the weights hit the wheel

frettsy · Post by **frettsy** » Fri Jul 11, 2008 9:02 pm

Eyewitness Accounts:

Johann Christian Wolff "During rotation, one can clearly hear the weights hitting against the wooden boards."

Joseph Fischer "At every turn of the wheel can be heard the sound of about eight weights, which fall gently on the side toward which the wheel turns."

this, together with the statements that "Weights acted in pairs" and "If I arrange to have just one crossbar in the machine it revolves very slowly just as if it could hardly turn itself at all", leads me to an idea. let me explain my attachment:

the weights are hung over the ratchet, and the ratchet axle is on a stand separate from the wheel. the wheel's faces are open and it is wide, so that the ratchet axel can go inside the wheel but not all the way to the spokes. so the ratchet and the weights are totally separate from the wheel, but they interact. as the heavy weight falls, it turns the ratchet axle, which turns the wheel due to the gears. when the heavy weight reaches the bottom, it is caught in one of the "catches" around the perimeter of the wheel. at this point the light weight is at the top, the wheel has some speed and is trying to carry the heavy weight up the side, and it is assisted with the weight by the pull of the light weight. this effectively makes the heavy weight "lighter", and the system is starting to reset. however, I'm not convinced that it would make it all the way around.

this is where multiple "crossbars" come into play. I'm not sure how he did this all within the wheel, or how he used more than two, but nonetheless. put an identicaly ratchet/weight set and opposite the original one, on the other side of the wheel spokes. stagger the weights so that one starts at the top and one at the bottom of their cycles. this way, as one of the weights is reaching the bottom of the wheel, the other will get to the top and drop over its ratchet axle, resetting the system.

this is how I believe Bessler's wheel maintained a constant speed, and a very rudimentary description of how it worked. eureka?

AB Hammer · Post by **AB Hammer** » Fri Jul 11, 2008 11:59 pm

frettsy

Are you trying to make a stationary axle? For that is the only way I can see any progress on this one.

frettsy · Post by **frettsy** » Sat Jul 12, 2008 1:23 am

to be completely honest I'm not exactly sure what a stationary axle is. so no, I'm not. haha!

why do you think it won't work?

broli · Post by **broli** » Sat Jul 12, 2008 9:43 am

Try to simulate it and see what it does! I agree that with one set it'll turn back. But we two sets it'll be lift vs rotation. If lift wins then you have a winner.

AB Hammer · Post by **AB Hammer** » Sat Jul 12, 2008 12:54 pm

frettsy

A stationary axle is an axle that doesn't move, only the wheel moves around it. For instance most rear wheel drive cars. The front wheels are on a stationary axle.

frettsy · Post by **frettsy** » Sat Jul 12, 2008 6:52 pm

broli wrote:Try to simulate it and see what it does! I agree that with one set it'll turn back. But we two sets it'll be lift vs rotation. If lift wins then you have a winner.

I tried to but I don't know WM2D very well. I could figure out how to do.. well, most of the objects. lol.

anyone want to help with that?

frettsy · Post by **frettsy** » Sat Jul 12, 2008 6:54 pm

AB Hammer wrote:frettsy

A stationary axle is an axle that doesn't move, only the wheel moves around it. For instance most rear wheel drive cars. The front wheels are on a stationary axle.

okay, that would have been my guess but I wasn't sure. but no I'm not trying to make that, since my ratchet gear is chained to the wheel's axle gear and not the wheel itself.

broli · Post by **broli** » Sat Jul 12, 2008 8:56 pm

Ok I think MT 48 and 49 are kind of in the same spirit as this design. Only are you using the fall to generate rotation, while they used the rotation to cause the lift.

"The principle is good, but this figure will bring about no mobility by itself until completely different, additional structures have been provided."

frettsy · Post by **frettsy** » Sat Jul 12, 2008 9:39 pm

it does look a bit similar. think of mine like the tumbler of a washing machine, but we are "tumbling" the weights to the top after they have done their work, and then dumping them over the ratchet axle again towards the top.

while the two pairs of weights will cancel each other out or stabilize or whatever, the speed of the wheel after its first turn should continue minus friction, just like if you spun the wheel of fortune or something. so if the second pair of weights is not acting on the wheel until the first pair of weights has done its initial work and reached the bottom (in other words, if you hold or delay the second heavy weight for a few seconds), it should maintain the spin.

also I think the cylindrical weights and warped boards apply here as well.
Johann Christian Wolff "Weights were cylindrical."
Johann Christian Wolff "Weights may have landed on slightly warped boards."
the cylindrical weights will let it settle nicely in the catches, which were probably slats which could have been warped to the proper angle to hold the weights, and will also let it roll off nicely at the top.

and maybe the spring was to throw us off.

Acta Eridutorum "Weights may have been pierced in the middle and attached by connecting springs."
well maybe they were attached by rope instead of springs. they would still be "pierced in the middle".

tell me I'm close here!

bluesgtr44 · Post by **bluesgtr44** » Sat Jul 12, 2008 11:48 pm

Hey Frettsy....the sound of those weights hitting on the perimeter were not ever mintioned in the first two, unidirectional wheels. This might lead one to believe that impact wasn't the driving force in the wheel...only a result of the bi-directional design...or as Wagner stated...a diversionary tactic. But, there are some descriptions of those first two wheels and no mention of tapping/banging/hitting.

Steve

frettsy · Post by **frettsy** » Sun Jul 13, 2008 3:48 am

broli: btw, thanks for bringing the MT drawings here. I had not seen them before but now I'm checking them out on the wiki. both of these seem very workable and efficient.

MT 48: "an insufficient number of spheres is carried to the wheel A by means of the paternoster"...
but why? it seems to me that there are more balls on the wheel than on the paternoster at any given time.

MT 49: "B, the axle of the wheel, moves by means of a chain which reaches up to the paternoster at C."
but why? it seems to me that B moves from the weight of the balls. also, it seems that the paternoster could be run from a gear off the axle B. this one is beautiful to me, it looks like it should be turning as I look at it!

also: isn't the labeling for MT 49 wrong? shouldn't "C" at the bottom be "D"?

axel · Post by **axel** » Sun Jul 13, 2008 3:58 am

Hello ALL!

The only "clue" in MT that has helped me is MT11 where JB mentions "this figure is doubled".

Axel

I see that ever since I challenged the warped board, my "reputation" was increased from "acknowledged" to "None".

LOL.

jim_mich · Post by **jim_mich** » Sun Jul 13, 2008 5:08 am

frettsy wrote:MT 48: "an insufficient number of spheres is carried to the wheel A by means of the paternoster"...
but why? it seems to me that there are more balls on the wheel than on the paternoster at any given time.

Yes, there are more balls on the wheel than on the paternoster! There are about 10 ball rising and about 16 balls falling. So it looks like it should work! Yes? No?

But take a closer look at how fast the paternoster/chain would be moving. As Bessler stated, "an insufficient number of spheres is carried to the wheel". The paternoster/chain would be moving much too slow because it runs off of the small hub sprocket. It will not deliver enough spheres to keep up with the wheel.

Even if you gear the chain to run at the rim speed of the wheel it will not overbalance. This is because the weights near the top and bottom of the wheel don't produce as much torque. It takes about 16 weights on the wheel to match the torque of 10 weights on the chain. (The actual ratio value is Pi/2 so there needs to be 1.5707963268 weights on the wheel for every one weight on the chain.)

Each of the MT's have something that makes them not work.

BesslerWheel.com

the weights hit the wheel

the weights hit the wheel

re: the weights hit the wheel

re: the weights hit the wheel

Re: re: the weights hit the wheel

re: the weights hit the wheel

re: the weights hit the wheel

Re: re: the weights hit the wheel

re: the weights hit the wheel

re: the weights hit the wheel