In your last design you have to consider two things on the left side.
First the torque due to the weight of the wheel. You'll see that this is equal to the weight times the distance which is the light green path you've drawn.
Second you have to consider the torque of the secondary rotation on the inner wheel.
If you combine these two you might find that they equal the torque contribution on the right side.
We don't care the Bessler wheel, the most important is to build a working wheel...
Moderator: scott
-
path_finder
- Addict
- Posts: 2372
- Joined: Wed Dec 10, 2008 9:32 am
- Location: Paris (France)
re: We don't care the Bessler wheel, the most important is t
Dear Broli, many thanks for your remark (congratulations, you are not one of the numerous armchair theoricians populating this forum)
On the left part of the drawing 'hamster_path1.png' (located in page #16) we suppose that the flywheel includes a prime-mover giving an permanent overbalance to this flywheel (in fact not constant, but periodic within every quarter).
Do not forget that the POWER axle is NOT centered on the flywheel but on the red drum (red point numbered #1 on the picture).
The dark grey roller is the axle of this flywheel.
So far the hamster (the dark grey roller) will try to climb up (due to the unbalance of the flywheel).
Due to the rotation of the red drum (by reaction of the torque) and after a rotation of 90 grades of the flywheel, the hamster will stop to climb (due to the suspension of the unbalance) and wait for the next active quarter of unbalance (where the process will restart).
There is a constant alternative motion of the hamster inside the red drum (changing between two active/inactive phases).
The flywheel center position is oscillating between the power axis and an external position of unbalance (due to the excentricity of the hamster).
On the right part of the same drawing (same page) the calculation of the COG shows that the resultant point of the three light grey rollers is exactly at the same place than the dark grey roller of the left picture (2P at the red point and the third P at three times the radius).
So far these three rollers replace the previous single hamster (with the restriction of weight values).
Regarding the last animation the green circle is NOT the flywheel (not represented here).
The axis of the flywheel is excentered like in the double drawing.
It's just for showing the path of the rollers axles (I want not to show a too much complex animation, but I will try anyway to show a more completed one as soon as possible )
On the left part of the drawing 'hamster_path1.png' (located in page #16) we suppose that the flywheel includes a prime-mover giving an permanent overbalance to this flywheel (in fact not constant, but periodic within every quarter).
Do not forget that the POWER axle is NOT centered on the flywheel but on the red drum (red point numbered #1 on the picture).
The dark grey roller is the axle of this flywheel.
So far the hamster (the dark grey roller) will try to climb up (due to the unbalance of the flywheel).
Due to the rotation of the red drum (by reaction of the torque) and after a rotation of 90 grades of the flywheel, the hamster will stop to climb (due to the suspension of the unbalance) and wait for the next active quarter of unbalance (where the process will restart).
There is a constant alternative motion of the hamster inside the red drum (changing between two active/inactive phases).
The flywheel center position is oscillating between the power axis and an external position of unbalance (due to the excentricity of the hamster).
On the right part of the same drawing (same page) the calculation of the COG shows that the resultant point of the three light grey rollers is exactly at the same place than the dark grey roller of the left picture (2P at the red point and the third P at three times the radius).
So far these three rollers replace the previous single hamster (with the restriction of weight values).
Regarding the last animation the green circle is NOT the flywheel (not represented here).
The axis of the flywheel is excentered like in the double drawing.
It's just for showing the path of the rollers axles (I want not to show a too much complex animation, but I will try anyway to show a more completed one as soon as possible )
I cannot imagine why nobody though on this before, including myself? It is so simple!...
-
path_finder
- Addict
- Posts: 2372
- Joined: Wed Dec 10, 2008 9:32 am
- Location: Paris (France)
re: We don't care the Bessler wheel, the most important is t
Dear ABhammer, thanks for your interest.
Before to build a more complex animation I can give more explanation at the present step.
see first this cool video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BHu8LAWSKxU
The acceleration of the flywheel is obtained by the exocentric position of its axle rolling inside the inner rim of the red drum.
If you accept the idea that a prime-mover is located inside the flywheel (with an effective maximum unbalance every 90 grades), there is a permanent dual effect:
- the reaction of the red drum against the climbing up of the hamster (flywheel axle) inducts a rotation of this red drum (and of the power axle on its center) on the side where the hamster is running.
- the rolling of the flywheel axle inside the red drum inducts the same rotation of the prime-mover located inside the flywheel.
If this prime-mover reinitializes the unbalance of the flywheel every 90 grades the hamster will go forward and stop permanently.
For a better efficiency (not shown on all these previous pictures) it can be clever to double this system of prime-mover.
In this case the two prime-movers can be dephased of 45 grades, and when the torque of the first prime-mover is minimum, the second prime-mover will be maximum, allowing here to minimize the step-by-step motion and giving a double torque to the red power axle.
Somewhere Besslers said he was obliged to 'double the cross' (something like that)...
In fact the principle is simple: instead to DIRECTLY connect one (or several) prime-mover to the main power axle (as usually made in almost design suggestion), the first purpose of the prime-mover is to excenter the flywheel in the way that the global weight (including the weights and the flywheel itself) acts as a pedal on the power axle.
Now the question is: if the system accelerates, when will it stop?
The climbing up of the hamster (flywheel axle) is limited at the 3:00 of the red drum (there is no way to hang up for him further between 3:00 and 12:00)
A stable equilibrium will be reached between the rotation speed of the red drum (power axle) and the maximum altitude of the hamster (flywheel axle).
In fact this equilibrium is only apparent because the variations of position around 3:00 depend from the mutual action/reaction of the both partners (and also from the used energy extracted from the power axle). This is perhaps the purpose of the stone-mills connected on the Bessler's wheel (an extraction of energy in view to avoid an overspeed of the wheel or more simply a reduction of a possible 'loop pump' damageable effect when overpassing the 3:00 position). Please note the old clue 'the torque is acting at 90 grades of the axis'...In the proposed design above the optimal position of the hamster (flywheel axle) is at 3:00 of the clock. Just a coincidence?.
But at least and not the last:
A clever system can be adapted to the prime-mover in view to cancel the unbalance when the flywheel axle is at 6:00 of the red drum.
Now let's think about what is done if the hamster is located at 6:00 of the red drum and the prime-mover locked?
Everything is stable (rest position)
Just a little gently push is needed to destabilize the system. Depending of the push direction the corresponding prime-mover can be unlocked and the flywheel start to rotate (due to the climbing of the hamster).
You obtain here the bi-directional version of the design.
Before to build a more complex animation I can give more explanation at the present step.
see first this cool video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BHu8LAWSKxU
The acceleration of the flywheel is obtained by the exocentric position of its axle rolling inside the inner rim of the red drum.
If you accept the idea that a prime-mover is located inside the flywheel (with an effective maximum unbalance every 90 grades), there is a permanent dual effect:
- the reaction of the red drum against the climbing up of the hamster (flywheel axle) inducts a rotation of this red drum (and of the power axle on its center) on the side where the hamster is running.
- the rolling of the flywheel axle inside the red drum inducts the same rotation of the prime-mover located inside the flywheel.
If this prime-mover reinitializes the unbalance of the flywheel every 90 grades the hamster will go forward and stop permanently.
For a better efficiency (not shown on all these previous pictures) it can be clever to double this system of prime-mover.
In this case the two prime-movers can be dephased of 45 grades, and when the torque of the first prime-mover is minimum, the second prime-mover will be maximum, allowing here to minimize the step-by-step motion and giving a double torque to the red power axle.
Somewhere Besslers said he was obliged to 'double the cross' (something like that)...
In fact the principle is simple: instead to DIRECTLY connect one (or several) prime-mover to the main power axle (as usually made in almost design suggestion), the first purpose of the prime-mover is to excenter the flywheel in the way that the global weight (including the weights and the flywheel itself) acts as a pedal on the power axle.
Now the question is: if the system accelerates, when will it stop?
The climbing up of the hamster (flywheel axle) is limited at the 3:00 of the red drum (there is no way to hang up for him further between 3:00 and 12:00)
A stable equilibrium will be reached between the rotation speed of the red drum (power axle) and the maximum altitude of the hamster (flywheel axle).
In fact this equilibrium is only apparent because the variations of position around 3:00 depend from the mutual action/reaction of the both partners (and also from the used energy extracted from the power axle). This is perhaps the purpose of the stone-mills connected on the Bessler's wheel (an extraction of energy in view to avoid an overspeed of the wheel or more simply a reduction of a possible 'loop pump' damageable effect when overpassing the 3:00 position). Please note the old clue 'the torque is acting at 90 grades of the axis'...In the proposed design above the optimal position of the hamster (flywheel axle) is at 3:00 of the clock. Just a coincidence?.
But at least and not the last:
A clever system can be adapted to the prime-mover in view to cancel the unbalance when the flywheel axle is at 6:00 of the red drum.
Now let's think about what is done if the hamster is located at 6:00 of the red drum and the prime-mover locked?
Everything is stable (rest position)
Just a little gently push is needed to destabilize the system. Depending of the push direction the corresponding prime-mover can be unlocked and the flywheel start to rotate (due to the climbing of the hamster).
You obtain here the bi-directional version of the design.
I cannot imagine why nobody though on this before, including myself? It is so simple!...
-
path_finder
- Addict
- Posts: 2372
- Joined: Wed Dec 10, 2008 9:32 am
- Location: Paris (France)
re: We don't care the Bessler wheel, the most important is t
The principle shown in the last pictures was based on a exocentric flywheel containing a particular prime-mover (not represented on the drawings).
Before to make any complex animation with the combination of the three parts (power axle, flywheel and prime-mover), it could be interesting to better observe the behavior of this prime-mover.
There are a lot of design for this kind of prime-mover.
Until now we made some suggestions based on devices with order 4 (with a 90 grades symmetry) like some Bessler clues seem to refer (to be confirmed).
On my opinion the best efficiency will be obtained with devices of order 3 (with a 120 grades symmetry) like used in the flowerbowl.
Anyway we can return later on this important point. So far for the moment we will continue with the order 4 in view to be homogeneous with the previous animations and do not create too much confusion in the brains.
How can be defined our prime-mover?
- it must create an unbalance, permanent (if possible), or periodical (also accepted).
- it must be self reactivated every 90 grades of it's rotation (order 4 symmetry)
The simplest prime-mover responding to these requirements is an hamster cage separated into four quarters where four balls are included (one by compartment).
The heavy balls are rolling on the flat part when horizontal, and on the circular part of each compartment or locked during the rest of the time.
I'm pretty sure that all members of this forum made their first test by building such as type of gravity device.
(Me too at the first beginning. I kept some pictures).
This kind of device is depicted in the first animation bellow.
In that state this one don't work!...
(the calculation of the COG drives to a mutual cancellation of the first by the second half of each 90 grades rotation cycle).
But there is a tricky way to solve the problem.
This has to do with the 'impact'...
I know that this point is sensitive (see the number of post or thread on the subject).
In any case I will not be the enemy of the half of those defenders or opponents...I'm hesitating to pursue...
Before to make any complex animation with the combination of the three parts (power axle, flywheel and prime-mover), it could be interesting to better observe the behavior of this prime-mover.
There are a lot of design for this kind of prime-mover.
Until now we made some suggestions based on devices with order 4 (with a 90 grades symmetry) like some Bessler clues seem to refer (to be confirmed).
On my opinion the best efficiency will be obtained with devices of order 3 (with a 120 grades symmetry) like used in the flowerbowl.
Anyway we can return later on this important point. So far for the moment we will continue with the order 4 in view to be homogeneous with the previous animations and do not create too much confusion in the brains.
How can be defined our prime-mover?
- it must create an unbalance, permanent (if possible), or periodical (also accepted).
- it must be self reactivated every 90 grades of it's rotation (order 4 symmetry)
The simplest prime-mover responding to these requirements is an hamster cage separated into four quarters where four balls are included (one by compartment).
The heavy balls are rolling on the flat part when horizontal, and on the circular part of each compartment or locked during the rest of the time.
I'm pretty sure that all members of this forum made their first test by building such as type of gravity device.
(Me too at the first beginning. I kept some pictures).
This kind of device is depicted in the first animation bellow.
In that state this one don't work!...
(the calculation of the COG drives to a mutual cancellation of the first by the second half of each 90 grades rotation cycle).
But there is a tricky way to solve the problem.
This has to do with the 'impact'...
I know that this point is sensitive (see the number of post or thread on the subject).
In any case I will not be the enemy of the half of those defenders or opponents...I'm hesitating to pursue...
- Attachments
-
Last edited by path_finder on Tue May 19, 2009 7:31 pm, edited 3 times in total.
I cannot imagine why nobody though on this before, including myself? It is so simple!...
-
path_finder
- Addict
- Posts: 2372
- Joined: Wed Dec 10, 2008 9:32 am
- Location: Paris (France)
re: We don't care the Bessler wheel, the most important is t
Everybody knows the Newtons cradle.
(it can be seen at the right side of this URL: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Newton%27s_cradle)
If we use the energy gained by the ball reaching 5:30 of the clock for accelerating the ball waiting at 6:30, we will obtain the desired unbalance.
To do that we need to replace the balls by some heavy cylinders supplied with some external axle.
If we keep the geometry of the previous hamster cage it's obvious that the balls cannot have any contact (they are stopped by the wall of the compartment).
Therefore the surfaces of the four cylinders must be free for collision, so far the horizontal sliding must be obtained by the rolling of these axles on some external guides (like the wagon wheels on the rails).
The next animation shows this principle (I apologize for the small size)
Note the position of the cylinders (their axles are rolling on the rails).
The collision occurs at 5:30 and the left cylinder at 6:30 is propulsed up with no negative action anymore.
It will be recuperated by the rails later (about 8:30 depending of the material of the ball and the rotation speed of the wheel).
I want not to create any polemical hereafter on the 'impact' subject.
Just make yourself the test.
For any comments not directly linked to the prime-over but related to the 'impact', please use the correspondent topics. Thanks.
I will continue here the completion of the full system (power axle, flywheel and prime-mover).
(it can be seen at the right side of this URL: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Newton%27s_cradle)
If we use the energy gained by the ball reaching 5:30 of the clock for accelerating the ball waiting at 6:30, we will obtain the desired unbalance.
To do that we need to replace the balls by some heavy cylinders supplied with some external axle.
If we keep the geometry of the previous hamster cage it's obvious that the balls cannot have any contact (they are stopped by the wall of the compartment).
Therefore the surfaces of the four cylinders must be free for collision, so far the horizontal sliding must be obtained by the rolling of these axles on some external guides (like the wagon wheels on the rails).
The next animation shows this principle (I apologize for the small size)
Note the position of the cylinders (their axles are rolling on the rails).
The collision occurs at 5:30 and the left cylinder at 6:30 is propulsed up with no negative action anymore.
It will be recuperated by the rails later (about 8:30 depending of the material of the ball and the rotation speed of the wheel).
I want not to create any polemical hereafter on the 'impact' subject.
Just make yourself the test.
For any comments not directly linked to the prime-over but related to the 'impact', please use the correspondent topics. Thanks.
I will continue here the completion of the full system (power axle, flywheel and prime-mover).
- Attachments
-
I cannot imagine why nobody though on this before, including myself? It is so simple!...
re: We don't care the Bessler wheel, the most important is t
Put a Lab coat on that Hamster!
besides, I already gave an e for effort.
Jerry
besides, I already gave an e for effort.
Jerry
-
path_finder
- Addict
- Posts: 2372
- Joined: Wed Dec 10, 2008 9:32 am
- Location: Paris (France)
re: We don't care the Bessler wheel, the most important is t
Dear smotgroup,
Many thanks for your attention.
I was a little bit anxious by the small level of feedback since some time.
I apologize do not have been explicite enough: the last animation in that state is not very useful.it must be included as prime-mover inside the flywheel like explained in the previous page.Instead this has no sense.
But I pretty shure you understood that yourself.
In addition this is a very basic design intended to depict the principle (there are much more efficient other designs)
Many thanks for your attention.
I was a little bit anxious by the small level of feedback since some time.
I apologize do not have been explicite enough: the last animation in that state is not very useful.it must be included as prime-mover inside the flywheel like explained in the previous page.Instead this has no sense.
But I pretty shure you understood that yourself.
In addition this is a very basic design intended to depict the principle (there are much more efficient other designs)
I cannot imagine why nobody though on this before, including myself? It is so simple!...
-
path_finder
- Addict
- Posts: 2372
- Joined: Wed Dec 10, 2008 9:32 am
- Location: Paris (France)
re: We don't care the Bessler wheel, the most important is t
As promised to ABhammer (are you alone here?), here is the full animation 'hamsterF.gif' with the prime-mover included inside the flywheel.
Click on the picture for a better view, or increase the size (Ctrl+Shft+Plus on Firefox)
Some dimensions have been exagerated for a better view, in particular the diameter of the flywheel axle and of the red drum, wich could be smaller in the reality.
Remember: the power axle is NOT the axis of the flywheel BUT the axle of the red drum.
This prime-mover, even if respecting the rule (active every 90 grades) CANNOT be used because the axle of the red drum CANNOT pass through.
Nevertheless only one of this kind can be used with a hollow cylinder, but we know that the torque will not be sufficient: we need two prime-movers, mutually dephased of 45 grades, in view to have always one active during the slow phase of the other one.
It has been used in this animation just for demonstrating the principle.
Now we need to use a prime-over with an big hole on the center, allowing the wobbling of the red drum axle inside it.
This is the next step of the quest. Anybody has an idea?
Click on the picture for a better view, or increase the size (Ctrl+Shft+Plus on Firefox)
Some dimensions have been exagerated for a better view, in particular the diameter of the flywheel axle and of the red drum, wich could be smaller in the reality.
Remember: the power axle is NOT the axis of the flywheel BUT the axle of the red drum.
This prime-mover, even if respecting the rule (active every 90 grades) CANNOT be used because the axle of the red drum CANNOT pass through.
Nevertheless only one of this kind can be used with a hollow cylinder, but we know that the torque will not be sufficient: we need two prime-movers, mutually dephased of 45 grades, in view to have always one active during the slow phase of the other one.
It has been used in this animation just for demonstrating the principle.
Now we need to use a prime-over with an big hole on the center, allowing the wobbling of the red drum axle inside it.
This is the next step of the quest. Anybody has an idea?
- Attachments
-
I cannot imagine why nobody though on this before, including myself? It is so simple!...
re: We don't care the Bessler wheel, the most important is t
Once again I congratulate you path_finder on your clever use of mechanics & skillful animations - rest assured that most members will be reading & thinking about what you show & have to say - some may have something of value to contribute to get some go-forward but remember that most of us are playing 'catch-up' to your thoughts & that takes time & careful analysis before many are willing to expand on an idea.
For myself, a long time ago, I decided to 'whittle down' the field so to speak - to this end I decided that the gravity only approach was erroneous & that another force/energy was required to have a self sustaining wheel - that meant that a FE machine would be an engine requiring input of energy from an outside source - for me narrowing the field of view & putting the blinkers on a little has helped me focus my attention away from gravity as the primary action to the secondary action - but in order for this hypothesis to be true it becomes self evident that the primary force I am looking for must be both quite large & altogether obvious [once identified] so that it can lift the weights to highest potential before gravity circulates them again, as far as a conservative force can do - it must also be large enough to overcome system frictional losses & do a measure of work to be useful as a FE engine, also an indication that the input force is very tangible & should be conspicuous.
So, whenever I see a new idea, no matter how ingeniously contrived, I immediately look for the source of gradient or force that will provide that energy input - so please forgive me not contributing greatly to your threads - it is not a personal slight but a long ago learned reluctance to revisit gravity only scenario's - those still on that track & who have kept the faith are better positioned to comment objectively & constructively on your designs - I continue to read & think & wonder 'what if' hoping that someone will find the way thru the maze to prove me wrong in my now entrenched view - a retraction I would gladly give - good luck as always.
P.S. I have huge respect for the effort it takes to think thru ideas & then animate or sim them for the discussion group - I also respect the right of individuals to follow whatever path they think will lead to an answer to a FE engine, including gravity only solutions, though some may see my commentary's as not constructive & just criticism, so I often refrain for risk of seeming like a shrew - I could be accurately labelled a benevolent sceptic of gravity as the only source of energy, at least in my own mind ;)
For myself, a long time ago, I decided to 'whittle down' the field so to speak - to this end I decided that the gravity only approach was erroneous & that another force/energy was required to have a self sustaining wheel - that meant that a FE machine would be an engine requiring input of energy from an outside source - for me narrowing the field of view & putting the blinkers on a little has helped me focus my attention away from gravity as the primary action to the secondary action - but in order for this hypothesis to be true it becomes self evident that the primary force I am looking for must be both quite large & altogether obvious [once identified] so that it can lift the weights to highest potential before gravity circulates them again, as far as a conservative force can do - it must also be large enough to overcome system frictional losses & do a measure of work to be useful as a FE engine, also an indication that the input force is very tangible & should be conspicuous.
So, whenever I see a new idea, no matter how ingeniously contrived, I immediately look for the source of gradient or force that will provide that energy input - so please forgive me not contributing greatly to your threads - it is not a personal slight but a long ago learned reluctance to revisit gravity only scenario's - those still on that track & who have kept the faith are better positioned to comment objectively & constructively on your designs - I continue to read & think & wonder 'what if' hoping that someone will find the way thru the maze to prove me wrong in my now entrenched view - a retraction I would gladly give - good luck as always.
P.S. I have huge respect for the effort it takes to think thru ideas & then animate or sim them for the discussion group - I also respect the right of individuals to follow whatever path they think will lead to an answer to a FE engine, including gravity only solutions, though some may see my commentary's as not constructive & just criticism, so I often refrain for risk of seeming like a shrew - I could be accurately labelled a benevolent sceptic of gravity as the only source of energy, at least in my own mind ;)
path_finder
LOL I thought you where doing something like that. Now to solve you axle problem. Make your red drum just an inside track on each side of a larger wheel you can set the hole thing in with a split axle attached at the edges or the wheel. This will allow you to put what ever you want in it and make it as wide as you want. Just a little contribution to the idea.
LOL I thought you where doing something like that. Now to solve you axle problem. Make your red drum just an inside track on each side of a larger wheel you can set the hole thing in with a split axle attached at the edges or the wheel. This will allow you to put what ever you want in it and make it as wide as you want. Just a little contribution to the idea.
-
justsomeone
- Addict
- Posts: 2098
- Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 5:21 pm
re: We don't care the Bessler wheel, the most important is t
Fletcher, Your FULL OF IT. CLASS that is! I know every time I
read one of your posts, it will be well thought out, respectful, classy,
and very informative. Thank you for all your time and effort in this
forum.
read one of your posts, it will be well thought out, respectful, classy,
and very informative. Thank you for all your time and effort in this
forum.
re: We don't care the Bessler wheel, the most important is t
You're welcome guys, so long as the messenger doesn't get shot ;)
My real motivation for posting that last little missive about myself was to give path_finder some encouragement, in the only way I could - so often we feel the imagined breath of on-coming winter, a long gestated idea withering on the vine for lack of nourishment - sometimes real or in-the-mind, but certainly not helped by a quiet vacuum - good for thermoses but not good for the psych :7)
My real motivation for posting that last little missive about myself was to give path_finder some encouragement, in the only way I could - so often we feel the imagined breath of on-coming winter, a long gestated idea withering on the vine for lack of nourishment - sometimes real or in-the-mind, but certainly not helped by a quiet vacuum - good for thermoses but not good for the psych :7)
-
path_finder
- Addict
- Posts: 2372
- Joined: Wed Dec 10, 2008 9:32 am
- Location: Paris (France)
re: We don't care the Bessler wheel, the most important is t
Dear all, many thanks for your encouragement, specially Fletcher (an high spirit), ABhammer(thanks for the suggestion, I will try it) and justsomeone.
As said in a previous page of this thread, nobody has the truth, everybody has a small part of the truth.
The success will be in the sharing of the ideas.
There are too much people still hoping become milliardaire with a self motion-wheel patent.
Any patent will be immediately attacked on the Court for no-value because the anteriorities of any kind (including the very old ideas revisited).
Indeed I cannot understand why the people here do not share their ideas.
When they will be one meter under the floor, there will be no chance for any patent request.
I'm in Cameroon until the end of this month, and will build one when back home, in view to verify the concept. Since perhaps one guest made the same and publish some shots.
As said in a previous page of this thread, nobody has the truth, everybody has a small part of the truth.
The success will be in the sharing of the ideas.
There are too much people still hoping become milliardaire with a self motion-wheel patent.
Any patent will be immediately attacked on the Court for no-value because the anteriorities of any kind (including the very old ideas revisited).
Indeed I cannot understand why the people here do not share their ideas.
When they will be one meter under the floor, there will be no chance for any patent request.
I'm in Cameroon until the end of this month, and will build one when back home, in view to verify the concept. Since perhaps one guest made the same and publish some shots.
I cannot imagine why nobody though on this before, including myself? It is so simple!...