Besslers prime mover and its enabler.

[Sam Peppiatt]

You are right Fletcher!
They were insanely thin and could turn in either direction,(IMO). That eliminates a lot of possibilities, which gives me an "Idea". Also, I might add, great simplicity is difficult to imagine---------------Sam

[Roxaway59]

I have already posted this on Fletchers thread but I want it on this thread also.

Its similar to another idea I will be posting soon.

Graham

[Roxaway59]

Here is a modified version of the last one.

I have added a ramp on the weighted pendulum and this moves the mechanism out even at lower speed.

The motor is set to 10 rpm and when you turn the motor off you will see the impacts giving the wheel a kick.

This I think is a kind of whiplash effect that is being translated to the outer pivot of the mechanism.

Graham

[Roxaway59]

This is very similar to the last but this one has two mechanisms.

The initial speed is 15 rpm and and when the motor is turned off the speed slowly increases. If the initial speed is around 10 rpm it struggles to increase.

Once it reaches higher speeds the mechanisms can become unstable and this maybe because there is only one weighted pendulum for both mechanisms.

Graham

[Roxaway59]

Mmm...... I'm not at all sure about this but one thing that strikes me as being odd about these simulations is the fact that I can hardly change the yellow weight on the mechanisms without it causing problems and this strikes me as being wrong.

So aside from the fact that I don't know where the extra energy would be coming from it is looking like it maybe another Algodoo red herring?

Graham

[agor95]

Hello Roxaway59

I have come across comments from various sources that Integrating in simulators can generate 'excess energy'.

The errors trend towards excess. In an ideal world there would be no errors or randomly cancelling out with equal number of plus & negative error bias.

The thing is simulators are close code so we do not know the calculation methods implemented.

Regards

[Roxaway59]

Hi agor95, there is another thing that struck me about this and I'm not sure it could be a bit half baked.

The mechanism on the left doesn't oscillate but the one on the right does along with the impact. I'm wondering if the oscillation itself is beneficial to the wheels rotation. That would also explain why the weights are more critical but its just a theory.

Graham

[Fletcher]

I have already posted this on Fletchers thread but I want it on this thread also.

Its similar to another idea I will be posting soon.

Graham

Hi Graham .. I need more information about your Algodoo sim build I'm afraid - I can basically open an Algodoo sim file and run it, but not much more than that - iow's, I can't easily find my way around and interrogate it for build details so I have to rely on you to tell me what you built and did blow by blow ( explaining it to a bar maid :7) .. )

What I am seeing at a quick glance is a background disk with center axle/pivot - hanging from that is an "artificial horizon ( AH )" i.e. a heavy plumb bob ( MT13ish ), which keeps it in vertical position below the axle unless a force acts on it to displace it sideways etc ..

Then I see a pivoting part parallel bar linkage arrangement to the right hand side - attached to this is a round weight below the x-axis - on the opposite side at the same x distance from center is a counter weight ..

It appears there is a motor attached to start it rotating CW - at some point the parallel linkage collides with the AH arrangement - I'm guessing the motor is turned off at some stage ..

Basic thoughts ..

1. I don't know whether you have a one-way bearing/clutch in there ? - I can not build them easily in WM if at all ..

2. all I'm seeing is a pendulum arrangement that collides with an AH arrangement and if the motor was OFF it would swing CW and eventually collide with the AH rod which would waste some energy, before swinging back again ..

3. I'm not seeing a reason for it to self accelerate itself i.e. be self-moving and gain rpm ..

[Roxaway59]

Hi Fletcher I don't think you are reading anything wrong in the way the simulation works and as a rule I don't tend to have hidden items so there is no clutch it works just as you see. Its very simple.

Another odd thing that I have noticed is that the less accurate you make the simulation the more likely it wont work.

Now that wouldn't be so odd if there was a clear reason why it works but like yourself I don't see one.

Most of the time in Algodoo if something works on low accuracy it struggles to work on high accuracy. This is doing the opposite and it is a lot more obvious on the last two simulations I posted.

I think the best way forward would be for me to do the best I can in WM2D and post that so you can have a look at it.

Graham

[Roxaway59]

Fletcher one thing I forgot to mention is that the restitution for the impact is set to 1. This means that there should be no losses from the impact. However If you set the restitution to say 0.5 so there are losses it still works.

Graham

[Roxaway59]

Its never a good idea for me to come up with a theory without properly engaging my brain so no doubt this will back fire on me.

Fletcher what if this is a real effect?

What if it isn't the impact itself that's making any difference other than losing some energy and it isn't anything exactly to do with the oscillation either?

What if it is a momentary pulse that is similar to what Robinhood did with his real build whereby the blue beams are changing length in a snapping action giving the wheel a kick?

It would be both the combination of sudden stop and the swinging of the weight.

Graham

[agor95]

Hello Roxaway59

...
I'm wondering if the oscillation itself is beneficial to the wheels rotation. That would also explain why the weights are more critical but its just a theory.

I have to think generally on this thought without the software you used.

I reconfigured my PC and some software was deleted to give me space to move data around.
Repartitioning, partition resizing and moving etc. To my surprise I got away with it without trashing my system.

There is a beneficial affect with masses swinging in three or more dimensions. And none in 1 or 2 dimensions.

Impacts takes simulators, that used finite integration, into error prone event regions.
Such regions create excess energy this does not exist in the real world.

Note. I use the term 'real world' loosely. However the 'real world' produces consistent results at a greater rate than simulations.
If you like one could interpret optical illusions as examples of the simulator software going into a error prone region.
Then you could consider our perceived 'real world' as a neural network simulator Mark I.

Regards

[Roxaway59]

Hi agor95 so basically you are saying that the impacts in the simulations may be producing an error?

Do you think this may be because objects are overlapping momentarily?

Graham

[agor95]

Hello Roxaway59

There is the problem; We have no access to the code within simulators except when you build it yourself.

When you do you see how easy it is to have biased errors that accumulate as integration calculates the area under a curve of a function.

Software deals with overlap events in various ways. What ever way is used the software tries to cause the energy in to be proportional to energy out.
Normally less on the way out by a factor resulting in energy loss.

The key point is to make the simulation too appear realistic for the user; That is a subjective call.

What we are looking for is an energy increase that is not from a known integration error bias or a rapid contact movement fix.

P.S. This thread has over 1 million views and it's only started in 2023 !

Regards

[Roxaway59]

Thanks agor95, all I know is that in Algodoo the higher the accuracy the less objects overlap and the more tighter everything is.

I know that this simulation works the same even if the accuracy is set 40 times higher than the highest setting.

I will do a version in WM2D and see what others can do with it.

Graham