A good lead ?

[thx4]

https://youtu.be/lz_pesorQ5E

The center of gravity changes, and the weights oscillate by about 2cm, with the support boards fixed crosswise on the same axis.
We're approaching a disc of inertia, but a little unusual in that gravity intervenes, causing an imbalance that's barely perceptible, but very much there, limiting the effect of friction.
Next step:
Modify the speed, with one support rotating at around 2x the speed of the other.
Perhaps also add a third support (with the fundamental difference), i.e. not attached to the other two, but simply joined during rotation.

[thx4]

https://youtu.be/sec56M-o9G0

MT51 peut fonctionner, comme je l'ai dit la semaine dernière, pas d'énergie pas de mouvement continu... lol
En cherchant ce matin, j'ai remis en place avec quelques modifications le balancier, après quelques manipulations, je m'aperçois que la roue peut transférer un peu d'énergie au balancier grâce au cliquet.
Le ratio du disque d'inertie et balancier est primordial, sans le faire exprès je ne suis pas très loin, il faut que j'allège un peu les planches...
Les poids (billes) font 800gr au total plus les planches (?) je pèserai demain l'ensemble, le balancier fait 750 grs.
Il y a échange entre les deux éléments, l'un donne plus (les planches), mais le balancier à son apogée redonne un peu plus à la roue selon moi...
Il reste a faire un cliquet digne du concept, à suivre.
On connait tous le transfert d'énergie d'un balancier a un autre lorsque que deux balanciers sont sur un même axe, en ait 'il de même entre un disque d'inertie et un balancier ?

MT51 can work, as I said last week, no energy no continuous movement... lol
Looking around this morning, I put the balance wheel back in place with a few modifications, and after a few manipulations, I realize that the wheel can transfer a little energy to the balance wheel thanks to the pawl.
The ratio between the flywheel and the balance is crucial, and I'm not very far off without meaning to. I need to lighten the boards a bit...
The weights (balls) total 800gr plus the boards (?) I'll weigh the whole thing tomorrow, the balance wheel is 750 grs.
There's an exchange between the two elements, one gives more (the planks), but the pendulum at its peak gives a little more back to the wheel in my opinion...
All that's left is to make a ratchet worthy of the concept, to be continued.
We're all familiar with the transfer of energy from one balance wheel to another when two balance wheels are on the same axis, but is the same true between an inertia disc and a balance wheel?

[Fletcher]

Nice thx4 ..

[thx4]

I must have missed something, but I haven't seen any MT Apologia yet? Didn't he want to keep us away from it?
My intuition is pushing me in that direction, knowing that intuition is the worst mistress. You only need to play poker to know that 🙂.
Just move your arms a few degrees and you'll see that ..., it could be very simple...You have to reset of course.
I'm working on it at a slow pace the weather has become very nice here....

[thx4]

https://youtu.be/qS7Fv2C0WBg

Small control model.
Each arm moves a few degrees in the desired direction of rotation...and returns to its point of origin.

[agor95]

knowing that intuition is the worst mistress.

Solaries is another mistress you can give you a good tanning :)

[thx4]

https://youtu.be/l59PiXKHE3c

Modèle non fonctionnel
Bien que B laisse entendre qu'il n'est utile d'être très précis au niveau de quelques grammes, dans ce cas précis c'est nécessaire.
J'aime bien cette idée. Je reverrai ma copie après les vacances.

Non-functional model
Although B implies that it's not useful to be very precise at the level of a few grams, in this case it's necessary.
I like this idea. I'll revise my copy after the vacations.

[thx4]

https://youtu.be/pAl2jL-e2D0

New test

[thx4]

Je suis sur une idée prometteuse mais pour l'instant je ne parviens pas physiquement à la réaliser correctement, il faut dire que les conditions météo n'arrangent rien.
L'idée tient dans une simple assiette ou disque, aucun poids à soulever.
Selon moi vous avez sous les yeux l'essentiel du moteur B, non ce n'est pas une blague, manque la deuxième pièce. A suivre.

[Art]

---"the second part is missing. "----

I'm betting there is more than two parts ! : )

Is that an eccentric axle in the drawing ?

[thx4]

There are two main parts and, of course, small accessories that have their importance.
For your 2nd question, the axis is centered.
See you soon.

[thx4]

https://ahp.li/d22a62f629e34c3ff1f6.mp4

I asked Chatgpt to make me a gravity-aware animated gif, this is the best I got after a good hour.
Probably the best idea I've had on this subject and probably the right one 😉.
We have a disk with one segment missing as the first sketch shows, we have a second piece that represents the missing segment in purple on the animation.
The two elements are independent of each other but fixed on the same axis with bearings, the purple segment oscillates between two stops (red and blue) which are fixed on the large disc.
In principle, when the blue stop is at around 5:30 a.m. clockwise, the mauve segment is in contact with it, so the wheel is balanced and continues its trajectory with the initial momentum.
When the blue stop is at 11 o'clock, the mauve segment falls on the red stop, the imbalance drives the wheel ... and so on.
That's the theory, now it's time to get down to the nitty-gritty.
It's very simple, too simple B is going to be angry...
See you soon.

[johannesbender]

It reminds me of this one i did , except your design is much simpler , good luck .

Honestly the non radial type of concepts is an area i did not dive very deep in to , the latest i looked in to was :

version 1 :
A disc with around 12 levered weights like the top image equally spaced , but there is a stop halway in between each weight , and each weight is held in place by some latch , they are all in balance , then as any lever comes in to around 1 it gets released (lets say on the right side) , and if any released lever reaches 6 it gets caught again , this creates a torque , but the effect breaks after a certain amount on the right has released latches , it would seem going all the way to 6 for a reset wont work like that .

The second version does the same , but releases any weight at around 6:30 7-ish , and catches them at past 12 as they pivot over to reset , but the same result takes place , it would have torque to the right but as soon as a certain amount in total is released its going to produce a counter directional torque that stops it .

I think such a concept like this i mentioned now which is releasing then dropping on to stops and catching has the same problems of a radial change approach , the weight that gets released had to be reset within a limited time such that not to much weights get released at once which would stop the torque , and that would be a required lift.

Further than this i have not thought of any other designs (apart from long ago RB types) , to be fair the answer might still be a radius change or something else, i was just annoyed at it .

Edits : making a bunch of faults texting on my mobile

Although i know these were failed ideas , just to be clear and complete the above ↑ by adding the images.
Weighted levers are latched in balanced positions , released at around A , and re-latched/caught at B .

ETOA , i looked at every weight release , and every 2nd and 3rd...

[thx4]

Before starting another proto, while watching this video again I'm thinking that maybe I'm missing something, I'll reassemble this proto and add a weight on the pawl and see. My finger only presses on the pawl without pushing it, but not on...

https://youtu.be/sec56M-o9G0?si=OyjRTIuhdZkVNAJa

[SHADOW]

Un ressort peut être!?