Pair of Pairs

[Fletcher]

A thought occurred to me this morning re the 'T' bar pendulums shown in the Merseberg drawings.

There was a lot of discussion some time ago about the weighted 'T' bar & its purpose ? Most agree that it could have been used as a speed regulator. I think it was Jonathan at the time that suggested moving/sliding the weights placement might change the period.

It would also change the center of gyration of the pendulum setup.

[ken_behrendt]

I consider those external pendula on the Merseberg wheel illustrations to be a distraction that, potentially, can lead the Bessler researcher astray as he attempts to unravel the inner mystery of Bessler's wheels.

We've seen a plethora of hypotheses on this Discussion Board over the last year as to what the "real" function of those external pendula was. It's been noted by other researchers that the "natural" frequency of the pendula seems to be close to the unloaded rotation rate of the wheel, so it would, most likely, indicate that the pendula served to smooth out the motion of the drum and, perhaps, to help maximize it's power output by preventing it from accelerating up to a velocity at which its power output would drop off due to an increase of CF acting on its internal weight shifting mechanisms that would disable them to a certain degree.

And, of course, there is also the possibility that the pendula were merely a hypnotic distraction Bessler added to confuse the reverse engineers in the paying crowds that viewed his inventions.


ken

[Fletcher]

They were only ever seen in the drawings, never physically displayed.

[rlortie]

Jim_mich,

What happened to this "Pair of Pairs" thread? By the end of page two it goes astray and the author disappears. Obviously I can see why, but where do you stand on this concept.

You were doing great for a while and then sort of dried up. Have you lost interest in the idea, if so I believe you are making a mistake.

I am pushing forward with my pair of pairs concept and the glue is drying as I type this. Tomorrow will tell me if I should not have taken a short cut using a modified previous concept.

Ralph

[jim_mich]

What more is there to say? A 'pair of pairs' of weights (along the line of those hammer guys on the toys page) seemed like it might take us somewhere. But after spending much time without any headway, I've backed off and I'm trying another path. I don't 'throw away' the idea. I just let is simmer and stew on a back burner awhile. Maybe it will ferment into something workable? I've worked with these 'pair of pairs' long enough to have a fairly good feel for how they work. Quite frankly every way that I've tried to use them ends up balancing. The old conservation of energy hits me straight smack between the eyes.

Bessler's wheel was so much more than just a little out of balance; it was a lot out of balance. This leads me to think that there may be some unique special mechanism that causes forces to be used in some unique unusual way so that the wheel stays out of balance all the time. I don't think we should be looking for a mechanism to cause out of balance but rather we should be looking for a mechanism that causes an "out of force", which then produces the out of balance.

I'm probably not making sense here?

I'm a believer in short threads. After the topic has been tossed around and has been thoroughly discussed then it deserves to take a rest until someone finds a reason to resurrect it.

[pstroud]

Pair of pairs... Great idea that I'm working into current designs and testing.

I'm working on the concept of designing balanced wheels with mechanisms to push/pull them into an out of balance state. I'm seeing many more advantages than my previous actions to designing out of balanced wheels and then try to over-power its control.

Preston.

[ken_behrendt]

Jim wrote:

Bessler's wheel was so much more than just a little out of balance; it was a lot out of balance.

I agree. The "robust" acceleration of the Kassel wheel led me to the conclusion that the CG of the device's active weight set must have been located several inches from the center of the axle. That's a big shift.

I still have not abandoned the "pair of pairs" type mechanism although, quite recently, I did make a brief (and failed) return to the single, self-shifting type mechanism.

Bessler has given a very important clue on the "toy page". I think that page was the one that was used to replace the final illustrations that showed the secret mechanism he used in his wheels. However, I think that he did not want to leave the reader completely flat and disappointed so he left that clue. Basically, it tells us that the CG of an opposed pair of horizontally orientated weights is always shifted toward one side of the wheels axle. I've embraced the "pair of pairs" concept for the meantime and assume that there was really an opposed set of mechanisms, each of which contained two weights of equal mass. Or, as I say, each mechanism contained a "shifter" weight and a "drive" weight.

I have tried a wide variety of mechanisms using just two weights and, of course, found no success. However, I think that I have only scratched the surface of this concept and intend to continue exploring it.

Sooner or later, one of us is going to hit the jackpot with a "general" solution to the secret of Bessler's one-directional wheels...I hope it happens this year.



ken

[bluesgtr44]

Hey Jim....

Bessler's wheel was so much more than just a little out of balance; it was a lot out of balance. This leads me to think that there may be some unique special mechanism that causes forces to be used in some unique unusual way so that the wheel stays out of balance all the time. I don't think we should be looking for a mechanism to cause out of balance but rather we should be looking for a mechanism that causes an "out of force", which then produces the out of balance.

This is where I am, Jim. Everything I have put together up to this point leads me to believe that there has to be more than one component. These components are independent, yet interconnected. The wheel is in the way....it holds the imbalance in check. I am using springs to try and create the "out of force" scenario you are talking about....I just have not been able to spend a whole lot of time on it. The simulations take so long to complete.

I think there may be other ways to create that "out of force" action...this was just an easy way for me to adapt it to WM2D. Basically, creating an elllipse trapped inside of a concentric...and it can only apply itself to one side of the concentric. I don't know if there is a way to have the ellipse maintain its force and still be eccentric....it IS going to want to be a concentric too!


Steve

[Jon J Hutton]

I realize this of course is not the Bessler wheel...but it is interesting to play around with. If you add more weight or change the pivot point a 1/4 from where it is, it keels. It does follow the clue pair of pairs, and fat horses wandering aimlessly. Aaahhhhh who knows.

Have fun

[Patrick]

Hi Jon;
Good design,
- dynamic fulcrum,
- mass passing through the axis,
- innovative weight implementation.
A+
A few tweaks and it will keep running!
--

[ken_behrendt]

Jon...

Your device reminds me of something that Ralph was working on (I think he intended to turn it into a windmill or something).

I think if you let the simulation Run with air resistance, then it will eventually stall out when it finds a low energy equilibrium position. But, overall, you did a nice job with WM2D's slot tool.


ken

[Patrick]

Hi Ken;
Why not incorporate a design like this in your daily updates? It is far superior to any of your designs to date. I wanted to send you one similar to this (except it ran continually) months ago but you refused?

[Paul]

I believe this: if the program "WM2D" had in his simulation also the centrifugal/centripetal (inertia) force the mystery of the Bessler wheel would be resolved. Maybe the two guys with the hammer (toy page) are moved by centrifugal force.

Paul

EDIT:
Ops, my mistake. WM2D also considers these "appearing forces" (centrifugal/centripetal). It will be precise ?

In the picture below I see WM2D considers the centrifugal force (inertia): The weights "B" move towards the outside for effect of the centrifugal force. The weigh "A" are moved via pulley by the "B" weights shift.

[ken_behrendt]

Patrick wrote:

Why not incorporate a design like this in your daily updates? It is far superior to any of your designs to date.

The problem with this design is that it requires the "spirograph" type arm to pass through the space where the wheel's axle would be. I am not convinced that Bessler's wheels used such a mechanism. At most, I might grudgingly admit that his earlier wheels may have had diametrically bored holes through the solid one-piece axles so as to allow rods or control lines to pass through them (I believe that he may have re-used the earlier axles in later larger models of this wheels, but then routed control lines around and away from the axle. He did not then fill the axle holes in, but allowed skeptical viewers to place their hands inside the wheel's drum to "grope" the axle. They were probably told that the holes where there to prove that the axles did not conceal any hidden mechanism to power the wheel. This, of course, would have been a "cover" story).

Anyway, there is far too much swinging about of the parts in this approach as far as I am concerned. I think the motion of the parts in Bessler's wheels was far more constrained.


ken

[Paul]

gentlemen, look carefully at the last drawing (143) of Bessler. Making a few modifications succeeded to obtain a very interesting movement however applying it correctly to the wheel is very difficult

Paul