Gain force from their own swinging.

[ken_behrendt]

Jim...

You are right. That "capenter's boy" would only have to have been able to build the device, not design it.

But, Bessler was described by the people who examined his wheels as "no profound mathematician". Could such an elaborate pro-CF, dynamic mechanism have been found through a craftsman's simple trial and error approach to building such a device?

It sounds to me like such a wheel mechanism would have to be very complicated and precisely made in order to work. I know if I could go back in time and cough up the 4,000 thousand thaler price to take a peek at the wheel's mechanism, I think I would have trouble honestly describing it as "simple".

It would seem that for such a design to work, it would have to create a differential in the CF acting on its weights such that this would then temporarily shift the CG of an opposed pair of the rotating mechanisms to one side of the wheel's axle after the wheel was given an initial spin to start it up. But, would not such a wheel, dependent upon "rectified" CF at work, not reach a limiting terminal rotation rate? That is to say, should not such a wheel be capable of continuously accelerating until the CF acting on its parts actually destroyed the wheel?

Bessler's wheels did not display this property which has led me to the conclusion that they did not rely upon CF for their motion. The fact that they were observed to reach steady terminal rotation rates seems to me to indicate that CF was force that impeded the weight shifting processes going on within them.


ken

[John Collins]

The fact that the one-way wheels began to turn spontaneously as soon as they were released seems to me to rule out CF and any other kind of rotation-induced force that might be deemed necessary to instigate motion, since that force would need to be present from the start, before rotation had even begun. Surely the position of the weights when at rest must have induced imbalance, or how else could spontaneous rotation have occurred. I, for myself, have finally ruled out careful positioning of the wheel when tied in order to produce an imbalance for starting the wheel.

John Collins

[Magnum]

I normally just read the posts but I feel that my two cents might by worth about 2 cents here.
I have to agree with both Jim and Ken B. on both there theories. Besslers wheel had to take advantage of CpF and overbalanced weight. The mechanisms in the drum lifted the weights, which in turn caused overbalance. The weights also gained momentum by there swinging. A swinging weight at the height of its swing would be easier to lift.
His wheel was not an overbalanced wheel. He himself said that overbalanced wheels where bunk.
Centrifugal force means center fleeing. It is know as the ghost force because it does not exist. It is the lack of force.
Centripetal force means center seeking.


One thing that may help here is to take apart Besslers first wheel. We can assume that each weight used was 4 lbs. Eight weights would be 32lbs. If I remember correctly the wheel weighed 45lbs. Now if we can fill in the blanks it would give us a good idea by what is left over.

Ken T.

[bluesgtr44]

I agree, John...what I find interesting in this particular section is...

To this end they are enclosed in a structure or framework, and co-ordinated in such a way that not only are they prevented from attaining their desired equilibrium or "point of rest", but they must forever seek it,...

I think the enclosure is very important...this sets the path. He also mentions that it does not have an ordinary rim, why? I'm thinking it is not concentric...it is eccentric. This has to come in somewhere....


Steve

[bluesgtr44]

One thing that may help here is to take apart Besslers first wheel. We can assume that each weight used was 4 lbs. Eight weights would be 32lbs. If I remember correctly the wheel weighed 45lbs. Now if we can fill in the blanks it would give us a good idea by what is left over.

Hey Ken T., I don't believe this to be correct. The 4 lbs was mentioned for the Merseberg wheel, not the Gera. The only indication of eight weights seems to be taken from a witness account that mentions 8 bangs/taps/knocks, on the descending side of the wheel per revolution. Now, eyewitness accounts never mention this happening in the first two one directional wheels. The only thing I have seen on this is scratching sounds and that it was very loud...nothing about banging/tapping/knocking in these wheels. This seemed to happen when he went to the bi-directional wheel.


Steve

[jim_mich]

That is to say, should not such a wheel be capable of continuously accelerating until the CF acting on its parts actually destroyed the wheel?

Ken, again you make an erroneous assumption! You assume that because CF increases with speed that a wheel driven by CF would also increase in speed. If this were true then of course the wheel would accelerate and destroy itself. But your assumption that a wheel driven by CF would continually accelerate is wrong. Any wheel with shifting or moving weights requires time for the weights to shift or move. When a wheel rotates faster there is less time for the weights to shift or move. This means that at some critical speed the weights will not be able to fully make their shift or move. The result would be that the wheel's top speed is restricted by the time that it takes to shift a weight one way during a first half revolution then shift back during the second half revolution. When a wheel turns faster there is no longer enough time for the weights to shift completely. With less shifting there will be less out of balance torque.

The weights may shift back and forth driven by CF but produce no out of balance condition at higher speeds. The out of balance condition might only work at lower speed when the weights have enough time to shift completely during a small segment of rotation. If they complete their shift too late they may lose the out of balance advantage.

Bessler may not have been a mathematician but he sure had a lot of hands on experience building wheels. This experience would have given him a very good 'feel' for what happens with wheels. I don't think he would have needed to 'calculate' exactly how his wheels operated. He just needed the right general configuration and a little trial and error to optimize it.

[Magnum]

These are some photos of my CpF experiments.
I had to start it with a push and it ran for 2 min. before it stopped. Had I installed a rim it would have ran longer but I would lose the high swing of the weights.

Ken T.

[mickegg]

Haven't I read Bessler saying the weights hitting the side were there
to confuse and hide the motion?

Also I thought he had studied mathmatics

Mick

[hopeful]

Wheels, such as those on carts and carriages in Bessler's time, had load bearing rims. Bessler wrote that his machine, or wheel, doesn't have an ordinary rim because it wasn't designed to roll on the ground. A twelve foot wheel that could bear rolling stresses would have been many times heavier than the drum hiding his mechanism. A heavier drum decreases the over balance condition--and this is also why Bessler said to avoid flywheels. There are several reasons why the largest wheels were covered with cloth instead of wood.

Chris

[Gravmaster2000]

Quote from 'John Collins'
"The fact that the one-way wheels began to turn spontaneously as soon as they were released seems to me to rule out CF and any other kind of rotation-induced force that might be deemed necessary to instigate motion, since that force would need to be present from the start, before rotation had even begun. Surely the position of the weights when at rest must have induced imbalance, or how else could spontaneous rotation have occurred. I, for myself, have finally ruled out careful positioning of the wheel when tied in order to produce an imbalance for starting the wheel."

Ah!!! but there is a simple answer for this! When the wheel is first
built, say all weights are in a 'neutral' position. After the wheel is turned
ONCE (or say goes above a certain speed) the weights are loaded/primed
properly, and from THAT POINT ON it always want to turn. I think this is a good possibility- in other words, if you opened it and relieved all
tension from the springs, it would need to be 'primed' again, ONCE.
(Of course, Bessler would NEVER have shown this to anyone!!)

Just a thought...

[Gravmaster2000]

Quote from "MAC"-About the "grindstone" reference...

Possibilities?
- gyroscopic effect, flywheel effect, or both.
- its position rotated with the wheel, or...
- it hung inside the wheel and rotated in one position.
--------
Indeed, yes, that is what I see too-it just hangs there as something to
push against by rollers, etc. Perhaps it rocked gently back and forth
as the 'pendulum' as well?
------------

Just a few thoughts. ;)

Mac

Gravmaster 2000

[Trev]

Jim, well done, I think your on the right track.
All those different interacting forces are highly complex and difficult to model, If an answer is discovered it will probably seem simple in retrospect and probably easy for a carpenters boy to replicate.

Trev.

[1712]

This is a real interesting thread.

One thing I've notice about swinging weights on a wheel structure.
As the weight begins to swing downward, as it is not held stationary, it becomes weightless until reaching the bottom of the swing. This weightlessness causes countertorque to be produced by the weights on the other side of the axle that haven't swung yet.

My point is, maybe it was this weightlessness that drove the wheel and not the other way around.

WH

[bluesgtr44]

WH?

[rlortie]

Wh? does not cover it!

It becomes weightless and is not attached to anything but yet it causes counter torque??? The only imbalance or counter torque was at the same time the weight dropped, not while it is falling!

Does a tree falling in the forest make any noise if there is no one there to hear it?