Speculations on the witness's evidence

[scott]

Banned for violating Terms of Service.

[FunWithGravity2]

good job

[DrWhat]

Ralph, in an earlier post you said:

"If Scott's post from 2002 and my input are on target, then the impetus applied creating the noise would be on the "ascending" side of the wheel. Similar to Johns theory of 'Kiking' or pumping a swing, the input is applied on the upswing. Same as in a clock!"

I agree the impetus would be on the upswing of the pendulum, but didn't eyewitnesses say the tapping was on the "descending" side of the wheel?

I also agree on the ascending side would be the best option though.

My thoughts are we can't try and slow the swing of the pendulums on the opposite side of the wheel.

Anyone have ideas how to tap or strike the pendulums? A mechanism?

Damian

[rlortie]

Damion,

IIRC only one witness claimed to hear eight weights allegedly falling on the descending side, was this the same witness report that stated the machine would lift a 'hundred weight or the one who said it would lift around 60 pounds using a four part line.

Why would I want to allow a drive weight to fall on the descent wasting its Pe?

My point being; if we are ever to get out of this 300 years of stagnation we must put assumptions and speculations aside and dive in head first.

IMO it was not the weights he heard falling but the hammers (clubs) resetting that apply the impetus to the pendulums on the ascent.

Children play among the pillars with loud heavy clubs.

The pillars are the spokes that the pendulums pivot from.

An anvil receives many blows.

Anyone have ideas how to tap or strike the pendulums? A mechanism?

James used a simple wire handled basting brush, but I prefer;

The jack fires. The bow twangs;

The hammer toy would be a good place to start.

As previously stated; Bessler's clues and Apologia will become clear. You now have enough material in this thread to get your hands busy building rather than sit and talk about it. The cracker barrel is empty! :-)

Ralph

[DrWhat]

Rolph.

The issue with a 'tapping' mechanism is changing the balance (or point of equilibrium) of the wheel when one hammer activates. If there are enough hammers and they are small enough then their change of positions may not affect the wheel as much. This is, say without the pendulums yet attached. So when a hammer fires, the wheel rotates back a little to compensate for the loss of height of that mass.

The next question is since the pendulums are moving and their displacement changes, how do you keep the hammer against the pendulum at the right time. It is nearly as though the hammer needs to ride along with the pendulum and move faster than the pendulum such that it strikes it no matter where the pendulum has swung to, but at the set time. A hammer tapping when the pendulum displacement is small will miss the pendulum when the displacement is much greater.

D

Just some thoughts.

Damian

[ovyyus]

IIRC only one witness claimed to hear eight weights allegedly falling on the descending side...

Fischer wrote, "the sound of about eight weights, which fall gently on the side towards which the wheel turns"

Wolff wrote, "One could hear the weights landing on the overbalanced side"


PS, well done Scott!

[FunWithGravity2]

I'm confused, i thought ralph was the accomplished builder. Is he asking us to build a simple mechanism that he beleives in but never followed through with himsilf?

Day late Ralph.

1. Your hammer falls in against CF, really?

2. a pendulum in descent while its pivot descends deos not weight four times as much at the bottom.

3. The pendulum on the ascending side will never be "weightless" as the pivot poit is accelerating away from it, unlike a static pivot example.

I have spent years and thousands of builds with pendulums, it would appear your lack of even the simplest POP has allowed you to overlook some of the basics. While asking others to do it.

Dive right in and do my experiments for me because i have seen the light, i am to busy judging others work effort deciding who to give pictures too. I am not in your inbox, you may have lost your mind.

[getterdone]

It seems as if I all run into the same problem when with all my builds. Put quite simply, the wheel always goes to about 90 to 95% of the distance that I'd like it to go, with loss due to friction and wind resistance etc.

JC's comment on the first page of this thread got me thinking. If one of the brightest minds in history wasn't certain he was hearing 8 knocks per revolution, maybe he wasn't.

If we take MT137 as an example, the wheel is devided into 12 equal parts. If you start from 12 o'clock, the line goes 150 degrees, then to 300 degrees ,and then back to 90degrees. This would give the wheel 390 degrees of rotation, minus the friction loss, and you would still have more than 360 degrees, 4 complete cycles of the wheel and the entire process repeats itself

This is still just a half baked idea, just a thought

[rlortie]

Rolph. That' with an 'a' if you do not mind!

The issue with a 'tapping' mechanism is changing the balance (or point of equilibrium) of the wheel when one hammer activates. If there are enough hammers and they are small enough then their change of positions may not affect the wheel as much. This is, say without the pendulums yet attached. So when a hammer fires, the wheel rotates back a little to compensate for the loss of height of that mass.

The hammer pivot points are symmetrical, as one drops its opposite is resetting. One negates the other.

The next question is since the pendulums are moving and their displacement changes, how do you keep the hammer against the pendulum at the right time. It is nearly as though the hammer needs to ride along with the pendulum and move faster than the pendulum such that it strikes it no matter where the pendulum has swung to, but at the set time. A hammer tapping when the pendulum displacement is small will miss the pendulum when the displacement is much greater.

No intent to demean your mechanical skills, but do you not see that timing and resonance is the main requirement here? You are not digesting what has been written, the hammer does not strike the pendulum, it strikes the dampener weight or 'Anvil' which is always horizontal in reference to the hammer at time of impact.

Ralph

[LustInBlack]

Ralph, misread.. forget it.

[rlortie]

IIRC only one witness claimed to hear eight weights allegedly falling on the descending side...

Fischer wrote, "the sound of about eight weights, which fall gently on the side towards which the wheel turns"

Wolff wrote, "One could hear the weights landing on the overbalanced side"

Thanks for the correction Bill! I do not wish to inadvertently or intentionally misinform anyone here!

Ralph

[rlortie]

FWG2,

I'm confused, i thought ralph was the accomplished builder. Is he asking us to build a simple mechanism that he beleives in but never followed through with himsilf?

A total speculation and/or assumption with credence on your part which I consider somewhat insulting! Yes I consider myself to be an accomplished builder. Yes I have followed through with this concept and am still working on it as health permits which is diminishing.

1. Your hammer falls in against CF, really?

You can look at it in that manner, but you also must consider that it is falling inward with the assistance of inertia, gravity, and Ke which is more than enough to circumvent what little Cf is dominant.

2. a pendulum in descent while its pivot descends deos not weight four times as much at the bottom.

I do not recall ever stating that it did, furthermore I could care less as to how much it weighs as it always weighs the same. It is the application of Cf that makes it appear heavier. As long as more force is developed than the lesser force created on the ascending side while in upward motion.

3. The pendulum on the ascending side will never be "weightless" as the pivot poit is accelerating away from it, unlike a static pivot example.

The pivot point is not accelerating away from the pendulum, it is moving adjacent and with the pendulum.

I have spent years and thousands of builds with pendulums, it would appear your lack of even the simplest POP has allowed you to overlook some of the basics. While asking others to do it.

I cannot speak for your builds other than to say that you 'apparently' have not taken a few point into consideration. Your accusation that I appear to lack the simplest POP is once again an assumption on your part which I highly refute. I am not asking anyone to do anything, I am suggesting that they experiment with what is being described and form their own conclusions.

Dive right in and do my experiments for me because i have seen the light, i am to busy judging others work effort deciding who to give pictures too. I am not in your inbox, you may have lost your mind.

Sounds like a personal thing or 'dig' to me. I am sending the pictures to whom ever asks for them, no decisions based on anything are being made. Ask and ye shall receive. To rebuke my explanations without substantiation will get you no farther response. I do not have the time to quibble.

Ralph

[rlortie]

getterdone,

If we take MT137 as an example, the wheel is devided into 12 equal parts. If you start from 12 o'clock, the line goes 150 degrees, then to 300 degrees ,and then back to 90degrees. This would give the wheel 390 degrees of rotation, minus the friction loss, and you would still have more than 360 degrees, 4 complete cycles of the wheel and the entire process repeats itself

This is still just a half baked idea, just a thought

I consider it a thought that should not be dismissed! I too am for some yet unexplainable reason drawn to MT 137. I have in the past spent many of hours with the design using a variety of different connections. It may hold the property for the augmented synchronization to bring a wheel to governed resonance.

Ralph

[DrWhat]

(Ralph, I wrote your name as Rolph since you misspelled my name twice in fact...trying to give you a polite hint. After so many years that was quite surprising)!!!

[rlortie]

Damian,

Sorry about that! know better as my Grandson is also 'Damian' Just to much rattling of the old 'P' brain going on! Did not see the connective hint!

Rafio