The Two Axles of MT 55.

[path_finder]

Just an old drawing I found recently in my archives.
Only a tiny link with the title of this thread, but a gift for the fans of Bessler.
The same way for breaking the stones.

[John Collins]

Excellent p_f. I love it.

JC

[Ealadha]

Who drew the stonebraeker waterwheel , was it J.B. ?

[shap-O-vert]

Good find, path_finder.

Is that the wheel operating the battery or vice versa? :-)

I note he uses a ramp for the prime mover.

Ciao

shap-O

[Stewart]

You guys should really check out the old machine books from before and during Bessler's time - there are many examples of stamping mills in them. Jacob Leupold's machine books are particular important to read (such as his "Theatrum Machinarum Generale" from 1724) - Bessler even gets a mention in it. Bessler also mentions the books of Leupold in MT. Even if you can't read the German text, it's worth studying the pictures to get an understanding of the knowledge of machines at the time and construction techniques etc. They've also helped me to understand the terms Bessler uses better. The pictures are beautifully detailed works of art in these types of book and not just basic diagrams. All the pictures I've attached to this post come from Georg Andreas Böckler's book "Theatrum Machinarum Novum", 1661. I'll sort out some links to various machine books and add them to the Wiki documents page soon.

Stewart

[shap-O-vert]

Velocity of Weight Down a 4° Ramp.

An update.

The Issue:

Bessler’s Gera wheel is recorded as having rotated at 56 rpm.

Followers of this thread (and The Anvils of MT 138) will know that I have proposed:

1. a ramp supported by a fixed axle to carry the mass of the weights down this ramp to remove –ve from the –ve side of the wheel; and that this ramp removes the equivalent of 25° of –ve;

2. A spherical weight with pegs either side – these pegs to carry the weight down the ramp. Two options of peg design were proposed: one tapered (to correct “drift� of the weight into the rails of the ramp) with mean diam. of 0.6 cm; the other straight (1.0 cm diam).

The Performance Test:

On testing both these designs down a 35 cm ramp, the average time taken was 5.45 secs for the weight with the tapered pins and 4.55 secs for the straight pins.

Based on the Gera wheel’s performance, to obtain a 56 rpm result the weights need to travel the 35 cm in:

25°/360° x 60sec/56rpm = 0.074 secs. (or 4.7285 m/s).

Clearly this is a lot faster than that which was achieved in the performance test.

Conclusion:

Bessler could not have used weights (supported on pegs) as they rolled down the ramp and achieved the rpms he is recorded as having achieved.

Thoughts?

Regards

shap-O-vert

[jim_mich]

Most wheels are hindered by latency. The weights move too late. Most wheel designs expect gravity to shift or move a weight. But it takes time for the weight to shift or move. By the time the weight has moved into its new position it's usually too late to help with turning the wheel.

[bluesgtr44]

Hey Jim, about that latency...when you first mentioned this the thought that came to my mind was Bessler's mentioning of the "connectedness". In MT, he mentions...

"To be sure, in all the weight drawings that I have found, these weights appear simple and are not connected together with belts or chains, even in Leupold, but nothing is to be accomplished with any device unless my principle of movement in activated; but here I neither wish to show nor discuss the figure for the time being.".....J. Collins pub. M.T. #9....

Do you think this latency is some of what he was addressing with this tidbit of information? It would make sense that if anything within this design is assisting in the propulsion of the wheel that there would need to be a way to maintain the integrity of the parts and pieces in their movement. So, connecting them to each other in a specified way would ensure that it would have to atleast move, whether other forces hindered it or not, due to the "connectedness"...would it not? This also has me wondering if the "prime mover" actually applies it's force on just a portion of the overall system and that this connectedness is what helps keep the timing together...so to speak.

Thanks for jostling the brain a bit with this one, Jim.


Steve

[jim_mich]

"Connectedness" seems to play a big part. Bessler mentions cross-bars, which are a form of connectedness. He also talks of the "two and two things" and where one weight moves outward as another gravitates to the center, which also implies connectedness.

Just remember that a weight cannot fall until it is OOB. Which means it must be first lifted upward. Which, if OOB gravity is the driving force, cannot happen quick enough. Thus some other force must lift the weights.

I vote for CF being this other force. It helps the weights move sooner, quicker, fast rather than latter, slower, and too late. I believe CF is the accelerating force that overcomes latency. CF also transfers momentum from a slower moving mass to a faster moving mass, thus quadrupling the inertial kinetic force of the faster mass while reducing the inertial kinetic force of the slower mass to near zero. This requires a connection between the two masses, or between the four masses when there "are now two and two things", which IMO results in a balanced wheel.

[Grimer]

Dear shap-O-vert,
Because the mandatory for a grounded reference, it's obvious that one axle linked to the frame(floor) must go inside the wheel.
Any primemover must have a reference for determining the direction of the counteraction to be applied.
IMHO an internal simple keeling pendulum cannot assume this reference function (not stable enough).

It may be "obvious" but it's not correct.

Yes, you have to have a reference but, no, it doesn't have to be the earth - or even a reference loosely linked to the earth such as a keeling pendulum.

[shap-O-vert]

jim_mich says:

.....and where one weight moves outward as another gravitates to the center, which also implies connectedness.

I'm not sure that "gravitates" is the right word, although I understand what you are driving at.

Bessler says in Das Triumphirende Perpetuum Mobile Orffyreanum

.....incessantly seek with their admirably fast swing to move and drive on the axis of their vortices loads that are vertically applied from the outside

.
http://www.besslerwheel.com/writings/da ... phans.html

Which seems to suggest that one weight lifts another, against gravity.

On the question of "latency", does this possibly account for the limit on the maximum rpms achieved by the Gera (one-way) wheel? How did Bessler deal with the latency issue?

Regards

shap-O-vert

[ruggerodk]

SOV:
I agree with you - "Gravitate" is a difficult word to identify the true meaning of.
So I had to look up my dictionary.
"Seaking or moving to the Center of Gravity (CoG)" seems to be the translation I've got.
"Gravitate to the Center" sounds like saying the same thing twice.
Or is Bessler actually saying that the CoG moves to the center (of the wheel)?
If so, perhaps he disclose the possible fact that CoG might not be at the center (of the wheel)...?

But DID Bessler even say anything about the true path of this movement?

Was the weight moving horizontal, vertical or diagonal, in a curved, straight or even helical path?

What we know for a fact is, that one weight moves to the center (of the wheel?) while another moves outward (to the perimeter of the wheel?).
I believe that "moving outward" meaning "moving away from the center"....logically

regards
ruggero ;-)

[jim_mich]

"anyone who wants can go on about the wonderful doings of these weights, alternately gravitating to the center and climbing back up again, for I can't put the matter more clearly." - pg 295 (of Apologia Poetica)

[ruggerodk]

Thanks Jim,
So "Alternately" could be translated as "every second time" meaning a repeating cycle of gravitating first and secondly climbing back up...?

Do you have any idea of the meaning of "Climbing back up again"?
I mean: back UP could just as well be UP to the Center of the wheel - depending of your frame of reference, right?

ruggero ;-)

[Grimer]

Just an old drawing I found recently in my archives.
Only a tiny link with the title of this thread, but a gift for the fans of Bessler.
The same way for breaking the stones.

Interesting drawing. At first, though I could see it looked like a water wheel I couldn't see where the water was. I was thinking in terms of an undershot wheel. That thing above the wheel I interpreted as the cornice of a building.

Eventually I became aware that those lines must represent water and I was looking at an overshot wheel.