Mayday! Mayday!!!

[raj]

Dear Daano!
Thanks a lot for your reply. I appreciate and learn from your comments.

Allow to repeat what I have said before. I am not here to prove that my design works or argue to convince forum members here that my design is working. I leave it to forum members, each one for himself, to decide.
I can only explain how my design is intended to work.

Referring to your drawing here, my previous learnings are in a bit of conflict with your teaching above.
1. A mass stays the same mass wherever it is on the arm of a seesaw. The mass does not reduce in density or increase in density because it move further from or nearer to the fulcrum.
Otherwise, it would be deadly to children playing on a seesaw.
2. An external mass giving continuous additional force and momentum to a seesaw must be somebody pushing and/or pulling on one of the arms of the seesaw. If that somebody sits fix without any further movements on the seesaw, his additional force would be applied only once at the time of his siiting.
One cannot be on and off a seesaw at the same time.

I must now adjust my learning in the light of the your views.

Raj

[raj]

This is what I understand of a balanced and unbalanced wheel.
See drawing below.

Wheel 1, wheel 2 and wheel 3 will always be in a balanced state ( if they are so precision built) because no matter how much they move, their COG will always be on the central axle.
Whereas wheel 4 (system) will always be in an unbalanced state because even if it moves, most likely it will keel, with its COG horizontally below the axle. Nevertheless it stays an unbalanced wheel (system).

Now I repeat my unanswered question.

Is wheel 4, a killer, a keeler or both?

Raj

[rlortie]

Wheel four is considered unbalanced when it COG is not in its keel position and will turn until it finds its keel/balanced position. Once it stops moving due to low Cog or COM it is considered balanced and at keel, there is no potential or Pe for it to move in either direction. It is in a state of equilibrium

A sailboat is at even keel (balanced) when the mast and keel are in true vertical alignment. That is unless physical characteristics of the boat and its cargo deem otherwise due to unequal loading of port and starboard.

Think of a three blade windmill, even when two blades are above the axis it is still balanced and will cease turning if there is no wind.

Once wheel four finds its keel, it is no longer considered an unbalanced wheel, it has sought and found balance aka it keel point.

I disagree with Bill's statement that a true static balanced flywheel is balanced when in motion. but not worth arguing about. This is a minor play on physics and terminology irrelevant to the cause. The purpose of the flywheel is to dampen any erratic imbalance whether by mass or applied variable torque, by the machine driving it via inertia and Ke. If it were to remain balanced when performing its purpose then there would be no need for its usage.

Ralph

[raj]

Pray Ralph, or any forum members, kindly answer the following:
1. Is wheel 4, (at it frozen 12 o'clock position) in a keel position i.e in balanced state?
2. Does the net torque calculation (at that frozen instant) and torque provided by each of the 8 weights confirm your answer to Q1.
N.B: The drawing is faithfully to scale.
3. Are the weights directly acting on the driving wheel(1) and its axle OR not?
4. How would calculate the torques provided to the wheel by the 8 weights, based on the assumption that the scale of the drawing is 100% correct.
5. What do you think would happen if the wheel turns slightly CCW?
Would that bring a positive change in the net torque in the wheel (system), with the falling top weight CCW?
6. Would the weights keep their elliptical orbit round the wheel(1) axle through a 45 degrees turn of the wheel CCW?

AND finally:
7. Can you kindly draw for me the keel position of my wheel 4 (system).

I know all the above is too much to ask.
But I am too keen to learn. And the only way to learn, I have learnt, is to ask relevant questions.

Raj

[murilo]

Bill,
thanks!
But I'm still not sure if a very fast command is not possible, even if this wheel has 2 axles, where one is not hold and free.
'Very fast' means something able to act following, before turning, or moving after that '6h' artificially left to fall back.
In my simple mind, keeling is ~ same as balancing.
Best!
M

Opsss...
A green bird told me that some of 'prominent members' of this forum are now working in stuffs like shown in tips here in this thread...
I bet!!! 8]
'care!
Murilo

[path_finder]

Dear raj,
IMHO your fourth wheel can be assimilated with the third one (therefore balanced) if you replace a couple of weights by their resultant COG.
However I cannot understand how the upper weight can be located at 12:00 in your drawing: the flip can only occur more later, may be like indicated in the orange area (assuming a clockwise rotation).
But my comment will be valid only if my understanding is good.

Your design is interesting because the same concept can be applied to a 5x2 weights.
In this case the Apologia drawing can be a clue, like in the animation here:
http://www.besslerwheel.com/forum/viewt ... 7390#57390

edited:
the animation is from 'Ron Flory' from Anchorage.
Many thanks to him for sharing.
His last visit was at June 18th 2006. Is this member still here?
Can we have any feedback from his experiments?

[path_finder]

In the previous post above, I made a reference to the following concept:
http://www.besslerwheel.com/forum/viewt ... 9246#59246
which shall be applied to the small wheel (hamster) rolling inside the big one, and not applied to the outer rim of the wheel like shown in my animation.

[raj]

Thanks Murilo, for your encouragement.
I'll keep persuing my ideas a bit more.

Thanks Path_finder for your continued support.
I, sincerely, wish I had your expertise and facilities to mechanical animation and builds.

If one answers my 7 questions above, faithfully and sincerely, I expect him to find my gravity wheel in the drawing above, set to turn counterclockwise. Hence, the top weight will fall CCW, at the slightest turn of the gravity wheel CCW, on to the stop/roller below, as all the weights change their relative positions round the axle of the gravity wheel, and resetting their overall positions every 45 degrees turn of the gravity wheel.

The crunch question is qiestion 4.

In the meantime, I am timidly trying some physical testing of my designs above.

Raj

[raj]

Murilo, I thank you for your hints.

I can assure you that I am on forum to share my ideas/designs with everybody. BUT I have taken care, not to give away originality of any of my ideas/designs to anybody.

Raj

[murilo]

Raj,
now you'll understand the reason why I show only 2 green dots, even besides I use send free tips...

I use to be clear, I kiss no asses and I don't need to fake in order to keep my green crown:

- yes, this is your very good thread but your ideas are not the only ingredients cooking in the pan... as some others will know!

The insight about keeling forced dislocation and managing is a good hit. Now all readers will know that I clearly know! 8)))

Best!
Murilo

[raj]

Hello Everybody!

This new slightly amended drawing should show forum members that my gravity wheel design is well and truly set to turn CCW.

What do forum members like Path_finder, Bill, Riortie, Murilo and others have to say on this new slightly amended drawing?

Raj

[Tarsier79]

In your design you have linked the inner and outer wheel. Consider the balance of forces at each point they will be acting upon.

[rasselasss]

Raj,this may/may not be of use to you (used by draughtmen before computers)....piece of scrap thin perspex set over your sketch centre with a pinhole and pin which can be rotated to plot where or what you want with a fine fibre pen which is easily eraseable with methylated spirit(the image shown has no relation to your subject)......Like yourself i envy those who can animate the images on computer .....PS..i do not worry about being "robbed" by someone patenting what i post,(i know this is controversal)because this site has time and dates recorded of postings and any patent registered not by the "author"will always be after this date and time....thus ownership is proven...

[raj]

A very big thanks to you, Tarsier 79.
Your suggestion to consider all the forces and counter-forces by all the weights at all the contact points on both wheels and my entire gravity wheel system IS THE VERY reason for sending my 'MAYDAY' thread on this forum.

I sincerely wish I had the ability to calculate the torques, CW and CCW, provided by each weight to allow me to find if there could be a net positive torque sufficient to turn the gravity wheel in one direction.
I was expecting that maybe some forum members would be interested enough and help me with my torque calculation.

I welcome your suggestion and I am, very slowly, working on it.
I feel there is something in my present design, because I have learnt somewhere on this forum, I think from MICH(?), that no matter how weights are connected to a wheel or wheels, their positions in relation to the wheel/s that will decide whether the wheel/s will turn or not and in which direction.
I am now looking forward to get the confirmation of this learning, to decide if I should continue with my present ideas/designs.

Something deep inside tells me I maybe on the right tract.

Rasselasss! Thank you for your advice.
I shall definitely try it your way.

Raj

[raj]

See calculating torque by weights on wheel (drawing) below.
It is a common drawing on this forum.

So how would we calculate the torques by each weight in this drawing?

Would we consider the points of contacts (in red ink) for calculating the net torque to find if the wheel will turn or not and in which direction?

OR

Would we use the positions of the weights in relation to the wheel and use this (the horizontal distance of weights from the axle/axis/fulcrum multiplied by mass) i.e LxM?

Raj