The Clockwork approach

[Gregory]

What if when Bessler's wheel was only a strange kind of clockwork mechanism which was actually able to rewind itself while running, due to gravity and its own rotational motion which is changed the reference point for some other mechanism inside the wheel?

(So, what if it was actually not an OOB wheel?)

Anybody thought about this before?

[rlortie]

Gregory,

YES! Without making statements fringing on confidentiality, I will simply say; Look at a clock escapement wheel, turn it inside out where as the teeth are now "warped boards" pointing inward.

With this thought in mind, attempt to find an MT drawing that it is compatible too!

(So, what if it was actually not an OOB wheel?)

I was under the impression that he made it clear that it was not!

My next question; Is WM2D capable of designing such an inverse spur gear based on an inverted (escapement) saw tooth design? If anyone can create such a design and put it in motion, let me know, I just may have a job for you.

Ralph

[AB Hammer]

Clock "A!"

Thats wild, I am rebuilding one of my gravity wheels just to run a clock. I have control at a 3 second mark that will flip a paddle every 3 seconds.
It is the paddle that gave me the control and the confidence of accomplishment for a clock motor.
But as for Bessler's being a big clock type machine NO. I have 4 different wheels blueprinted to be built after I build my originals and the math seems to work on all of the ones I will be building.

[Fletcher]

While its technically feasible to build a self winding clock wheel it could not perform at anything like the tests Bessler's were put thru.

Cox's clock was called a PM machine by the inventor & used barometric pressure but couldn't perform useful work over & above turning clock hands - built circa 1760.

http://www.uh.edu/engines/epi527.htm

Today we have self winding wrist watches that wind by movement of the hand creating inertial kinetic energy & I believe there are thermal gradient watches wound with the use of bimetallic strips responding to differences in skin temperature & ambient temperature - probably thermal electric [driven from skin temperature] & piezoelectric & solar ones also.

The trouble with any traditional clock mech is that it must be wound which requires that it be anchored somewhere in the wheel or frame to leverage against while winding & unwinding.

In my opinion it is very unlikely to have been any recognizable self winding mech we can find today, although the very action of his wheels suggests that they were in effect self winding or as I prefer to think of it - 'self restoring' - which amounts to the same thing.

[Gregory]

My next question; Is WM2D capable of designing such an inverse spur gear based on an inverted (escapement) saw tooth design? If anyone can create such a design and put it in motion, let me know, I just may have a job for you.

Ralph

Hi Ralph!

Lib actually built a simple type before...
So I think it is possible to build one with Wm2d, however it may be a hell both for wm2d & the user. I haven't tried so far and haven't got much time for it, but perhaps I try.

Which type of escapement you thought of?
http://www.abbeyclock.com/escapement.html

And Why it's important to use the tooth inside the escapement wheel? (if I understand you correctly?)

[Gregory]

While its technically feasible to build a self winding clock wheel it could not perform at anything like the tests Bessler's were put thru.

Cox's clock was called a PM machine by the inventor & used barometric pressure but couldn't perform useful work over & above turning clock hands - built circa 1760.

Hey!

Anybody have ever been built a Cox's clock (or multiple ones) as big as the Eiffel-tower? 8-]]

Or even as big as the Kassel-wheel was?

Anyway, I just got this idea about some kind of clockwork mechanism, while I was working on my CF experiments. I noticed that some of my designs would need some kind of escapement or connection-disconnection to operate or even just test what can happen with them... This was the point which stopped me. Also my devices became more close to a component device (like clocks) and more & more far from the old wheel.

So, it just made me speculating...
(what if when gravity can be used somehow as a rewind force, while the thing is rotating...?)

[Stewart]

(So, what if it was actually not an OOB wheel?)

I was under the impression that he made it clear that it was not!

Ralph, I must take you up on this statement once again as I feel you are misleading people. Bessler does not make it clear that it was not an overbalanced wheel, in fact he states the opposite on more than one occasion - i.e. he states that it IS an overbalanced wheel. Now even without Bessler telling us his wheel has overbalance it should be obvious that it does from what we know of the set-up - i.e. wheel, axle, and pivots all revolve together. This means that the only way to turn it unfraudulently is by overbalancing it. Since there is no fixed point for a clock-spring to push against, the only way to utilise such a spring would be to do what Wagner did with his spit-jack device (i.e. create a fixed point using hanging weight), but once again Bessler categorically denies that that is how his wheel works and states it has overbalance. Obviously there is more to Bessler's wheel than just the overbalance aspect, but the overbalance is what causes the wheel to revolve. The secret is finding a way to maintain that overbalance state constantly.

Stewart

[Fletcher]

Couldn't agree more with you Stewart !

[bluesgtr44]

Going to put this out there.....AP, pg 295-296...J. Collins

"But I would just like to add this friendly little note of caution:- A great craftsman would be that man who can "lightly" cause a heavy weight to fly upwards! Who can make a pound-weight rise as 4 ounces fall, or 4 pounds rise as 16 ounces fall. If he can sort that out, the motion will perpetuate itself, But if he can't, then his hard work shall be all in vain. He can rack his brains and work his fingers to the bones with all sorts of ingenious ideas about adding extra weight here and there, The only result will be that his wheel will get heavier and heavier - it would run longer if it were empty! Have you ever seen a crowd of starlings squabbling angrily over the crumbs on a stationary mill-wheel? That's what it would be like for such a fellow and his invention, as I know only too well from my own recent experience!

I also think it's a good thing to be completely clear about one further point. Many would-be Mobile-makers think that if they can arrange for some of the weights to be a little more distant from the centre than the others, then the thing will surely revolve. A few years ago I learned all about this the hard way. And then the truth of the old proverbcame home to me that one has to learn through bitter experience. There's a lot more to matters of mechanics than I've revelaed to date, but since there's no urgent need involved, I'll refrain from giving more information at the moment."

I agree with you, Stewart....that is not exactly what he is saying...


Steve

[bluesgtr44]

Hey Ralph...I think what he meant is it is not JUST an OOB wheel....it is far removed from THAT (just an OOB wheel)...does that help?


Steve

[rlortie]

Stewart,

You are correct in refuting my statement. Some times I am either not thinking or thinking to hard on another tangent when I make such abbreviated claims.

I should have clarified that Bessler said in effect: overbalance by having one weight closer to the axle and one toward the rim was not the answer. I believe the experienced here will accept that.

It is in this aspect that I posted questions regarding weights on your forum.

Some how, some way as Steve has pursued, the weights may have been on one side of the axle.

I have tried a number of concepts that had an internal counter rotating affair that would lift the weights back to the top. Problem is keeping the paired weights from ending up in the bottom of the drum.

Ralph

[Fletcher]

Going to put this out there.....AP, pg 295-296...J. Collins

"But I would just like to add this friendly little note of caution:- A great craftsman would be that man who can "lightly" cause a heavy weight to fly upwards! Who can make a pound-weight rise as 4 ounces fall, or 4 pounds rise as 16 ounces fall. If he can sort that out, the motion will perpetuate itself, But if he can't, then his hard work shall be all in vain. He can rack his brains and work his fingers to the bones with all sorts of ingenious ideas about adding extra weight here and there, The only result will be that his wheel will get heavier and heavier - it would run longer if it were empty! Have you ever seen a crowd of starlings squabbling angrily over the crumbs on a stationary mill-wheel? That's what it would be like for such a fellow and his invention, as I know only too well from my own recent experience!

I also think it's a good thing to be completely clear about one further point. Many would-be Mobile-makers think that if they can arrange for some of the weights to be a little more distant from the centre than the others, then the thing will surely revolve. A few years ago I learned all about this the hard way. And then the truth of the old proverb came home to me that one has to learn through bitter experience. There's a lot more to matters of mechanics than I've revealed to date, but since there's no urgent need involved, I'll refrain from giving more information at the moment."

I agree with you, Stewart....that is not exactly what he is saying... Steve

Steve .. how many of us have read this statement by Bessler & assumed he was directly challenging us to break the laws of leverage ? Assumed he was implying that he was the only one who could solve this conundrum of 'lifting more with less' whilst not being constrained by the laws of leverage & unless you could too, you also were doomed to fail [as he learnt the hard way] ?

There is another interpretation possible ! He is saying that no one can achieve the impossible, even he i.e. break the laws of leverage - therefore you must look for another way to solve the mystery of the over-balanced wheel - a way that he alone found - obviously, it still involved physical principles [was provable in physics/natural laws] & was the source of energy he needed to complete the over-balancing task & neatly supplement the laws of leverage that all others are obliged to religiously stick too, without his prime mover principle.

My belief is that he too had to stick to laws of leverage [just like everybody else] but that he found supplementary energy to add to the system ! In essence he is saying, even he is not a magician & should not be regarded as so, & is obliged to stick to the laws of physics - the challenge being to find his principle of weight shifting that he used !

[bluesgtr44]

Hey Fletch....I just want to avoid a lot of copy/paste and just say I couldn't agree with you more. I think he found a way to provide a constant off balance to one side....consistently. Weights are the medium for maintaining the direction and the force!

My belief is that he too had to stick to laws of leverage [just like everybody else] but that he found supplementary energy to add to the system ! In essence he is saying, even he is not a magician & should not be regarded as so, & is obliged to stick to the laws of physics - the challenge being to find his principle of weight shifting that he used !

This is where I am, Fletch.....to take off from a dead standstill, with a load attached (just release the cord)...it had to be pre-loaded, so to speak. With this in mind, I have to wonder if where is the value to the 1 to 4 ratio application he alludes to. No doubt, just trying to persuade one weight to manuever itself further from the axle than a similar weight on the other side to perpetuate a movement is never going to happen....I think this is the basic premis he shows us in MT1-8...in and of themselves, they will never work....

I can't get past the reports of the way his wheels ran....from the very beginning of my interest in Bessler and what he accomplished....I could not, and still cannot....get past the wheels acceleration rate combined with the max. rate of speed and how smoothly it ran. To attach a load and to the axle and then just (I know I have said this before) release the cord and it accelerates on it's own....wow!

Fletch, if you think Bessler was NOT a fraud....his one way wheels did just this....granted, no tremendous amount of power, but JEEEEEZ! I was floored! From some of the basic tests I have done to try and create an imbalance of enough weight to one side to perform this....it would have to be a considerable amount of an over weight condition to pull this off....unless I keep it all to one side....then the problem would be controlling the off-balance and maintaining the path. The forces are not proportional as the speed increases. This is what makes using springs very unmanageable....the have a constant tension and the increase of the reaction forces are anything but constant...heck, they're not even proportional.

If you do use springs? They would have to be able to "breathe"...yeah, I know, sounds crazy. But, if the acceleration process needs to be regulated...and it is not going to be proportional...something has to give, right? Expansion/contraction within a closed system of this type is a possibility is it not....I think is will be needed, personnally....

...this is the part that I think you and I see as far as this direction is concerned...

If he can sort that out, the motion will perpetuate itself, But if he can't, then his hard work shall be all in vain.

...just have to figure out how to put all the parts together....:-)


Steve

[Fletcher]

There is a certain amount of cross over between this & the other thread I have been answering today so they should both be read in conjunction in that regard.

I'll offer this for your consideration in answer to some of your main points of interest !

Take a look at MT9 & onwards - here Bessler shows a classic Arabian over-balanced wheel with superior over-balance demonstrated in MT15 - now imagine them accelerating unhindered by little or no back torque - they would smoothly accelerate up until the levers could not physically fall fast enough to continue the acceleration & it would reach terminal velocity/rpm - in fact they would have more power available under load [self regulating/governing] because the over-balance torque would act for longer at a greater horizontal distance from the axle at slower speeds.

This would meet most of your observations/conditions about his wheels performance - the only disagreement you & I would have is that imo his one-way wheels were pre-positioned [using MT9 as an example] before being tied down - then in that favourable position they would have positive torque which could be used to activate the dynamic prime mover force which in turn was the muscle to shift his weights [change CoM] at the appropriate time - springs imo were used to reposition weights in a closer orbit after they had been used to create the superior over-balancing.

So, we know he used an over-balanced wheel - we know that pure mechanical leverage shifting/repositioning of weights leads to debilitating back torque & confers absolutely no mechanical advantage & will never give us OU ! So what was his Prime Mover Force that made it all possible & where did that extra energy come from ? - they would be/have been the questions on my mind that you have no doubt also pondered at some length !

[DrWhat]

Fletch, Ralph et al,

"Many would-be Mobile-makers think that if they can arrange for some of the weights to be a little more distant from the centre than the others, then the thing will surely revolve. A few years ago I learned all about this the hard way"

If you read this carefully he is not saying that he didn't also do this. He is just saying he too went through a great deal of effort trying what everyone else was trying.