with my proposed internal MOI changing Prime Mover ( which there can be multiple inside the wheel ( superior numbers and effort available compared to one external pendulum ) ) these require a lot of real-estate to morph shape, and out in the last half radius is a lot of unoccupied real-estate, if there are no moveable OOB weights per se there ..

[Fletcher]

Hi Graham .. thanx for your thoughts - annual Xmas parade about to start on the island and I'm getting the side-eye lol .. best to you and all .. will address your post next available slot ..

cheers - f

[Robinhood46]

I have never been too sure of how to take the "no weights at the perimeter of the wheel" claims.
Are we talking no heavy weights, or not even the smaller weights that cause the raising of the heavy ones?
If we really believe there are no weights at all, near the perimeter, then why would the wheels need to be so big? other than to have pivot points for the arms holding, or somehow affecting the weights that are close to the axle. MT 19 & 20 style.
I wouldn't entertain the idea that Bessler purposely built huge great wheels, just to throw people off the scent, of how it works, if there was absolutely no reason for the wheels to be so big.

So if weights weren't at the perimeter, what was?

[preoccupied]

If a lever is kept upright by gears, a weight can be pushed out by a spring on the descending side and it could be blocked at 90 degrees maximum distance and then on the ascending side the force of rising will pull the weight back down compressing the spring flat. Also because on the ascending side pulling the lever outwards helps turn the wheel then the spring can also wrap onto the opposite sides lever by a pulley. There might be able to be a second stronger spring and a higher gear ratio against the opposite side because when the the weight swings out it travels extra distance.

[Sam Peppiatt]

FWEIW,
It seams more likely that the wheels were made big in diameter to increase the torque. Which means the weights needed to drive the wheel, would be at or near the rim. There could still be a lot of empty space between them.

There must be some thing wrong with the idea that a wheel won't slow down by increasing the load on it. That can't be right. Also, a flyball governor reduced the steam flow, when the engine increased it's speed, to slow it down.

The wheels turned very slow. When pendulums are hanging down, they have translating motion,(not rotating), no angular acceleration, there for no centrifugal inertia forces.

The wheels were different and unusual but, it's still no excuse to through your brains out a window----------Sam

[thx4]

FWEIW,
It seams more likely that the wheels were made big in diameter to increase the torque. Which means the weights needed to drive the wheel, would be at or near the rim. There could still be a lot of empty space between them.

By the way, happy holidays to all.

@Sam, hard to think otherwise.

There must be some thing wrong with the idea that a wheel won't slow down by increasing the load on it. That can't be right. Also, a flyball governor reduced the steam flow, when the engine increased it's speed, to slow it down.

Worse still, how could you operate a wheel at full speed without a clutch?
The wheel was at a standstill and then it was launched with the load?
I'd give anything to see the film again 3 centuries ago.
Essential questions without serious answers...

[Kattla]

The wheel was at a standstill and then it was launched with the load?
I'd give anything to see the film again 3 centuries ago.

The earlier wheels was overbalanced just about all the time. So even when stopped, they would remain "ready to work".

This do match up very well with the oneway bearing swingers model , since those swingers don't reset before they reach the bottom.
But it do need something to encourage the swingers to move. And this something shouldn't affect the centre of mass too much.

I did it by shaking the entire assembly. Which was way overkill, but it did the job , and kinda proved the concept.
But, to respect Fletcher , i'll not post too many suggestions on it. At least not until i actually tested them. Things can sometime work
fine in my head, but once applied to a rotary mechanism, things sometimes don't go as planned.

And, 50 RPM isn't really that slow for wheels as large as those Bessler made. It is close to one turn every second. Apply that to the external
pendulums, it is quite a bit for something that long to swing at that rate. That puzzles me, but it goes a long way to explain why he kept the
weights closer to the centre.

Made a quick sketch of my experiment. What is very easy to miss in this thread, is that the swingers sits on oneway bearings. And, there are
more of them. I just did 2 for the sake of simplicity. And 4, but 2 seemed to work better.