Elliptical Track

[AB Hammer]

GraViTaR

I was looking at the angle of the spokes your hole would have to be of a wide hourglass shape.

I find it best when we start a wheel, to try to show how it won't work and if you can find with good reason why it should then balance the pros and cons and then look again. I took your drawing and made marks to help you see what I see. When something is still having to rise you will still be in a negative effect.

[GraViTaR]

GraViTaR

I was looking at the angle of the spokes your hole would have to be of a wide hourglass shape.

(To avoid confusion from this point on, I will refer to the "umbrella spokes" that pass through the balls as "rods". The main wheel consists of "spokes".)

A pivot of around 15 to 20 degrees is all that is necessary to keep the ball from binding; and the diameter of the narrowest part of the hole, at the very center of the ball, need only be slightly wider than the diameter of the rod to maintain a free rolling motion by the balls on the spokes.

I find it best when we start a wheel, to try to show how it won't work and if you can find with good reason why it should then balance the pros and cons and then look again. I took your drawing and made marks to help you see what I see. When something is still having to rise you will still be in a negative effect.

What you show is a static system. You have to take into account the momentum of a wheel already in motion for these systems.

The whole reason for an elliptical path is the greater speed that the balls travel on one end of the ellipse as compared to the other.

This is what Bessler was referring to when he said "it is found in nature"; a comet in its highly eccentric orbit around the sun. When the comet nears the Sun, it is traveling many times faster than it does when at its aphelion.

The elliptical path in my model gives the ball maximum speed at the rim of the wheel. There is always much more downward force at the rim and very little upward resistance at the center. The wheel itself acts as a flywheel and its own kinetic energy keeps the balls moving.

It is actually more accurate to refer to these systems as "self-sustaining momentum".

[AB Hammer]

Well GraViTaR

There is only one thing to do. And that is build it. for if you don't, it will plage you until you do, or be a question never answered. For all of us want a working wheel, and only with an open mind will one of us achieve it.

I wish you well on your project.

[scott]

FWIW this is one of the first builds I ever made, about 15 years ago. It does not work. The net torque is zero. If you don't believe me then I encourage you to build it. You will learn a lot.
-Scott

[GraViTaR]

Scott, I have a few questions.

Did you use an eight-spoke wheel or another number?

Were the rods you used flexible or rigid?

Were the holes through the balls similar to what I drew or were they vastly different?

At what angle did you have the rod wheel positioned in relation to the main wheel? What was the angle of the rod array, itself?

Do you still have any plans, photos, videos or any other documentation?

Where did you get the idea for this? Did you come up with it yourself or did you get it from someone else?

I came up with this on my own. I have never seen or heard of anything like this before.

[rlortie]

GraViTar,

Balls on an elliptical track;

How about MT 1 through 18 just for a short start. It does not seem to matter how you get them there the results are the same!

Sorry but it is my opinion that no matter how glorified the method of transference the end product is the same. Match your drawing to any of the afore mentioned and explain how yours differs in weight distribution.

Ralph

[coylo]

GraviTar wrote:

I came up with this on my own. I have never seen or heard of anything like this before.

'Research' is not one of your strong points.
I have seen hundreds!

Like Scott, I would say that anyone who delved deep into PM experimentation would have built this at a very early stage, if not their first attempt!

[Jon J Hutton]

Wouldn't this be better.

There are rods connecting the smaller circles that are weights to the medium size circles that are connected to the large circle (wheel) the rods are connected off center to a hub causing the weights to always be on the right......I do not think it will work the same reason the elliptical track will not work.

JJH

[LustInBlack]

Gravitar:

Elliptic will work only if you isolate the support from the balls.. If you have no support the weights fall to the ground..

I tried playing with time, as we usually play with space ..

Pulsing the weights on the support, out of it, on the wheel and back on the support, the problem is evident as desynchronization happens..

The other way I tried this, is with Seekers inside the wheel that seek to the ground to keep the weight on an elliptical path but the seeker by it's nature is balancing ...


I suggest you keep up you work, you will learn .. These things are quite easy to understand once you failed 2-3 times.. Don't let others tell you out of it, because you will skip a good part of the learning process you will need later..

[GraViTaR]

I looked at all the pictures I could find and I don't see any that are even close to my idea.

Maybe you can point me to something that I may have missed. But it looks like my idea is completely original.

[AB Hammer]

When we are convinced we have a good idea, it is time to BUILD IT!!!

[LustInBlack]

Grav, don't make your weight that far to the axle, make them pass thru the axle if you know what I mean..

Why in the hell would you like to have any counter-torque!?

I think this thing will balance, the idea of the conic section is not bad, until you see that your conic umbrella must rotate at a constant speed..


Maybe you can show us otherwise, this should not be too long to build..

You could try this :

[scott]

I looked at all the pictures I could find and I don't see any that are even close to my idea.

Maybe you can point me to something that I may have missed. But it looks like my idea is completely original.

OK Gravitar, here is one example:

On the Links page in the Background section click Bessler's Wonderful Wheel (Article, 1956)

Scroll down on that page and you will see the image I've attached to this post.

Visit the link called Boruts' Website to see many more typical starter designs like this one.

We all appreciate your enthusiasm but in this line of work you'll find it is generally wise to assume your idea is not original until you have pretty good evidence that it is.

Just my $0.02.

-Scott

P.S. I realize this does not show an elliptical path, but after building it I assure you the shape of the path does not matter, nor does the number of spokes. The result is the same: zero net torque.

[Fletcher]

Grav .. here is a thread with conical ellipses probably worth reading & looking at the pictures IIRC - the guy's name was Claudio under the handle 'Unstable'



http://www.besslerwheel.com/forum/viewt ... highlight=

[evgwheel]

GraViTaR

Now you have really joined the club. In my opinion everyone who is interested in free energy must have gone through what you are going through now. You just know (belief) you are right and every one just hasn’t got the imagination to see what you see is the (possible) answer.
When you have found the glitz in your design (and see it for yourself) you feel stupid, but you shouldn’t. Ninety nine percent of all members here have felt the same way.
And unlike learning from our mistakes we happily make them again and again, it is an addiction that won’t let go. I hope you keep on trying and maybe you or someone else will change your original idea and make it work. Good luck EVG
(P.s Most of us are only trying to help. The only one who is allowed to be an asshole is the one who shows as a working wheel.)