right angles

[preoccupied]

What do you think Bessler meant when he said "weights applied force at right angles to the axis."?

If someone has an idea that involves right angles I would love to see it.

[jim_mich]

A force applied to a wheel at a wrong angle won't rotate the wheel. So I guess the force must be applied at a right angle.

[preoccupied]

I think Bessler meant the x and y axis. I think the weight bessler talks of needs to be equal distance form the x and y axis when it falls. So either it goes all the way to the center when it falls to the x axis or it goes diagonally upwards somehow. Or the y axis is in a different spot than the axle.

I think that the way I calculate the torque might be incorrect for the animation but by my way of calculating torque there is more than enough to lift a weight back up. I think the torque here is based on going straight down and not leverage or is based on the length of the first arm attached to the axle and not the second arm.

[preoccupied]

As I described in the previous post I think there is like an X in the middle of the axis to represent all the right angles. If a weight were attached to an arm attached to an arm attached to an axle and it were to move along the X in the middle of the axis representing all the right angles it might look like this animation for one weight.

[path_finder]

it's what KAS made in his wheel (six arms) here:
http://www.besslerwheel.com/forum/download.php?id=10089

[Tarsier79]

You need more than just weight position.

[preoccupied]

KAS is similar but different. I only have a cross and KAS had three paths to me two.

[rlortie]

My 2 cents worth;

Adding more weights to the above animation is simply another mechanical guise for changing height for width. Although your linkage represents a right angle to the axis your weight does not!

Many attempts have been made by using varied mechanical designs similar to yours. What I do is look at the drawings and erase all but the weights, they usually end up in a symmetrical pattern with more on the ascent than descent, yours is not different.

Question we should be discussing here is; Where is a weight placed within a wheel that is at a right angel to the axis??? If it falls within an imaginary radial line from axis to rim, where is the right angle???

Cf always pulls outward from the axis and as such does not promote any pull on the circumference of the machine, if it were at a right angle then it may be of significance.

Ralph

[erick]

I think it just means that one weight must move away from the central axis, perpedicularly. Maybe this implies that the other moves parallel to the axis? I don't know.

I do however agree with Tarsier79; simple positioning of weights farther away from the axis on one side than the other will not work. I know from experience. Either WM2D is wrong or it simply doesn't work...

E

[preoccupied]

Maybe right angles to the axis is just the y axis by itself because it is perpendicular from the x axis.

[preoccupied]

I shifted the cross path to the side and added 2 weights and arms to each of the four arms attached to the axle. I don't think it makes a difference in torque but it looks like it. I thinK I will hav eto modify the length of the levers attached to the axle.

[pequaide]

The only force that can accelerate a wheel (with a bearing) is a force tangent to one of the concentric circles within that wheel. This is no doubt the 90° of which Bessler spoke. But it is another non-clue. I would not be surprised if all his so called clues were non-clues; they were meant to mislead rather than steer you in the right direction.

Bessler is trying to make you think it is an overbalanced wheel that slowly shift its internal masses. Did he know that if he gets you going down that road you will never get it right? These slowly shift overbalanced wheels were a common concept back then (as now); all he has to do is key the investigator into that common misconception and his competitor is toast.

He did not want you to get it; or he would have told you exactly how to make the machine; as I have done.

[Art]

[quote="jim_mich"]A force applied to a wheel at a wrong angle won't rotate the wheel. So I guess the force must be applied at a right angle.


Thats an interpretation I hadn't considered before Jim .

Do you think the German word for "Right angle " could be read as "Correct angle " ?

Puts quite a different slant on his statement if this is the correct interpretation !

[rlortie]

pequaide Wrote;

He did not want you to get it; or he would have told you exactly how to make the machine; as I have done.

Your thread; Energy producing experiments is 73 pages long with 1094 posts. http://www.besslerwheel.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=2580

Please reiterate and explain exactly where you have told us how to make the machine?

If you know how, do you have a running prototype that you are not ready to expose? Or is it possible your statement is a little bit stretched?

Yes I agree that an Atwood pulls on the axis at a right angle but that does not explain self-sustaining.

Ralph

[nicbordeaux]

The sole "clue" that Bessler left that seem's to be of any significance is the statement about weights working in pairs, and seeking to attain equilibrium but never managing to do so. Just my uninformed opinion.