First of all I realize that most have been here (on this site) longer than I have and have been trying this more years than I. I don't want to insult your intelligence but would like to make some statements and am open to criticism if they are incorrect.
Many are trying to solve this ou/pm puzzle. Some are using water, magnets, wind and weights. most all of these have a common point and that is some type of lift.
So if the lift fails to produce ou/pm the wheel fails. Does anyone have ideas on how you can produce a type of lift that will lift higher than its ratio or more than the weights ratio.
New lifts needed
Moderator: scott
-
Jon J Hutton
- Aficionado
- Posts: 922
- Joined: Fri Dec 23, 2005 4:41 pm
- Location: Somewhere
re: New lifts needed
It's easy to do once. Repeating it is the problem.
fAt
fAt
-
AgingYoung
- Aficionado
- Posts: 761
- Joined: Sun Apr 03, 2005 4:44 am
- Location: Houston, TX
re: New lifts needed
Jon
I think that is the crux of the problem. No matter how much work falling weight produces you need to require less work to get it back to the top. I think your statement might be better put that if the lift requires as much torque than you get with the weight falling it won't work. The weight is going to produce as much torque as it will when it's caused to be unbalanced (how ever you manage to do that). No matter what that quantity is you need to use less of it to get the weight back up.
I am really fascinated by Murilo's chain because of the way I look at what I think he has. In one moment the chain is at zero degrees then in the next moment he's in a vertical drop. It's like a virtual time travel of the forces.
Gene
So if the lift fails to produce ou/pm the wheel fails.
I think that is the crux of the problem. No matter how much work falling weight produces you need to require less work to get it back to the top. I think your statement might be better put that if the lift requires as much torque than you get with the weight falling it won't work. The weight is going to produce as much torque as it will when it's caused to be unbalanced (how ever you manage to do that). No matter what that quantity is you need to use less of it to get the weight back up.
I am really fascinated by Murilo's chain because of the way I look at what I think he has. In one moment the chain is at zero degrees then in the next moment he's in a vertical drop. It's like a virtual time travel of the forces.
Gene
Working Model 2D
[It is] the glory of God to conceal a thing: but the honour of kings [is] to search out a matter.
[It is] the glory of God to conceal a thing: but the honour of kings [is] to search out a matter.
-
ken_behrendt
- Addict
- Posts: 3487
- Joined: Wed Mar 02, 2005 7:45 am
- Location: new jersey, usa
- Contact:
re: New lifts needed
Jon wrote:
So what does that leave? I focus on trying to find a mechanism that automatically shifts the CG of a set of weights to one side of the wheel's axle as the wheel rotates and carries the weights near its rim along with it. In such a wheel, the CG is constantly climbing with respect to the moving wheel, but would appear stationary to an outside observer! To an outside observer, the CG appears to be floating in space as the wheel rapidly rotates about it. But, for the wheel, the climbing CG provides a constant driving torque.
ken
It is not possible to get a falling weight to lift another weight of equal mass to a higher level than the starting elevation of the first weight. So, any type of gravity wheel or other device based on this "principle" of operation is doomed to failure.So if the lift fails to produce ou/pm the wheel fails. Does anyone have ideas on how you can produce a type of lift that will lift higher than its ratio or more than the weights ratio.
So what does that leave? I focus on trying to find a mechanism that automatically shifts the CG of a set of weights to one side of the wheel's axle as the wheel rotates and carries the weights near its rim along with it. In such a wheel, the CG is constantly climbing with respect to the moving wheel, but would appear stationary to an outside observer! To an outside observer, the CG appears to be floating in space as the wheel rapidly rotates about it. But, for the wheel, the climbing CG provides a constant driving torque.
ken
On 7/6/06, I found, in any overbalanced gravity wheel with rotation rate, ω, axle to CG distance d, and CG dip angle φ, the average vertical velocity of its drive weights is downward and given by:
Vaver = -2(√2)πdωcosφ
Vaver = -2(√2)πdωcosφ
re: New lifts needed
Ken wrote:
Then.. fAt wrote:
Problem is, I have a new daughter coming into this world on the 9th (perhaps sooner!), and I have work obligations which don't give me the time to get physical on the build! Seems like it's always the case! Perhaps it's the Bessler Curse! LOL!
I think, well I am almost 100% sure that it is possible.. And not only an equal weight, but a much heavier one too! Well.. That's if my current epiphany holds some merit! I have the concept, but not the exact design at this stage. There is a secondary shifter mechanism in place also, which is taken from one of the MT's.It is not possible to get a falling weight to lift another weight of equal mass to a higher level than the starting elevation of the first weight. So, any type of gravity wheel or other device based on this "principle" of operation is doomed to failure.
Then.. fAt wrote:
Yes... That's where I am getting stuck at this stage! I am now trying to figure out how to reset the mechanism so that the dynamics can be repeated! I think I have some idea on how to do this now..It's easy to do once. Repeating it is the problem.
Problem is, I have a new daughter coming into this world on the 9th (perhaps sooner!), and I have work obligations which don't give me the time to get physical on the build! Seems like it's always the case! Perhaps it's the Bessler Curse! LOL!
The limits of the possible can only be defined by going beyond them into the impossible.
-
AgingYoung
- Aficionado
- Posts: 761
- Joined: Sun Apr 03, 2005 4:44 am
- Location: Houston, TX
re: New lifts needed
Congratulations, Spiros 
Working Model 2D
[It is] the glory of God to conceal a thing: but the honour of kings [is] to search out a matter.
[It is] the glory of God to conceal a thing: but the honour of kings [is] to search out a matter.
re: New lifts needed
Thank You Gene! I will post a photo up as soon as I can next week!
The limits of the possible can only be defined by going beyond them into the impossible.
re: New lifts needed
a good drawing will do, but a picture is nicer.
Marchello E.
-- May the force lift you up. In case it doesn't, try something else.---
-- May the force lift you up. In case it doesn't, try something else.---
re: New lifts needed
Spiros,
Thats my birthday, I hope she doesn't turn out like me, Aries is a crazy birth sign.
Re Ken's words
"It is not possible to get a falling weight to lift another weight of equal mass to a higher level than the starting elevation of the first weight. So, any type of gravity wheel or other device based on this "principle" of operation is doomed to failure."
The good old English reply to this is "bollocks". It is possible, I have done it and as Bessler said about the 1:4 ratio "this would be perpetual motion itself".
Ken, just because you can't see how, doesn't mean it can't be done.
Keep your mind open, please do not close it due to your education.
It is not only possible but easy, as John Harrison said, "engineers think in straight lines, you need to think in curves".
Keep at it.
Pete.
Thats my birthday, I hope she doesn't turn out like me, Aries is a crazy birth sign.
Re Ken's words
"It is not possible to get a falling weight to lift another weight of equal mass to a higher level than the starting elevation of the first weight. So, any type of gravity wheel or other device based on this "principle" of operation is doomed to failure."
The good old English reply to this is "bollocks". It is possible, I have done it and as Bessler said about the 1:4 ratio "this would be perpetual motion itself".
Ken, just because you can't see how, doesn't mean it can't be done.
Keep your mind open, please do not close it due to your education.
It is not only possible but easy, as John Harrison said, "engineers think in straight lines, you need to think in curves".
Keep at it.
Pete.
re: New lifts needed
Ken .. preload the system in one form or another. The problem is restoring it after it has been activated.
-
ken_behrendt
- Addict
- Posts: 3487
- Joined: Wed Mar 02, 2005 7:45 am
- Location: new jersey, usa
- Contact:
re: New lifts needed
SeaWasp wrote:
However, in the case of an overbalanced wheel, the weights on the descending side do, for a brief time near the 3:00 position, actually fall a farther distance than the weights near the 9:00 position rise. This obviously does cause a net loss of gravitational potential energy for the weights involved. It's the weights near the 12:00 and 6:00 positions that are the problem. Their motion is mostly horizontal and requires a net increase in gravitational potential energy which would seem to use up any energy delivered from the system by the weights undergoing mainly vertical motion near the 3:00 and 9:00 positions. I've attached a past sketch I did below which illustrates some of what I'm stating here.
One might think that, because of this, even if one could build a chronically imbalanced wheel, then it still would not turn because it would have a continuous net loss of gravitational potential energy. That is, it would behave like the several designs that have been presented on this Discussion Board that, while chronically imbalanced, did not turn because, once they started to rotate, counter torques immediately developed that cancelled out any driving torque they possessed due to their imbalance.
However, we are reasonable certain that Bessler's wheels were chronically out of balance and did turn. Apparently, his design did not develop any counter torques and was free to accelerate with an unimpeded driving torque. The only way that I can see this happening is if the weight shifting mechanisms within the wheel were independent of each other and anything outside of the wheel. That is, each mechanism would shift its own CG without requiring any sort of external connections or even any interconnections between the individual mechanisms.
I think this is one of the factors that led Count Karl to declare the mechanism Bessler allowed him to view was "simple". The more complex a mechanism becomes, the less chance it will have of not producing counter torques when the wheel is allowed to turn freely.
ken
Physically, it would seem to be an impossibility for one weight to drop a given distance and then for another weight to rise by a greater distance or for a heavier weight to rise by the same distance that the first fell.I think, well I am almost 100% sure that it is possible.. And not only an equal weight, but a much heavier one too! Well.. That's if my current epiphany holds some merit! I have the concept, but not the exact design at this stage.
However, in the case of an overbalanced wheel, the weights on the descending side do, for a brief time near the 3:00 position, actually fall a farther distance than the weights near the 9:00 position rise. This obviously does cause a net loss of gravitational potential energy for the weights involved. It's the weights near the 12:00 and 6:00 positions that are the problem. Their motion is mostly horizontal and requires a net increase in gravitational potential energy which would seem to use up any energy delivered from the system by the weights undergoing mainly vertical motion near the 3:00 and 9:00 positions. I've attached a past sketch I did below which illustrates some of what I'm stating here.
One might think that, because of this, even if one could build a chronically imbalanced wheel, then it still would not turn because it would have a continuous net loss of gravitational potential energy. That is, it would behave like the several designs that have been presented on this Discussion Board that, while chronically imbalanced, did not turn because, once they started to rotate, counter torques immediately developed that cancelled out any driving torque they possessed due to their imbalance.
However, we are reasonable certain that Bessler's wheels were chronically out of balance and did turn. Apparently, his design did not develop any counter torques and was free to accelerate with an unimpeded driving torque. The only way that I can see this happening is if the weight shifting mechanisms within the wheel were independent of each other and anything outside of the wheel. That is, each mechanism would shift its own CG without requiring any sort of external connections or even any interconnections between the individual mechanisms.
I think this is one of the factors that led Count Karl to declare the mechanism Bessler allowed him to view was "simple". The more complex a mechanism becomes, the less chance it will have of not producing counter torques when the wheel is allowed to turn freely.
ken
- Attachments
-
On 7/6/06, I found, in any overbalanced gravity wheel with rotation rate, ω, axle to CG distance d, and CG dip angle φ, the average vertical velocity of its drive weights is downward and given by:
Vaver = -2(√2)πdωcosφ
Vaver = -2(√2)πdωcosφ
Re: re: New lifts needed
That is exactly correct.Fletcher wrote:Ken .. preload the system in one form or another. The problem is restoring it after it has been activated.
Ken... A preloaded system can be used to lift a much heavier weight with a much smaller one. One way is to use springs that preload the heavier weight. Once the system is in balance, a small effort is only required to shift it! Now where the scissors come into it... Preload the scissor mechanisms with a spring and voila.. You have a fast range of movement which can be shifted by a much smaller weight.Ken wrote:Physically, it would seem to be an impossibility for one weight to drop a given distance and then for another weight to rise by a greater distance or for a heavier weight to rise by the same distance that the first fell.
The problem though, as Fletcher and fAt have stated is getting the process to reactivate itself while the wheel is turning. What works on one side of the wheel will be much more difficult on the other side to shift.
Now, this is perhaps where the pair of pairs system can come into play. That is, balance the forces from "both sides" of the wheel. So that while one side can shift more easily, it will help the other side to restore!
This is where I am at in my thought processes so far.. When I can get the time to actually think about it! lol!
Clarkie... My daughter was born on the 10th of March! So she is a Pisces! Although her traits seem very Arian at this stage! lol!
Spiros.
The limits of the possible can only be defined by going beyond them into the impossible.
-
LustInBlack
- Devotee
- Posts: 1964
- Joined: Thu Apr 06, 2006 10:30 am
re: New lifts needed
Hello,
I've read a lot on this forum in the last few days and I decided to register.
I have an idea that I didn't see elsewhere, maybe you can tell me what you think about it..
Every design I saw send the weights inside the wheel and the ones that send the weights outside the wheel, do it on the top.
My idea is different.
Take a look and give me your comments.
I've read a lot on this forum in the last few days and I decided to register.
I have an idea that I didn't see elsewhere, maybe you can tell me what you think about it..
Every design I saw send the weights inside the wheel and the ones that send the weights outside the wheel, do it on the top.
My idea is different.
Take a look and give me your comments.
- Attachments
-
- The wheel in the background is the "working" wheel.. The weights on this wheel shifts the CG.
I try to keep the CG shifted by using a second wheel, the foreground wheel serve as a guide for the weights.
I am currently testing it, I need to provide s
re: New lifts needed
In that case you didn't looked good enough...
Try this:
Take a long piece of metal or wood, and attache two equal weights on either side with a piece of string, and pivot it in the middle (just a simple lever system). hang it somewhere where it stays horizontal. Now place your hand under one of the weights, and lift it a very small bit. You will notice that the lever will try to rotate very fast.
This lever system is your "working" wheel, but the weight you'd lift is on the other wheel and will try to run the other way around. And in doing so, it will stop lifting the weight of first wheel...
Maybe it needs a better explaination, but sorry, it will not move at all.
Try this:
Take a long piece of metal or wood, and attache two equal weights on either side with a piece of string, and pivot it in the middle (just a simple lever system). hang it somewhere where it stays horizontal. Now place your hand under one of the weights, and lift it a very small bit. You will notice that the lever will try to rotate very fast.
This lever system is your "working" wheel, but the weight you'd lift is on the other wheel and will try to run the other way around. And in doing so, it will stop lifting the weight of first wheel...
Maybe it needs a better explaination, but sorry, it will not move at all.
Marchello E.
-- May the force lift you up. In case it doesn't, try something else.---
-- May the force lift you up. In case it doesn't, try something else.---
-
LustInBlack
- Devotee
- Posts: 1964
- Joined: Thu Apr 06, 2006 10:30 am
re: New lifts needed
Hi,
Yes I understood, but in fact, it is spinning..
The guide is not fixed, the weights will follow the guide and fall.
I think you see the weights as being fixed to the second wheel, my drawing wasn't very good..
The only problem I have right now, is that the weight at 4 o'clock will bind to the bottom [you should take a look at my other thread (problem at 5-6 oclock)].
I got the wheel to start very fast with springs fixed to the side of the working wheel, trying to keep the weights to follow the guide, but the problem was still that a weight shifted enough to go backward on the guide.
I will try with another geometry, to get the left weights to be nearer to the center and the right weights to be farther away from the wheel.
I'll be back soon to post an animation...
Yes I understood, but in fact, it is spinning..
The guide is not fixed, the weights will follow the guide and fall.
I think you see the weights as being fixed to the second wheel, my drawing wasn't very good..
The only problem I have right now, is that the weight at 4 o'clock will bind to the bottom [you should take a look at my other thread (problem at 5-6 oclock)].
I got the wheel to start very fast with springs fixed to the side of the working wheel, trying to keep the weights to follow the guide, but the problem was still that a weight shifted enough to go backward on the guide.
I will try with another geometry, to get the left weights to be nearer to the center and the right weights to be farther away from the wheel.
I'll be back soon to post an animation...