Proposal

[Alone]

Can you, please, examine this proposal?
The system consists of eight identical rotors, interdependent of the same axis, and shifted of 45 degrees.

[/img]

[rlortie]

Alone,

welcome to the forum! Nice animation and it looks good doing what animations will do.

To help you get acquainted here, I am taking it upon myself to ask AB Hammer (Alan) to explain the whys and what for of your design. It looks very similar to some of his first contributions.

Ralph

[AB Hammer]

Greetings Alone and welcome to the forum.

Yes that has been done and I did several variation since as well. You will find the power stroke not very good. It is starts from basically 3:30 mark which is to close to the equilibrium mark to break through.

Go to the top of the forum page and hit Albums and look under AB Hammer and you will see all you want on this type of wheel.

[Alone]

Thank you Alan and Ralph. Important is to try...
Excuse me for my english, but I am french !
Have you seen this explanation :
http://moteur-hackenberger.over-blog.co ... 44612.html
http://moteur-hackenberger.over-blog.co ... 44854.html
What do you think about it ? (you can translate it whith Altavista).
I only undertood the way to make "ORFFYRE" from "BESSLER". But I cannot see how masses can lift alone, compress springs, and make the wheel turn...

Alone

[rlortie]

Alone,

The links you post above have been posted here in English. Maybe somebody with more time than I have at present can recall it. A search for "Hackenberger" comes up empty but it is in here somewhere.

When first posted (English version) it received very little response. It does not work and in my opinion is not related to Bessler's actual designs other than the outer facsimile.

Ralph

[iacob alex]

Hi Alone!

Your simulation proposal(one year ago...) is fascinating, and can be a challenge for me,in the same time.

The simplicity,as a prime line in design ,is sometimes as a spark of thinking ,so to set free the unseen from our inner pensive constellations.

Really,from time to time "Less is more..."

As I see the things,we can develop your proposal as follows:

-with a single arm/spoke(just as you)

-to add a "partner"(a centric mass/hub as a main "in-out storage" for a rotational inertia storage system).

-to make use of the fact that the mass/ball/bob can rotate ceaselessly in the same sense(a second "in-out storage" for a rotational inertia storage system).

-To make use of the down-hill and up-hill effects,when the ball is rotating inside the track(way-wheel relation).

I can't guarantee the final result,but anyway a development of your proposal(one arm only...),seems to be an attracting mental aerobics.

Congratulations!

All the Bests! / Alex

[path_finder]

Dear Alone,
You are not alone in France.
Your design has been implemented by Leonardo da Vinci, wich improved it by using a single path like in the second picture below.
I made one myself. It is still at home (see the first picture). It don't work and is specially noisly.

[iacob alex]

Hi Alone!

You have good news...

If the so old and known design of Leonardo da Vinci,is tested as unworkable,your proposal "with eight identical rotors,interdependent of the same axis,shifted of 45 degrees" is in the line of "why make it simple,when you can make complex"...

The next step,is your starting one: "why make it complex ,when you can make it simple ?".

It can help you to understand the cry of this "phantom design":Let me fall,if you want some power!

Maybe you have as a "Golden Fish" into your hands...you know the story.

All the Bests! / Alex

[Bill_Mothershead]

Wow...deja vu all over again.

These things are always fun to watch and come so close
to looking like they just might possible work.

Everyone should be aware of the relevant "da Vinci" youtube animations:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GhR-K10UjnY
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lOk8i668 ... re=related

Same guy did both. Impressive. High quality art.

I spent a couple of months last year looking at rolling balls.
Wrote about a dozen different C++ programs that automatically
generated various random ball paths then automatically tweeked
them toward optimum. Tried some with as many as 20 balls
all running in differently shaped paths. The computer would
run all night generating/evaluating many tens of thousands of
configurations. Eventually I ran out of new ideas on the subject.
Never did find what I was looking for. Moved on.

It is hard to prove a negative.

I did NOT prove that a rolling ball machine can NOT work.

I just demonstrated that all the things I tried did NOT work.

Oh, well...it is a well worn path that many have traveled.

Here is some advice for some future travelers of that path.

The perception of motion using a series of frames (in an animation)
can lead you to trouble...it is an illusion. In particular, the
motion of the ball (especially as it goes straight out on the
down side of the wheel) is really complicated. It is sort of
rolling down a ramp that is changing its angle depending
on how fast the wheel is turning. The animation at the top
of this topic looks like it spends 3 frames showing the roll
of the ball. It "looks" good but how do we know if that is
too little or not enough?

Also, at the end of the travel of the ball on the down side,
it crashes. Even the "da Vinci" animations are the same.
The ball goes from max speed to zero....it just crashes.
Obviously momentum is lost from the system. Some
kind of upward curve in the path is needed to transfer
that momentum into the wheel. But again, the design
of that curve is going to depend on how fast the ball
is moving and how fast the wheel is turning. Very
complicated.

I could not figure out how to honestly simulate either
of this issues...so I did the next best thing...I cheated.

I redefined the problem by restating it. I was not trying
to find a "working" wheel (ie one that keeps moving).
I was trying to find an "unbalanced" wheel which is defined
as one which, when held motionless in ANY random position,
and then released, would spontaneously move clockwise.
Logically, since it could never find a stopping place where
it would be balanced, it must therefore continue to move.

This allowed a simple simulation based on separate, static
calculations. The ball did not roll...it was just "evaluated" to the
proper path placement point (animated jump). The wheel did
not speedup/slow down, it just "stepped" to the next simulation
point (I used 1 degree stepping points.) Assumed a static start
so no calculations of speed or momentum anywhere.

Never did find any combination of ball paths to make
an unbalanced wheel.

Discouraging...YES.
Moved on...YES.
Was it worth my time....hmmmm.....hard to judge.
Would I advise others to look into it....probably not.

Would some of the wise people on this forum like to
offer a definitive summary about this topic to help out
all those people in the future that might begin to
explore this topic.

Please...something more useful than:
"Rolling balls don’t work."

How about:
"Rolling balls don’t work because....
[and then something scientifically logical and convincing]."

[path_finder]

Dear Bill_Mothershead,
you are right with the concept of calculation step by step.
I had the same problem whis this svastika design:

[broli]

That's secret Nazi technology, how did you get that!

[path_finder]

The svastika (horizontal and rotating clockwise) is a very ancient symbol (like the yin-yang) from old India.
The rotating anticlockwise and 45 grade leaning version has a bad reputation since the nazi party used it during the WW2.
But interesting are the old legends (Vril-ya of the Hyperborea, many century before the Mu, Lemuria and Atlantis)
The design shown above is coming from the sicilian or Manx triskelion.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Triskelion
It has a link with the flowerbowl too.

[Fletcher]

I was also the original Swiss peace symbol, IIRC, before it got 'appropriated'.

[Michael]

Pathfinder, regarding the Vril: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vril

The vril were also the subject in a science fiction move called the forbidden planet.
I'd be careful about merging science fantasy with fact. Atlantis originated as far as out history goes with Plato so you should read what he has to say about it before accepting material written after the fact, just my advice.

[path_finder]

Dear Michael,
You are right to be suspicious and we need to take care before to accept any kind of fake nor hoax.
But there are facts. See the new Mohendjo-Daro and Harappa discoveries in the Indus valley (Karachi/Pakistan today).
Some measurements demonstrated the existence of a dust strata (including bodies) showing a nuclear level 50 times greater than the standard.
We cannot exclude the possibility of a big disaster explaining the old legend of the lost paradise, the angels and the daemons, etc.
se the URL: http://twitscope.wordpress.com/tag/harappa/
don't forget the instructive next page:
http://twitscope.wordpress.com/2008/07/ ... a/#more-40

I'm not an archeologist. But IMO (on my opinion) there is a NOT NULL chance that some ancient technologies have been lost.
This is the reason why I have been so interested with the flowerbowl.
Suppose you are in your garden and a pterodactyl falls in the grass. What to you do?