Chirality

[Grimer]

I believe motion in three dimensions is needed and that chirality is involved. Masses have to travel part way left handed and part way right handed. I hadn't seen the necessity of this


It isn't sufficient to enclose an area of independent variables. You have to enclose a volume. What with B's wheel being so relatively thin people probably don't realise that one has to work in three dimensions. That's why there have been so many failures and why a 2D simulation program is a trap for the unwary.

[jonnynet]

I often thought about using the 3rd dimension but so far I never found any advantage of this. The same problems I had within 2 dimensions were arising. What I achieved through the 3rd I always could also do in 2. So I was giving up to look for the solution there.

[greendoor]

I could go either way. If there is any relationship with vortex technology (Chlem motor etc) or gyroscope precession or capturing earth rotational energy then I think 3D is probably necessary. But I prefer to think that Bessler simply used the force of gravity directly, and that it's explainable with ordinary 2D Newtonian physics (forget the V^2 energy stuff - that's hopelessly biased against PM, and Bessler didn't know what to make of it either).

I do notice that the Bessler wheels got relatively wider instead of taller as he scaled them up. But that's probably a function of increasing mass sizes - perhaps similar to engine makers adding more pistons for more power.

AFAIK, the axle is a simple axle that doesn't wobble in it's bearings. A tall wheel that precessed a lot would have been talked about. Maybe the weights inside described a 3D path - that's possible, but I can't see much reason for this. The nature of rotating mass is that it tends to resist sideways turning, like a gyroscope or a bike at speed.

[Grimer]

I think you mean the Clem motor.

It's an interesting factoid. It seems to gel with that other spiral legend of the man who invented a perpetual motion toy of ball bearings falling down a vortex spiral and being constantly lifted up.

[agor95]

If an inertial mass is at a fixed position on a wheel. Also the wheel rotates at a set rate. Does it resist sideways movement differently moving with or against the acceleration due to gravity?

[FunWithGravity]

Sometimes a parabolic path along the perimeter of the wheel allows the 3rd dimension to be used while still providing enough latent interia to return the weight to its outermost position. If weight is attached via pendul and a radiatied out from the center tracing a parabolic line around the perimeter it can still provide slight imbalance even in a 3 inch think wheel.

[Grimer]

I could go either way. If there is any relationship with vortex technology (Clem motor etc) or gyroscope precession or capturing earth rotational energy then I think 3D is probably necessary. But I prefer to think that Bessler simply used the force of gravity directly, and that it's explainable with ordinary 2D Newtonian physics (forget the V^2 energy stuff - that's hopelessly biased against PM, and Bessler didn't know what to make of it either).

I do notice that the Bessler wheels got relatively wider instead of taller as he scaled them up. But that's probably a function of increasing mass sizes - perhaps similar to engine makers adding more pistons for more power.

AFAIK, the axle is a simple axle that doesn't wobble in it's bearings. A tall wheel that precessed a lot would have been talked about. Maybe the weights inside described a 3D path - that's possible, but I can't see much reason for this. The nature of rotating mass is that it tends to resist sideways turning, like a gyroscope or a bike at speed.

Now that I've finally seen how the Vesica can be transformed into the Keenie I was a bit concerned at first as to where the third dimension came in. Then I realised is was in the twist of the axle.

Just as in the Keenie the rim has to be attached at one end and the inner wheel attached near the other. Weights have to be dropped down one side of the inner wheel and taken back up the outer wheel, the case, to generate the differential shear couple, the free couple which transfers its action to the centre axle.

[greendoor]

I've often thought that a simple way of forcing a mass to orbit in a parabola would be to use 3D. Like cutting a tube on an angle ...

I can't help thinking that the best implementation will be very simple & elegant - like the path of an electron or a planet or moon, or the fluid flow in a whirlpool or tornado. These are all basically 3D non-circular, and not constrained by anything other than the natural forces between particles. I suspect we are totally missing it by designing circular-path constrained machines.

Maybe Bessler used simple curved wooden compartments to allow rolling weights to follow a 3D vortex-like shape. (A 'horizontal vortex')?

If the resultant effect is to allow the falling weights to 'linger' and the rising weights to take the shortest path, I believe the Impulse = Force x Time maths could account for a momentum surplus between falling & rising.

That would be too simple ...

[path_finder]

the gyroscopic effect when the rim is flexible (from the Eric Laithwaite lectures):
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kRCq3wLMfIM
See between 2:05 and 2:50

[pstroud]

Grimer,

Its funny you mentioned this.... Chirality....
I've done a lot of research on this. I believe the properties relate to the Mann Gravity Mover, which I built replications of for about a year. I started a PES wiki page but have not finished it:

Link: [url]ttp://www.peswiki.com/index.php/Directory:Mann_Gravity_Mover[/url]

There is also a Bessler thread on it:
http://www.besslerwheel.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=3236

When studying Chirality, I zoomed in on the Russian Rattleback. I felt that its movements are similar to the way I imagine the Mann Gravity Mover working. (edit: But I imagine the rattleback cut in half to match the MGM design)

Here are a couple of videos on the russian rattleback.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8hHOHDE5ahE

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PydoEA5Jx5s

I actually purchased one of these from the UK and its is sitting on my desk at work for pass-time thought provoking.

Preston