Zeroing in on Bessler's wheel

[Sam Peppiatt]

What can I say,
Wrong again. It's a dead duck---------------------------------------------Sam

[Fletcher]

Do you know why it hasn't worked Sam ? In your words are you able to explain it to us ?

Sometimes having to explain something to someone else makes things clearer so we are not doomed to repeat stuff.

[Sam Peppiatt]

Hi Fletcher, yes you are right.
Mechanically, it was all working reasonably well; as I wanted it to. The "flaw" in the whole concept, was the large pendulum. In order to drive the other parts it had to swing backwards by some amount. Producing a back force exactly equal to the foreword force of the weighted arm(s). A lot of things were working. It's just that it was the wrong way to do it. It was too complicated.

I've had this same problem before. There must be some way to cause the large Pend., as it's doing it's work, to swing forward. which would help to turn the wheel, instead of canceling every thing out--------------------------------------Sam

[Sam Peppiatt]

FWEIW,
I think there is a simpler way to do it; with two pendulums. A large one farther out and a smaller one in closer to the center of the wheel. They are connected together by roller chain. However, the chain is twisted to form a figure 8. This should reverse the force on the large pend, if so; it will help turn the wheel instead of canceling out the forward force of the smaller one--------------------------------------Sam

[Fletcher]

It's good that you have further things to explore Sam ..

And that you know why a particular design or concept failed.

The equal torque and back torque issue is very common in most all designs. It's been around since Adam was in shorts. In fact imo it is the most common reason designs fail to be runners.

The theory goes, if you know what the problem is likely to be then perhaps you can avoid or mitigate it in the next design. I'm sure I'm singing to the choir there, but you'd be surprised.

[Sam Peppiatt]

Fletcher,
Yes; I agree, this issue has come up a lot of times. I'm going to try flipping the chain to see if that will fix the problem----------------------Sam

[Sam Peppiatt]

It looks good so far,
Trouble with the chain. It doesn't like the figure 8 twist. McMaster-Carr has flexible roller chain, maybe that will save my ass-----------------Sam

[Sam Peppiatt]

FWEIW,
Back to the "Roberval Balance", with continuous torque. I think, all it needs is a reversing gear----------------------------Sam

[Sam Peppiatt]

An up date FWEIW,
Struggling with the "Roberval" type gravity wheel, for want of a better way to describe it. There is a lot to like about it. It would have constant torque; the weights shift in on the up side and out on the down side, which is what has to happen. And it's fairly simple to build. However have to find a way to prevent back forces from canceling the foreword forces. So far, can't seam to resolve it. (Reference, MT-13, MT-123, & MT-143). Also, it has the potential, at least, to be reversible----------------------------Sam

[Sam Peppiatt]

Here I go again; Calloway has given me a new "Idea". Maybe this one will work, or not, as the case may be-----------------------Sam

[Sam Peppiatt]

FWEIW, The new wheel will have a FRICTION drive. One pend. will have a drive roller. It will engage a big wheel on the 2nd pend. The ratio is @3 to one and, will swing the 2nd pendulum up about 45 degrees as the 1st one swings back 15 degrees, depending on the amount of friction. Before, every thing was one to one; one pend. would exactly balance out the other. Now, with a MA of three to one, (between the two), the balance problem can be resolved; I hope------------------------Sam

[King_Lotar]

opps

[agor95]

Welcome to the forum

You are one of many who have examples where rare earth magnets drive wheels.

Regards

[King_Lotar]

sry

[King_Lotar]

now how do I remove myself from this forum? lol