Members,
Let us say, we have a wheel that turns because of Overunity, Overbalence, a wheel turning, because of falling weight.
What is the best RPM, for this wheel to be turning at. ( The Sweet Spot.)?
At 60 RPM the CF is throwing the weight out and the power of the overunity is not as powerful as it could be. Meaning, the power at the axle is not 100 percent.
If this wheel is turning at 30 RPM, the CF is only acting on the weights, at 50 percent. Would this alow the wheel to have more power at the axle?
What is the RPM?
What is the Formula?
Barrell98
Sweet Spot, For R.P.M.
Moderator: scott
re: Sweet Spot, For R.P.M.
Welcome Barrell98,
CF is dependent on three things. The first is obviously the weight of the weight. The second factor is the RPM speed of the wheel. The third is the radial distance from of the weight from the wheel center.
The formula that I use to calculate CF is...
CF = 0.000028416 x Wt x R x RPM x RPM
where Wt = pounds, R = inches, and RPM = Revolution Per Minute
The constant 0.000028416 is only good for these English units of measurement.
If you want to find the RPM at which CF equals weight the formula is...
RPM = SquareRoot( 1 / 0.000028416 / R)
A weight at 24 inch radius spinning at 38.2924 RPM will produce CF equal to the weight.
A weight at 52.058 inch radius spinning at 26 RPM will produce CF equal to the weight.
A weight at 72 inch radius (12 foot diameter) spinning at 22.1081 RPM will produce CF equal to the weight.
If the radius doubles then the CF doubles.
If the RPM doubles then the CF quadruples.
CF can be both a friend and a foe. Make friends with it and it can help you. Consider it your enemy and it will hinder you.
CF is dependent on three things. The first is obviously the weight of the weight. The second factor is the RPM speed of the wheel. The third is the radial distance from of the weight from the wheel center.
The formula that I use to calculate CF is...
CF = 0.000028416 x Wt x R x RPM x RPM
where Wt = pounds, R = inches, and RPM = Revolution Per Minute
The constant 0.000028416 is only good for these English units of measurement.
If you want to find the RPM at which CF equals weight the formula is...
RPM = SquareRoot( 1 / 0.000028416 / R)
A weight at 24 inch radius spinning at 38.2924 RPM will produce CF equal to the weight.
A weight at 52.058 inch radius spinning at 26 RPM will produce CF equal to the weight.
A weight at 72 inch radius (12 foot diameter) spinning at 22.1081 RPM will produce CF equal to the weight.
If the radius doubles then the CF doubles.
If the RPM doubles then the CF quadruples.
CF can be both a friend and a foe. Make friends with it and it can help you. Consider it your enemy and it will hinder you.
re: Sweet Spot, For R.P.M.
Thanks for the information, Jim
Does this mean,
A weight at 24 inch radius spinning at 38.2924 RPM will produce a spinning wheel that has no extra power at the axle?
Or because this wheel is moving, because of the weight, it will coast at 38 RPM, governing itself?
Maybe this CF only comes into play, at a percentage, depending on the RPM.
I would wounder what RPM a wheel could have, without CF involvement.
I think CF is always in play, with any RPM, from 1 up.
Barrell98
Does this mean,
A weight at 24 inch radius spinning at 38.2924 RPM will produce a spinning wheel that has no extra power at the axle?
Or because this wheel is moving, because of the weight, it will coast at 38 RPM, governing itself?
Maybe this CF only comes into play, at a percentage, depending on the RPM.
I would wounder what RPM a wheel could have, without CF involvement.
I think CF is always in play, with any RPM, from 1 up.
Barrell98
re: Sweet Spot, For R.P.M.
I have a thought about this...
The RPM rate, where the CF equals to the weight is the maximum RPM of an operational gravity driven wheel. This is the Rpm, where it begins to act as an active brake and maintain its constant rotational speed.
Is this statement right? Or can be possibly right?
I think it looks correct in the case of Bessler's wheels.
Greg
The RPM rate, where the CF equals to the weight is the maximum RPM of an operational gravity driven wheel. This is the Rpm, where it begins to act as an active brake and maintain its constant rotational speed.
Is this statement right? Or can be possibly right?
I think it looks correct in the case of Bessler's wheels.
Greg
re: Sweet Spot, For R.P.M.
CF is always in play at any RPM except zero. A rotating wheel will always have CF.
A weight that stays at a certain radius (say 24 inches) will never be able to power a wheel. The weights must move about in some manner. As weights move inward or outward CF changes.
If you have the CF of one weight counterbalance the CF of another weight then there is no speed limit on the wheel.
If weights are on the ends of levers then the direction of CF relative the the pivot point is all that matters. If the wheel's axle and the lever's fulcrum point and the weight's center are all three in a straight line then CF will not swing the lever. If the lever is at right angles then CF exerts full force on the lever.
We must learn how to use CF to move the weights when and where needed. It will most likely take four weights (a pair of pairs) working together as a unit to make a wheel self turn.
Make CF your friend! Don't fight it and don't ignore it.
A weight that stays at a certain radius (say 24 inches) will never be able to power a wheel. The weights must move about in some manner. As weights move inward or outward CF changes.
If you have the CF of one weight counterbalance the CF of another weight then there is no speed limit on the wheel.
If weights are on the ends of levers then the direction of CF relative the the pivot point is all that matters. If the wheel's axle and the lever's fulcrum point and the weight's center are all three in a straight line then CF will not swing the lever. If the lever is at right angles then CF exerts full force on the lever.
We must learn how to use CF to move the weights when and where needed. It will most likely take four weights (a pair of pairs) working together as a unit to make a wheel self turn.
Make CF your friend! Don't fight it and don't ignore it.
-
ken_behrendt
- Addict
- Posts: 3487
- Joined: Wed Mar 02, 2005 7:45 am
- Location: new jersey, usa
- Contact:
re: Sweet Spot, For R.P.M.
Greg wrote:
Unlike Jim, I see CF as a hinderance to the operation of Bessler's wheels that would, at any speed greater than zero rpm's, begin to interfere with the shifting processes taking place within the individual mechanisms located near the wheel's rim. This interference would make it difficult for the wheel's mechanisms to keep their CG displaced on the wheel's descending side. As a result, with increasing wheel velocity and rotation rate, the CG of the wheel's weights would slowly rotate until it was almost directly below the axle. As a result, the driving torque acting on the wheel would rapidly decrease until a point was reached where it was exactly equal to the counter torque acting on the wheel due to bearing friction and air resistance. At that point the wheel would have no net torque and would achieve a constant rotational rate.
ken
Actually, we have no idea exactly what the CF was acting on the weights in Bessler's wheels when they had reached their terminal rotations rates.The RPM rate, where the CF equals to the weight is the maximum RPM of an operational gravity driven wheel. This is the Rpm, where it begins to act as an active brake and maintain its constant rotational speed.
Unlike Jim, I see CF as a hinderance to the operation of Bessler's wheels that would, at any speed greater than zero rpm's, begin to interfere with the shifting processes taking place within the individual mechanisms located near the wheel's rim. This interference would make it difficult for the wheel's mechanisms to keep their CG displaced on the wheel's descending side. As a result, with increasing wheel velocity and rotation rate, the CG of the wheel's weights would slowly rotate until it was almost directly below the axle. As a result, the driving torque acting on the wheel would rapidly decrease until a point was reached where it was exactly equal to the counter torque acting on the wheel due to bearing friction and air resistance. At that point the wheel would have no net torque and would achieve a constant rotational rate.
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: Sweet Spot, For R.P.M.
Members,
The answers, I was looking for, you've given me. Along with some more questions.
Thanks for the timely replies. This was faster then when I asked a question at school.
It now looks like I will have to deal with a slow moving wheel and make use of some gearing to achieve the required, RPM, for any attachments.
Math, it sure tells the regrettable truth.
Barrell98
PS It looks like this forum, contains allot of talet.
The answers, I was looking for, you've given me. Along with some more questions.
Thanks for the timely replies. This was faster then when I asked a question at school.
It now looks like I will have to deal with a slow moving wheel and make use of some gearing to achieve the required, RPM, for any attachments.
Math, it sure tells the regrettable truth.
Barrell98
PS It looks like this forum, contains allot of talet.
re: Sweet Spot, For R.P.M.
Hi Jim,
The info you said about CF is quite useful. Thank you very much!
I agree that CF can be a friend, but I'm sure that CF itself can't drive a wheel. The question of CF is an interesting thing about Bessler's wheel. I think we can only guess what he did with CF. He had to consider it and work with it on a way, but we don't know how.
I have an intuition wich makes me thinking about that he used the CF to regulate the terminal velocity of his wheels. (in my previous post) I don't know why I think this, only an intuition. Maybe this process is happening by itself once you have a working wheel.
Now I had a thought...
If you have a working wheel, and CF act as your friend, and excert some force for the wheel...
Does not that mean that the wheel will accelerate to destruction?
I can be totally wrong or right, I don't know...
An other idea:
Can we use the CF to turn an overbalanced wheel to an overal balanced one at a certain point of rotation?
Greg
The info you said about CF is quite useful. Thank you very much!
I agree that CF can be a friend, but I'm sure that CF itself can't drive a wheel. The question of CF is an interesting thing about Bessler's wheel. I think we can only guess what he did with CF. He had to consider it and work with it on a way, but we don't know how.
I have an intuition wich makes me thinking about that he used the CF to regulate the terminal velocity of his wheels. (in my previous post) I don't know why I think this, only an intuition. Maybe this process is happening by itself once you have a working wheel.
Now I had a thought...
If you have a working wheel, and CF act as your friend, and excert some force for the wheel...
Does not that mean that the wheel will accelerate to destruction?
I can be totally wrong or right, I don't know...
An other idea:
Can we use the CF to turn an overbalanced wheel to an overal balanced one at a certain point of rotation?
Greg
re: Sweet Spot, For R.P.M.
Ken,
I also have no clear idea about the CF played in JB's wheels.
What I wrote, that was only an intuition. Maybe CF was a hinderance and a friend at the same time...
What you wrote about CF & CG is maked me thinking about.
I'm not quite sure in that. I mean, I don't think that CF and CG are neccesary to be highly connected? These are good questions.
Greg
I also have no clear idea about the CF played in JB's wheels.
What I wrote, that was only an intuition. Maybe CF was a hinderance and a friend at the same time...
What you wrote about CF & CG is maked me thinking about.
I'm not quite sure in that. I mean, I don't think that CF and CG are neccesary to be highly connected? These are good questions.
Greg
-
bluesgtr44
- Devotee
- Posts: 1970
- Joined: Sat Feb 26, 2005 8:31 pm
- Location: U.S.A.
re: Sweet Spot, For R.P.M.
The concept behind a design or build will determine the effect of the counter forces and the role they will play. I can see why there is a difference in how Jim and Ken see these forces...they have different approaches and concepts of how Besslers wheels may have worked. These forces WILL have to be dealt with in some form of fashion...I mean, it has to go 'round, right? I do agree with big Jim...make CF your friend. After all, it isn't going away all by itself...
Steve
Steve
Finding the right solution...is usually a function of asking the right questions. -A. Einstein
re: Sweet Spot, For R.P.M.
Steve,
Kind of anticipated that you would make an entry in this thread :-)
I have ben waiting for you.
I agree that different designs will cause great difference in the roll CF plays. With the right design CF is a very welcome friend and shows it by supplying a usefull CP force.
Some time back I proposed a simple layman's formula:
CF+VG = CP+G-AV of AM, G is constant and cancels,CF and CG show gradient as does AV by change of AM. (VG, velocity of gravity or kinetic)
I have always had a problem with kinetic and inertia regarding a once started or moving object.
Ralph
Kind of anticipated that you would make an entry in this thread :-)
I have ben waiting for you.
I agree that different designs will cause great difference in the roll CF plays. With the right design CF is a very welcome friend and shows it by supplying a usefull CP force.
Some time back I proposed a simple layman's formula:
CF+VG = CP+G-AV of AM, G is constant and cancels,CF and CG show gradient as does AV by change of AM. (VG, velocity of gravity or kinetic)
I have always had a problem with kinetic and inertia regarding a once started or moving object.
Ralph
-
bluesgtr44
- Devotee
- Posts: 1970
- Joined: Sat Feb 26, 2005 8:31 pm
- Location: U.S.A.
re: Sweet Spot, For R.P.M.
Well, it came out a couple of weeks ago that our company is being bought out by a consortium...don't know if that is a good thing or not yet. Also, been a bit hectic with two customer audits in the last month we had to prepare for. One was BMW and man are they tough!
Ralph, hope things are going well for you. I have just been lurking a bit and biting my tongue on some things. The level of the reaction forces that will have to be dealt with is going to be directly related to the application that one uses to drive the wheel. Annnd, if your weights are attached directly to the wheel at symetrical intervals (say 45 degrees), they will be totally at bay to these forces.
As for the RPM aspect of this thread, the Dratschwitz wheel (one directional) seemed to be the fastest at a reported 58 RPM's...the Kassel reached 26 RPM's. Bessler mentions that the wheels output is dependant on the diameter of the wheel...nothing about the speed. Now, just think about a 9 ft. diameter wheel at 58 RPM's and how the CF would affect the weights. I believe I posted a WM2D snapshot of what would happen and the weights were pinned up against the rim very solidly. This was a while back ago and I can't remember the values that were used.
Steve
Ralph, hope things are going well for you. I have just been lurking a bit and biting my tongue on some things. The level of the reaction forces that will have to be dealt with is going to be directly related to the application that one uses to drive the wheel. Annnd, if your weights are attached directly to the wheel at symetrical intervals (say 45 degrees), they will be totally at bay to these forces.
As for the RPM aspect of this thread, the Dratschwitz wheel (one directional) seemed to be the fastest at a reported 58 RPM's...the Kassel reached 26 RPM's. Bessler mentions that the wheels output is dependant on the diameter of the wheel...nothing about the speed. Now, just think about a 9 ft. diameter wheel at 58 RPM's and how the CF would affect the weights. I believe I posted a WM2D snapshot of what would happen and the weights were pinned up against the rim very solidly. This was a while back ago and I can't remember the values that were used.
Steve
Finding the right solution...is usually a function of asking the right questions. -A. Einstein
re: Sweet Spot, For R.P.M.
Steve,
Sorry to here of your company's situation. Do you believe the customer audits are related to those pending a take over?
RPM and CF hold very little influence with me. RPM is an artificial source of motion without producing recoverable power. In other words rev up a massive balanced wheel and it will spin for a long time via inertia, but it will not produce or replace anything. All CF does is fix or attach itself as more mass to the inertial spin.
CF does not help drive a wheel as it is an outward angular force at 180 degree to axis at any given point of direction of rotation. It will pull your wheel apart but will not spin it. It will of course kill or negate any mass or mechanical transference that does provide torque to maintain RPM/CF.
Remember it well! Best explanation of why I shall never "pin".. One needs to make a friend of CF by using it to produce just as much CPF, not unlike a battery there will be a potential between and that is where the sweet spot lays.
Ralph
Sorry to here of your company's situation. Do you believe the customer audits are related to those pending a take over?
I agree, but remember me, I am the guy who said that I would never attach anything to my wheel. :-)The level of the reaction forces that will have to be dealt with is going to be directly related to the application that one uses to drive the wheel. Annnd, if your weights are attached directly to the wheel at symetrical intervals (say 45 degrees), they will be totally at bay to these forces.
RPM and CF hold very little influence with me. RPM is an artificial source of motion without producing recoverable power. In other words rev up a massive balanced wheel and it will spin for a long time via inertia, but it will not produce or replace anything. All CF does is fix or attach itself as more mass to the inertial spin.
CF does not help drive a wheel as it is an outward angular force at 180 degree to axis at any given point of direction of rotation. It will pull your wheel apart but will not spin it. It will of course kill or negate any mass or mechanical transference that does provide torque to maintain RPM/CF.
I believe I posted a WM2D snapshot of what would happen and the weights were pinned up against the rim very solidly. This was a while back ago and I can't remember the values that were used.
Remember it well! Best explanation of why I shall never "pin".. One needs to make a friend of CF by using it to produce just as much CPF, not unlike a battery there will be a potential between and that is where the sweet spot lays.
Ralph
-
bluesgtr44
- Devotee
- Posts: 1970
- Joined: Sat Feb 26, 2005 8:31 pm
- Location: U.S.A.
re: Sweet Spot, For R.P.M.
Actually Ralph, the companies situation is really pretty good. I believe that is why this happening and was a plan all along. Staying pretty positive about it, but it is already agreed upon and seems like we just need to get the formalities out of the way. BMW is already a customer and they insist on audits...and they are rough.
I have mentioned this before...it's been awhile. If you use WM2D and have a sim that you want to test, attach a motor to it and see how many rpm's you can get up to before (or if) it kind of flies apart. At lower rpm's, this will give you a good indication of how your components will respond to the reaction forces. If you are a Bessler solution seeker...just think about his results...40-50 rpm's within 2-3 revolutions and runs fluidly (smoothly). Hey, I'm impressed....
Steve
LOL...this was not intended for you...I already know how you feel about that. Should have put that in the next paragraph.I agree, but remember me, I am the guy who said that I would never attach anything to my wheel. :-)
I have mentioned this before...it's been awhile. If you use WM2D and have a sim that you want to test, attach a motor to it and see how many rpm's you can get up to before (or if) it kind of flies apart. At lower rpm's, this will give you a good indication of how your components will respond to the reaction forces. If you are a Bessler solution seeker...just think about his results...40-50 rpm's within 2-3 revolutions and runs fluidly (smoothly). Hey, I'm impressed....
Steve
Finding the right solution...is usually a function of asking the right questions. -A. Einstein
re: Sweet Spot, For R.P.M.
I'm sure that all of my components will fly apart soon, if I can't prevent them to do that.At lower rpm's, this will give you a good indication of how your components will respond to the reaction forces. If you are a Bessler solution seeker...just think about his results...40-50 rpm's within 2-3 revolutions and runs fluidly (smoothly). Hey, I'm impressed....
Bessler's results have some real thing to suggest. He prevented the weights to fly out, and perhaps he used "the fly out effect" or CF to give more power to his wheel.
At the same time the weights he used not directly attached to the wheel or to some mechanism...?
I am impressed too.
Greg