Musings on Gravity

[murilo]

Wow!
Thanks Grimer!
Here is it once again and just pasted from IDEAS section:
http://www.besslerwheel.com/murilo/index.html
Hope it will work now! 8|
Best!
M.
PS edition: now it worked fine! Thanks again!

[eccentrically1]

Yes it worked Murilo, the graphics are impressive. But don't you think your avalanche drive is going to have a lot of friction to overcome? Each one of those segments in the chain adds up to a lot of inefficiency, I'm afraid. But it's an interesting idea based on the scissors/Jacob's ladder motion.

[murilo]

No... sorry, it's not based in any scissors from anyone - thanks very much if you can send me something about.

Most of the device is assembled by gravity and this means that great part of friction, or 'touch' is very good and part of device.

The friction is found just in the small axles of the chain when the angles are been open of shut.

You must be thinking about the compensatory reposition velocity and it's reached at the outer perimeter of that wheel with hooks.

Note: the 'natural' velocity is going to be hold and a lower one will be imposed, as 'resistance', to wheel's main axle.

Thanks!
M.

[AB Hammer]

murilo

PM sent. I am glad to see a new interest in your avalanche. I was hoping to have time to build it first with the changes we talked about first. Oh well. LOL

Alan

[eccentrically1]

Murilo the scissors and Jacob's ladder I said your idea resembled is part of Besslers MT drawings; I thought you knew what that referred to. I think it's the 137-141 drawing number.

Friction is never good in an engine Murilo. The less friction, the better. In your chain, each link has friction associated at every point where it connects to the next link. When the chain has to expand or contract to make one side heavier and the other lighter, those connections require energy to open and close, and your chain has a lot of links and even more connections.

I don't recognize your terms "compensatory reposition velocity" or "natural" velocity.
I hope that helps!

[murilo]

Eccentrically1,
in the present case, the contact between elements of the chain is a must, because it forces a segmented body to behavior as a pure solid.

Believe me, this is very true! This must not to be understood as pure friction that operates against mechanism performance.

The vertical rails make the compacted pile to fall almost 100% free.

I had some accidents during my tragic model building that is now stuck. The pile acts as a huge strong piston.

About velocity: pile at left falls with weight '2' at velocity '1' and will force the left pile to rise at vel. '2' and weight '1' - compensation.
Thanks!
Murilo

[eccentrically1]

The contacts between the elements of the chain are each sources of friction, Murilo. The points where the elements of the chain engage the hooks on the wheels are more sources of energy loss. It would be more efficient if you eliminated the bottom wheel; it's not necessary for any of the motion anyway.
Have you tried this idea with a minimum number of elements? Try it with only, say, 7 of the elements and see what happens.
Good luck!

[murilo]

Eccentrically1,
yes you saw the hooks and their costs, which are well localized and confined to a restricted place - I forgot to mention this in above msg.

Supposing that this will cause loses of 10% over one hypothetical hold potential, enough will be if this value is added or supplied to the main pile.

Never to forget that this pile is eccentrically and punctually applied to the wheel's perimeter, and this fact changes or allow to all direct weight/counter weight behavior and repetitive unbalance.

Yes, this wheel has a axle, fulcrum and bearings hold over ground.

Without this small trick all the device should freeze as a roman arch ( just like some other colleagues hope, or think.)

Take a look at my build at the point it is. My worst fail is exactly the hook wheel that doesn't work well. Try evaluate the huge pressure that is on that white chord!

Thanks!
M