Peter Lindemann

[AB Hammer]

ruggero

Sorry, but according to my grid you lost 1/2 point of positive gain. Go to http://www.besslerwheel.com/forum/download.php?id=6041 Then copy the grid and print it on clear sheet. Then overlay it over your version and then the original. Even though the grid is not perfect, it can still show you where you stand quickly.

Alan

[ruggerodk]

Alan

1/2 of what and where?

ruggero ;-)

[AB Hammer]

Greetings ruggero

I use my grid to do gravity line counts that seem to tell a quick story. It does not tell you anything about effect, only position. I placed the grid over the original and counted up the positives and then the negatives according to gravity lines. The original had only 1 point advantage. I did yours and it only had 1/2 point advantage. Of course the grid is open to some interpretation to weight factors. But I have found it fairly accurate for determinations whether or not to go further into a test.
If a design passes the upright position of the grid, then turn it on its side and test for possible keel, if I do that I add all the positives together and the negatives and see what I come up with. I don't look at keel unless I have 3 points positive or better and nether one of these did.

[ruggerodk]

I'm sorry Alan, but I find it very difficult to see your point here:

It does not tell you anything about effect, only position

What I hear you say is, that a CW-running wheel that are constantly overbalanced between 02:00 and 06:00 will not work?

If that's the case, a waterwheel shouldn't be running at all.

Or do I read you wrong?

regards
ruggero ;-)

[AB Hammer]

ruggerodk

I think you missed my meaning. the grid shows for all intensive purposes a balanced wheel. Yes the weights are in different position and a slight over balance shows but only by 1/2 point. but if you try the keel check by turning the grid sideways you will see that there is more weight under the 3 to 9 mark which is a negative unless you are designing a walker style. Friction is also a factor that has to over come and the system has a cam to release the catch.

[graham]

Hi Ralph, the thread over at "Overunity" on this subject is quite lively and up to four pages now !
I wonder why the "Big Guns" on this forum have not put in their 2 cents?
I'm in the "Non Runner" camp at the moment but wouldn't object to being convinced otherwise.

I experimented with the downward force from short swinging pendulums years ago and I never had any luck with the idea.

Resetting back to the starting height of the bob was the killer along with that weightlesness as the bob started its' fall.

Graham

[AB Hammer]

Hay graham

One of our "old friends" P-motion is using BAHammer and he is up to his typical. To be honest I think he is here on Bessler Wheel under a different name or/names as well. It is one of his favorite things to do, to have several identities.

[agor95]

AB Hammer

It would be help full if you could and others to confirm what typical tricks people get up to. Just for those how are new around here.

Regards

[AB Hammer]

AB Hammer

It would be help full if you could and others to confirm what typical tricks people get up to. Just for those how are new around here.

Regards

Well hello Jim/P-motion/agor95

I figured you would respond.

[ovyyus]

Graham, it's beyond me why a D.Sc would publish a paper on a simple mechanical device that clearly does not work, as though it might.

IMO, if we are ever to resolve the secret of Bessler's wheel then what we don't need is more mechanically infantile speculation from self-proclaimed experts who seem more skilled in powerpoint presentation than actual engineering. This fellow seems to have a history of exactly that. Sorry if that seems harsh, just my 2 cents :)

[agor95]

AB Hammer

It is getting late here so I will spend some time tomorrow and look at Jim/P-motion posts. I may be able to figure what these typical ticks are.

I have checked your ip address and it is not the same as P-motions or mine.

I think in time members here will accept I am not this person and in time
I will learn what this person gets up to.

Regards

[graham]

Thanks for your two cents Bill. Actually a good dollars worth and a very loud bang !!!

Graham

[rlortie]

Graham,

I have been holding back waiting for good old ovyyus, forum watch dog to make an entrance. IMO he is treating the subject lightly. Being in the position that I am, I will let a Google search on Peter Lindemann, and input from Bruce A. Perreault lead you to your own conclusion.

http://www.nuscam.com/lindemann_internet_posts.htm

Ralph

[rlortie]

Those of you who question the properties of a pendulum may find interest in this link;

http://paer.rutgers.edu/PT3/experiment. ... &exptid=59

Ralph

[ruggerodk]

Alan;

I dont know what you mean by "Walker"...and I still cannot see the point of your statement concerning the weights positioned between 03:00 and 06:00, as this is exactly where you will see the 'weight' occur on a waterwheel...?

But what I can say is, that my design as suggested has 8 'compartment' or - if you prefer - 8 sections. Each section contain a separate double escapement with one pendulum and spring.

All 8 sections turns with the wheel at all time, holding their positions respective to eachother.

You need at least 4 sections to make it run.

Also - my design does not need a cam.
The escapement is a matter of simple mechanical lever functionality, and one way to do that is by gravity or springs.

regards
ruggero ;-)