MT51 Comments Enquiry ?

[thx4]

The bracket is needed to hold C in place. Maybe Fletcher has an idea as to what C is exactly.

If you look at picture D, the 3 teeth are mobile, so without the C your pendulum won't hold.


Otherwise I don't see the point of the MT 51, I made one for fun with an unbalance...
No energy from anywhere, the inertia disc runs out, the pendulum even faster as it gives an impulse to the disc.

https://youtu.be/2rAJKOiekF0?si=iYrIomwcvDYPtnyg

[johannesbender]

Talking in general , Leonardo Da Vinci made use of the ratchet and pawl system in his different machines , he has also tried to stop counter torque with it in this wheel design .

https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/i ... nardo3.jpg

I think Bessler may have added the details not just because of being clear or perhaps "clues" , but imo they were also his inventions .

[daxwc]

JB: The thing that still gets me is the use of the open bracket on the axle like in his prints of the exhibited wheels , it serves no point to the mechanics .

Is there anywhere else he use the bracket to ground to the pillar that I am missing?

[Sam Peppiatt]

What's an open bracket-----------Sam. I don't under stand that.

[SHADOW]

Pour reprendre l'argument de THX4
C est la couronne de centrage sur l'axe du pendule, les cliquets ne peuvent pas être porteur du pendule.

To use the argument of THX4
It is the centering crown on the axis of the pendulum, the pawls can not be carrying the pendulum.

[Sam Peppiatt]

Hi SHADOW,
Oh, OK; the ratchet is the open bracket. Thanks---------------Sam

[johannesbender]

He used the open ended brackets against the allegations of a fraudulent method shown by the illustration which went through the posts .

I have mentioned in the past that i believe he used it as a type of spacer/stop in mt51 , however there is no need to use the same type of open brackets which he used in his other illustrations of his real wheels , because an ordinary spacer would do.

Does it mean anything ? who knows , i don't think anything off it but its clearly worth a mention , ignore it at will .

[daxwc]

Thanks. I thought I was missing another place he was doing it on the axle. It is interesting because he could be grounding it inside the wheel to something that moves just a little.

[Fletcher]

... Otherwise I don't see the point of the MT 51, I made one for fun with an unbalance...

No energy from anywhere, the inertia disc runs out, the pendulum even faster as it gives an impulse to the disc.

https://youtu.be/2rAJKOiekF0?si=iYrIomwcvDYPtnyg

Hi thx4 .. yes, thanks, I remember your 3D printed ratchet-wheel video ..

Your observations about it were spot on, then and now - no energy from anywhere, and inertia/momentum runs out quickly, in both the flywheel and the ratcheted-pendulum - just about all of us recognize this will be the problem with the design immediately, without even having to build it to confirm it .. it's a dead-duck with zero glimmer of life, no matter how hard you kick it - which is why I say the machine itself was not the hero ( focus ) of the illustration, other than being a non-working type of oscillating feed-back system - imo the ratchet/one-way mechanism itself is ! - and that is why it takes up half the page, and in uber detail, so we can't possibly pass it by ..

How and when the motion is applied is another matter ( i.e. not as shown imo ) - but we do know of the ratchet/sprag function and what it can intrinsically do in the mechanical sense - and that is what I suggest we are supposed to take note of imo ..

[Fletcher]

** A one-way bearing/clutch assembly controls/regulates rotational movement about an axis to just one direction - coincidence, or potentially helpful in the search ?!

I would say yes Fletcher they have potential. I have lost count of the times that I have asked myself what would happen if I put a ratchet on a mechanism I am working on.

At one time I had code for making one in WM2D and I have lost it. Believe it or not I use to painstakingly make them from scratch and I used them on quite a lot of ideas in WM2D. When you mentioned WM2D going nuts when objects overlap those were the designs it was forever doing it on. So I could never make my mind up on it. Unfortunately I have lost all of those designs but I remember that pendulums played a big role in them.

I have made some basic ones in Algodoo but they are not good enough and things overlap too easily in Algodoo.

If anyone does have useful WM2D code for making ratchets and other things then could you post them and I will start experimenting more in WM2D once again.

Hi Graham .. I'm guessing that you made your painstaking "real" saw-tooth like rachets and pawls in WM and Algodoo etc ..

Here is a scripting code for a saw-tooth ratchet for WM made originally by our friend ME ( see attachments - second one for a ring or spiral made by Wubbly ) ..

I'll assume you are not that familiar with WM scripting so a brief explanation of how to use it, apologies if you are ..

.................

Open a blank WM page - in the menu go to Script > editor , then File > open , then select your script file you have saved down somewhere - then Run > start ..

.................

I had to play with it a few times to get familiar with the scripting process which I had previously never used and built things the long way like you - if you have any problems sing out ..

cheers -f

[johannesbender]

Something i noted that is a little strange , is how this non runner wheel illustration , connects to the text written by Bessler about flywheels and such to Wagner , and that flywheels and such are great , but who ever strives to think a PM can be made from those alone are not on the correct path (something like that).

[Fletcher]

I think this is what you were thinking of jb .. fwiw flywheels store and release momentum and KE i.e. they have inertia which means once motion is given to it that motion is preserved according to Newton's First Law .. Newton's First Law, an object will not change its motion unless a force acts on it.

Beneath, B. makes it clear that while flywheels have their uses it is not they which makes his wheels self-moving - it is the constantly recharging imbalance factor of metaphorically speaking, one side being heavy and full and the other light and empty, so to speak, imo - which creates and exercises the "excess weight" and "preponderance" he describes ..

John Collins AP pg 348 .. re. Bessler rebutting Wagner ..

It also seems that Wagner is at the moment at odds with Borlach in Dresden - (he's the chap, remember, who wrote that defamatory tract with the aim of ridiculing my invention - something I still cannot forget.) For Wagner sings the praises of weights and springs, and the sort of fly-wheels to be found in saw-mills. (However, in Borlach's writings a contrary point of view is expressed.) But, fly-wheels are not to be sniffed at! Though anyone who sets about the task of bringing a Mobile to glorious completion with such devices, is not on the right track at all. For external wheels, weights etc. - all of this sort of stuff is not the real thing. The wheel's own inner force must come into being without external momentum being applied by such devices. It must, simply put, just revolve, without being wound-up, through the principle of "excess weight", as I describe in Part I. Even according to the ideas my enemies express in their writings, my Wheel is the true device, and is indeed, per se, a genuine Perpetuum Mobile. None better will ever be found upon this earth, for without the principle that I alone possess, there can be no real perpetual motion. Whoever seeks another method is deceiving himself, for my device does not need winding; it runs according to "preponderance", and turns everything else along with it; so long as its material shall endure, it will revolve of its own accord. On one side it is heavy and full; on the other empty and light, just as it should be. That which hitherto has been impossible, was vouchsafed to me to discover.

[johannesbender]

Fetcher , yes that is it thank you , but i must have remembered it wrong because i thought Bessler responded to Wagner about him praising such things as pendulum and springs because of his own wheel design , but here Bessler writes he praises weight and springs which is odd , the flywheel part i remember correct though.

[agor95]

Hi Fletcher

I think this is what you were thinking of jb .. fwiw flywheels store and release momentum and KE i.e. they have inertia which means once motion is given to it that motion is preserved according to Newton's First Law .. Newton's First Law, an object will not change its motion unless a force acts on it.

John Collins AP pg 348 .. re. Bessler rebutting Wagner ..

It must, simply put, just revolve, without being wound-up, through the principle of "excess weight", as I describe in Part I. Even according to the ideas my enemies express in their writings, my Wheel is the true device, and is indeed, per se, a genuine Perpetuum Mobile.

None better will ever be found upon this earth, for without the principle that I alone possess, there can be no real perpetual motion. Whoever seeks another method is deceiving himself, for my device does not need winding; it runs according to "preponderance" ...

With a quick read of JC rebuttal to Wagner I get the meaning that the principle of "excess weight" is where you lift up a weight in a pendulum clock.
This is then released. Therefore we may consider 'The principle of "excess" can be broadened to be "excess spring distortion".

Which means a long running device incorrectly designed will loose energy over time. When it stops one can look and say the mass has dropped or spring has unwound. Therefore those were in excess when the device started running.

Now one could have a device that may get some initial "excess weight" to start turning until that has been lost.
However the device keeps on turning from that point. Also the weights' positions are where they were in the initial setup due to "preponderance".

Therefore one would not be able to find the weight dropped or spring unwound.
Also the act of stopping the wheel quickly may cause an internal lifting affect which is not there during normal long term running in some device designs.

I am ignoring the last two sentences as they do not apply to my current study design.

P.S. Therefore a device does not have any "excess" only "preponderance" in a long running state.

Regards

[Roxaway59]

Hi Fletcher thanks for the code. Yes when I said about making the ratchets I meant in WM2D but I have dabbled with making the real thing.

I am experimenting with an idea at the moment that is kind of along the ratchet theme because its based on a one way movement. I'm not sure what to make of it yet but I will post it when I can understand it better.

Graham