The summary of my latest studies

[path_finder]

For those with some difficulties for find a convenient spiral springs (size and force), an alternative is here:
http://www.stanleydoorclosers.com/index.asp?MODE=D1650

But on the other hand I prefer my own way: a helicoidal spring, colinear with the pendulum rotation axle, with the two ends attached to the frame and the middle attached to the freewheel. A shot of Grimer shows the principle, here: http://www.besslerwheel.com/forum/files/whirler.jpg

[path_finder]

Hereafter some shots on my personal implementation of the springs.
You can see the two springs (at each side of the pendulum, for a balanced mechanical torque).
A points: linkage of one end of the spring to the frame.
B points: linkage of the other end to the pendulum.
The torque is adjustable by the number of turns you apply to the spring before to fix the attachment.
In my case the springs were not so strong and therefore the torque is low, like you can see in the second shot, showing the pendulum at the keeling position.
Therefore the angle is weak but we can use more stronger springs.

An important point before to continue was to verify the eccentricity of the swing.
The small video shows a significative difference between the angles of the swing (about 45 grades at left, but only 30 grades at right), the keeling position being the central position of the swing.
Now I'm sure, all four pendulas will be eccentered during the full rotation of the wheel.
It was not obvious...

[Ken]

The springs are attached to the weights.

[path_finder]

Being for two weeks in Chile, my experiments are now suspended.
Forcast of the next step the 15th of May. Sorry.

[murilo]

path,
why not make a stop at SP?
I'll pay the coffee and/or beer... and show you my model.
Nice trip!
M

[path_finder]

Just returned back from Chile I tested the wheel with the four pendula supplied with the springs in accordance with the above previous shot.
The results are impressive: the wheel starts very quickly and rotates two full turns.
At about the end of the second turn the wheel stops and rotates back for about two turns, and so on, alternatively in the both directions, with a decreasing amplitude.
I found quickly why, and this can be easily explained.

In the present configuration the springs are attached one end to the pendulum's rod and the other end to the frame of the wheel.
The preset condition of the springs (about 720 grades, depending of the original pression you give) is equivalent to an energy storage.
The four pendula are excentered and the COG gives an important torque responsible of the quick and efficient start of the rotation.

But during this rotation the axles of the pendula are also rotating, so far the tension of the spiral springs is reduced and the torque is decreased until zero when the initial setup has been compensated.
Continuing the process the spiral springs this time are tied in the reversed direction, creating a negative torque which stores the kinetic energy.
The process is reversed with some friction losses.

Therefore the solution is not here.
But this is very instructive: the concept is confirmed.
What we need now, is to find how to compensate the rotation of the pendulum axles.
IMHO here the freewheels will be helpfull.
The final solution is in a combination of the freewheels and the spiral springs.
The implementation is in progress. The results: tomorow.

[Jon J Hutton]

I have been away for a while pursuing a project (pump) of mine that I discoverd as a result of my quest for pm...made a video of it here. I am not selling anything it just proves that we accept that the current way of doing things is by far the best and we can go for years without challenging the way things are done.

The pump is using a 2 hp motor pumping water up 9 feet, through an elbow and along another 4 foot of pipe. The reserve at the bottom is 76" long 48" wide and it pumps about 11 inches of water in between 6 and 7 seconds before it starts sucking air. There is a 2 horse motor on it now, but becuase of resistance changes we made we are going to replace it with a 1 hp. If you look at the square part of the spout, you can see the water mark where the water started.

http://youtu.be/Ypk27HoQMJ4

enjoy

[murilo]

John,
it's a submersible huge pump!

The 11'' volume rising looks really great for 2x2Hp!

Congratulations!
Best!
M

[Jon J Hutton]

Thanks Murilo,

If you do the math 76x48x11=40128x(60/7(=8.5))=341088/231(cubic inches per gallon)=1476 gpm at 9 ft. of head..with a 2 hp motor....not bad.

There is still much to figure on this incredible effecient pump. I am just scratching the surface. I do not have a patent so it is difficult to get a professional opinion on it. When I tell the results to people like franklin or many other companies they just are silent and tell me I must be wrong. I show them the video and they say....they want to see it, yea right. So it is moving cautiously along.

Jon

[jim_mich]

I did some rough calculations. It looks like you are getting the equivalent of about 3.77 HP out. If your input is 2 HP then, what's happening? Double check the input volts & amps to the motor when under load. Motors will draw greater current and produce extra HP when overloaded. But they will also overheat and burn up. In other words, you cannot expect a 2 HP motor to always draw only the electrical equivalent of 2 HP of electricity. Motors just don't work that way. As the load goes up, they draw more current. And the ratio of current input to output force changes as they start creating and wasting heat.

[Jon J Hutton]

label of motor....I am checking the amp draw, but have been adding the water seal instead of the bearing mech seal to cut back resistance. The motor is running cool to warm (like that scientific term). I wrote down the amp draw and will post it when I find it. It did not seem high for the motor at the time I saw it.

[murilo]

John,
once I got some experiments with // and series fans and same think I saw may help you with 2 motors, specially if you connect them to a same rotor, each side.

What may happen is that the motor with lower RPM, even a few %, will be dragged - as a charge - by the faster one and the set may not be so effective as theory.

If I understood Jim, both motors you use may be far of max possible power.

Best!
M

[Jon J Hutton]

Murilo and Jim,

Thanks for the replies,

I did the same rough calculations and I know what you mean by whats going on. The math is elementary....gpm*head*8.3370/33000=hp in this case given the numbers 1476*8.33*9/33000=3.35*745.69=2632 working watts or 2.632 kw in other words the pump has to consume that many watts or it is over unity....if you take out resistance of seals, flow resistance from dia of pipe and its length, temp of water and sea level calcs it would be even higher....what is going on, I have no idea.

I am planning on using a 1 hp because we made the internal components 50 percent lighter and using water seals instead of mech seals.

I just received a call from the director of engineering dept at the university close to where I live and they have agreed to do iso testing on it next week. I will keep you posted.

By the way, It is not a piston, vane, parastolic, pump. It is closer to a centrifugal pump. But, I think that what is happening is that all cent. pump work because of the capillary effect they have on water and not centrifugal dynamics only, meaning that the more surface area a cent pump exhibits the more efficient it becomes. That is why the tesla water pump was so efficient but a bear to make.

It only uses one motor but can be stacked or staged much easier than a normal cent pump and can handle sand and gravel up to 3/8". Uses no special volute or casing.

The price for the pump if made out of plastic not including the 2 hp motor is about $75.00 capable of 1500 gpm and would weigh under 15 pounds. It does follow normal head to rpm rule meaning that the pump could just as easily be used as a fire pumper or scaled down to a fish aquarium. Handle caustic, hot or slurry fluids. I am not selling it, I am just saying how much it cost me to make.

Jon

[Jon J Hutton]

edited out

[path_finder]

Dear Jon,
Really deeply respectful of any personal studies including your pump which appears interesting, I regret this kind of highjacking, your pertinent data justifying the aperture of a new thread or perhaps a new follow to an old previous topic on the same subject.
In addition I see no connection with the gravitic engines in general and with Bessler in particular.
No intent to offend you, just a reminder of the common rules in use in this excellent forum.