Did Bessler use fire flame or heat to power his wheel

[jimmyjj]

Hi to all at the forum.


In Besslers time the steam engine was in its early development and was extremely inefficient say about 15 per cent todays combustion engines are also very inefficient say 25% of course the diesel engines seem to be the most efficient with 50% or more efficiency.

There are a number of things which bug me about Besslers demonstratations perhaps what bugs me the most is that i can find no record of the wheel being weighed before and after each test. The exact weight of the wheel could have been very accurately determined at the time ......the absence of this test is very strange.

Also some quotes from John Collins translation of his Apologia-
p.330

"Wagner excells himself at this point, and describes in sources of mechanical power - human muscle power, oxen, water, wind, FIRE,
springs, and especially weights. He judges them all, and the upshot is that none of them would be suitable to produce perpetual motion......."

p.349.............."They say they'll let me have anything i want to put inside the machine..............And also all the four elements ( air ,FIRE, water and earth)..............."

p.326.........."inner turnspit mechanism........."

Also earlier in the book he talks about a roasting spit where of course theyre would have been ample energy in the fire to turn the spit.

Theyre is the duration of his longest test run which was just over one thousand hours ( 6 weeks) a candle or lamp can easily burn this long.

One can buy wicks which will last between one thousand to two thousand hours.

I believe that it is very possible that Bessler used either a candle flame or oil lamp to power his wheel.

Of course it would have been a smokeless candle or else people may have been able to smell the smoke.

The chinese had smokeless candles circa 200 b.c. where the smoke was filtered through water.

If he did have a flame burning within his wheel it would have had to have been hidden.

Its efficiency would have had to have been very good as well and this is perhaps Besslers achievement in that he may have found a way to capture much of this heat from a flame and use it in an extremely efficient manner.

Here are two links of designs that Bessler may have used of course if theyre was a flame many other techniques could be used.

I would estimate that the efficiency of his wheel would have been 75% plus but am just guessing.

http://www.newenergyshop.com/pdf/Extrao ... mobile.pdf

Of course it is probably quite unlikely that bessler may have discovered memory metal but not impossible.

http://sci-toys.com/scitoys/scitoys/thermo/thermo3.html

http://www.newenergyshop.com/ seesaw candle bimetal engine.

Where does bessler say that he doesnt use fire?
Any quotes?

I hope i may be wrong but at this moment in time fire seems to me to be the most likely source of Besslers motive power.

How many candles equivalent of power would Besslers wheel have put out. I am sure this has probably been discussed before but my searches have revealed little....

Well all the best fellow mobilists

JimmyJJ

[Fletcher]

Thanks for the great topic jimmyjj. Those sites are awesome. I'll be ordering some of those engines for my boy in a year or two.

I'm a bit suspicious that Bessler developed his wheel after (IINM) John Harrison invented the sea going pendulum clock to reliably work out longitude. Harrison had tried to claim the prize & it took 20 years to get paid out. Meanwhile he developed more efficient chronometers. The original used 2 pendulums counterpoised to nullify the effects of the ship pitching.

The interesting part that relates to your thoughts is that Harrison used bimetallic pendulum rods to compensate for ambient temperature differences at different latitudes. The strips were coupled in opposite directions & expanded & contracted at different rates so they exactly compensated & net expansion or contraction was zero. The effective pendulum rod was always the same length. That way it kept accurate time. From memory I think the metals were tin & copper but I could be wrong there ?

It is conceivable that JB used this bimetallic principle as you suggest. The only quarm I have is that Bessler said quite categorically that his wheel used 'Gravity' as its motive force ?! It comes down to whether you believe him or not I suppose, or if you can build a demonstration wheel that can match his performances using thermal to mechanical energy.

[graham]

I think that the use of "fire ,flame , or heat" requires too great a stretch of the imagination to be taken seriously. That's not a putdown Jimmy but just my feelings.

It strays too far from what was observed at the time.

'When Orffyreus exhibited the extraordinary machine which he had built, to refute the malicious rumours being spread that it is fraudulent, I was deliberately present. The mechanic, Gartner, in particular, who is so famous for his many celebrated mechanical inventions, has distributed in public a copper-engraving on which is a slanderous picture showing how Orffyreus' machine was moved by means of a cord from an adjoining room. We have demonstrated that in reality Orffyreus' wheel is far removed from any such deception. The investigation was conducted in the presence of representatives from the Court of the Duke and other guests. When the machine was ready to rotate, all adjacent rooms were opened and the bearings were completely uncovered. To prevent anyone accidentally seeing the internal structure of the machine, he covered it. Whilst he did this, he did not disguise the fact that the mechanism is moved by weights. Several such weights, wrapped in his handkerchief, he let us weigh in our hands to estimate their weight. They were judged to be about four pounds each, and their shape was definately cylindrical.
I conclude, not only from this but also from other circumstantial evidence, that the weights are attached to some moveable or elastic arms on the periphery of the wheel. During rotation, one can clearly hear the weights hitting against the wooden boards. I was able to observe these through a slit. They are slightly warped. When he put the wheel onto another support and reinstalled the weights in their previous positions, he pushed down on an iron spring that gave a loud noise as it expanded upwards. I therefore presume that there is no doubt that the wheel is moved by an internal source of power, but we cannot necessarily assume that it is perpetual. Furthermore, the machine may be of little value to the public unless it can be improved. At the moment it can lift a weight of sixty pounds, but to achieve this the pulley had to be reduced more than four times, making the lifting quite slow. The diameter of the wheel is about twelve feet, and as well, the bearing was quite thin, about one quarter of an inch and only a sixth of its length was subject to friction.' - Christian Wolff, letter to Leibniz, examination of Merseburg wheel, 19th December, 1715.

The above quote came from Bills site "orffyre .com" .

Movable or elastic arms seems to stand out to me. I'm back where I was when I started !!

Graham

[ovyyus]

...I therefore presume that there is no doubt that the wheel is moved by an internal source of power, but we cannot necessarily assume that it is perpetual...

Graham, blatant fraud, such as hidden candles inside Bessler's wheel, seems unlikely to me. Not because it couldn't be done or that it couldn't solve the problem (I think a single candle flame outputs about 40 Watts... around double the output of Bessler's largest wheel) - but rather because I highly doubt that Bessler was a cheat!

I think we must at least try to define a real energy source with which to lift the weights inside the wheel and I commend Jimmy for maintaining an open mind. IMO, exporing heat options seems less a stretch of the imagination than entertaining seemingly remote possibilities of gravity/inertia PM - though perhaps not quite as much fun :)


BTW, while the above quote does come from orffyre.com it's source, as stated on my website, is John's book, "Perpetual Motion - An Ancient Mystery Solved?"

[jimmyjj]

Thanks for your thoughts

Perhaps in the early 17th century the actual definition of a perpetual motion machine may have been slightly different than what it is today.

In Besslers last pages of Apologia from John Collins book He gives the folllowing quotes-

p.351
"the.........,its innate virtue would keep it revolving as long as its materials might last."

".........and would revolce of it own accord as long as its materials lasted............"

"In the meantime my machine will be called the PRIMUM, and it will also be called Perpetuum"

I think that Bessler calls his wheel perpetuum , because it will run for as long as its materials might last and that therefore if his wheel was weighed before and after each test. - The wheel would always weigh less after each test.

I suppose it would all come down to accepting whether or not the fuel source would be counted as material or not.

I also agree that weights were used in the wheel somehow gravity and heat.

I would like to try to build a replica Bessler wheel using a candle like flame as a heat source and think that this would be in the realms of possibility and the power outputs are fairly similar.

Bessler admitted to being a player with words. Even Cox years later thought he had discovered perpetual motion.-

"Cox's clock writes an odd chapter in the history of human ingenuity. For he seemingly succeeded in creating that great will-o-the-wisp, perpetual motion. 18th-century science hadn't yet written laws that would tell us it was impossible. But Cox saw where that science was going, and he worked around it. He saw how nature could provide energy and make it look like something for nothing."

Well good luck folks thanks Ovyyus Graham and Fletcher.

Jimmy

[Fletcher]

Bill & Jimmy .. others ?

If I were a betting man with no emotional interest in this mystery I would have to put my money on an external or ambient 'fuel' as the motive force. Thermal would be an excellent choice as would be diurnal temperature & air pressure changes, as you've both suggested.

Although obviously I can't prove that Bessler only used 'gravity' as he said he did, I accept that air pressure differences for example could be attributed to 'gravity' in the wider sense so might fall under this general classification as Bessler saw it.

Also it is true that the definition of PM of Bessler's time may have been looser than it is today leaving some accuracy of interpretation wiggle room perhaps.

The question that I ask that may shed light on how loose he interpreted the term gravity has to do with MT.

To your knowledge how many of the drawings show either an external fuel source or changing ambient gradients & which ones are they ?

I don't think we should include any designs that show water wheel type devices where say water falls from a higher elevation to a lower elevation around or thru a wheel turbine etc. They are obviously gravity driven but use an external medium that must be replenished which is obvious in the drawing.

If he has included obvious departures from what we consider to be 'pure gravity' wheels in MT then that would tend to support your conclusions that he felt that anything was fair game to find the answer to PM & so opens the door wider & strengthens the case that this just might be what he did to accomplish it under the definition of his time.

[ovyyus]

...obviously I can't prove that Bessler only used 'gravity' as he said he did

If the wheel turned as a result of an out-of-balance state, which seems to be the case, then it was obviously driven by gravity acting upon its internal weights, as he said. Didn't Bessler simply state the obvious?

To your knowledge how many of the drawings show either an external fuel source or changing ambient gradients & which ones are they ?

Aside from the odd MT85 & 86, and the others you exclude, there appear to be no prime movers depicted in MT - yet Bessler does mention the necessity in his accompanying notes. I find that interesting.

[Fletcher]

Yes, he is stating the obvious if you accept that there is a secondary system that creates the imbalance.

He however gives nothing away about what the prime mover to do the shifting would be, so it still leaves the door open & thermal etc can't be ruled without further information.

My thoughts are that most of MT is about attempts to beat the conservative nature of gravity. If he found a way that augmented gravity by the use of environmental gradients etc then his answer would appear to be out of left field in relation to the context of what was shown in MT so far.

Substituting the toy page mechanical linkage devices (while I feel they are probably symbolic rather than accurate representations) also doesn't appear to point to an obvious prime mover ?

MT85 & 86 are interesting.

MT85 appears to show what are effectively dual lift pumps operated by the pendulum lever which is of course pumped by the man on the swing (a representation of old fashioned hand power I would think ?)

MT86 is more curious. Here we have the same pendulum hand pump but this time it appears rather than lifting water vertically via lift pumps the vessels containing water are themselves lifted (for what purpose ?) or else they are not vessels at all & are pipes drawing up water from the reservoir beneath, like a lift pump works. MT88 also fits in this scenario as a similar design.

[ovyyus]

I forgot to include MT30 along with the others.

My thoughts are that most of MT is about attempts to beat the conservative nature of gravity.

Yes and Bessler seems to acknowledge the futility of attempting such and pushes the reader to look for alternative methods of solving the problem - to find and apply his 'prime mover'.

prime mover
–noun

1. Mechanics. a. the initial agent, as wind or electricity, that puts a machine in motion.
b. a machine, as a water wheel or steam engine, that receives and modifies energy as supplied by some natural source.

2. means of towing a cannon, as an animal, truck, or tractor.
3. Also called unmoved mover. Aristotelianism. that which is the first cause of all movement and does not itself move.
4. a person or thing that initiates or gives power and cohesion to something, as an idea, endeavor, or organization.

Never did I hear a word of praise, though I was criticised from all directions. But I never changed, never once wavered, because a single word could have betrayed my wondrous achievement.

That's one of my favourite quotes... connecting the dots... IMO, the 'single word' was the name of his prime mover - something simple and commonly recognised or understood, as alluded to by Karl. If Bessler never dared mention it then he would probably never dare illustrate it.

[Fletcher]

Bessler seems to acknowledge the futility of attempting such and pushes the reader to look for alternative methods of solving the problem - to find and apply his 'prime mover'.

Bessler wrote:

Never did I hear a word of praise, though I was criticised from all directions. But I never changed, never once wavered, because a single word could have betrayed my wondrous achievement.

That's one of my favourite quotes... connecting the dots... IMO, the 'single word' was the name of his prime mover - something simple and commonly recognised or understood, as alluded to by Karl.

If Bessler never dared mention it then he would probably never dare illustrate it.

Quite !

This is how I see the problem being categorized to find his prime mover.

1. Gravity induced : that breaks the conservative nature of gravity [Bessler says he learnt the hard way about this].

Seems unlikely given thousands upon thousands have tried & failed since before him & over the last 300 years.

2. Uses an external or ambient source of energy to be his prime mover i.e. thermal (as in a added fuel or ambient changes), atmospheric pressure differences.

Are there any other candidates here that were available in his time ???

3. Uses forces & principles found in other commonly available materials of his time, also readily available today.

I favour fluids & this is where my efforts mostly lie. Water for example has all the properties of solid materials of inertia & mass but also has another unique ability. As per Pascal's Principle it can transfer forces applied at one point to each & every water molecule i.e. the transmission of forces.

I feel there is a good chance the answer will be found with the properties of liquids. It is also apparent that much of MT after 56 is devoted to hydraulics. And then there is the constant inference to it in various writings.

Ever since I saw the Kassel woodcut I felt Bessler was giving us a big albeit obscure clue, but one thing stood out like one ball on a greyhound.

The Archimedean screw : Archimedes was famous for formalizing the Principles & Laws of Floatation & Buoyancy. It is curious that very few MT drawings show any floatation devices, yet he would have been well aware of them in a practical sense.

The biggest indicator in my book that fluids (water) is part of the answer is when you look closely at the Kassel woodcut.

The Archimedean screw (turned by the wheel) lifts water from its reservoir & then it runs back into the reservoir. This should be an entirely closed recirculating system of water transfer with no spillage. Curiously if you look beneath the picture frame (bottom right corner) you will see a funnel & discharge pipe with water freely flowing from it.

That should not be happening as it is a closed self contained system unless he is perhaps indicating that excess energy can be had from rearranging the usage & mechanics of water (or as I see it, the redistribution of forces) ? I at least think so.

I'll see if I can get a close up of the Kassel funnel & discharge pipe.

P.S. sorry about the poor quality picture. I once saw a far better one on this board which showed the funnel clearly.

[ovyyus]

Fletcher, that's interesting about the water screw discharge pipe.

Re: your preference for a fluid solution. Almost every design in MT would probably work with the addition of a prime mover applied to lift the weights. IMO, once the prime mover is uncovered it should then be possible to apply it to virtually any form of overbalancing wheel design and create a wheel that works.

Bessler made a similar statement about his ability to create wheels based on different principles:

... I have many different kinds of machine all running on different principles. They can be moved by weights, balls, springs, internal gears, internal water, oil, alcohol and wind... (PM:AAMS? page 142)

This statement makes sense in light of a common prime mover applied to any of the listed methods. A common prime mover applied to the designs in MT should similarly result in working wheels that operate on different principles.

[Fletcher]

Can't argue with that Bill & can't escape the logic of what you are saying. His comment to his friend about 'harnessing the horse' strongly hints at your above definitions of 'prime mover'.

It is also how I interpreted what he had written about his various wheel designs i.e. 'one common prime mover to rule over them all'.

Until [hopefully] new information comes to hand perhaps from Stewart & Ed's & John's separate efforts [all kudos to them] then I am unfortunately no closer to zeroing in on what exactly that prime mover was that he used.

Like you I am only interested in duplicating Besslers wheel feats by whatever means that work & are credible for his time.

Hopefully I am not to wrapped up in the concept of a gravity alone approach or a strict definition of todays PM to ignore pragmatic, if unromantic solutions ;)

The low power output hints at a low tech solution imo & that could well be indicative of a slow to change diurnal effect.

Somebody solve this mother of a mystery & quick.

[bluesgtr44]

I really cannot see any kind of a flame sourced heat being used in one of Besslers wheels. His first two wheels had to be tied off...so, the wheel is sitting there with a flame source burning...I don't think so. Now, the idea of heat transferrence with alloys. The thing took off as soon as the leash was unhooked. It didn't need heat! It was OOB.

DT, page 191...J. Collins...."To this end they are enclosed in a structure or framework, and co-ordinated in such a way that not only are they prevented from attaining their desired equilibrium or "point of rest", but they must forever seek it, thereby developing an impressive velocity which is proportional to their mass and to the dimensions of their housing."

The "structure or framework" seems to provide the path...I know I have mentioned this before and maybe some are tired of it, but....they can't get out. They're stuck in this cycle..."enclosed"..."encased"..."prevented"

As far as the Archimedes screw goes, I think that was just a demonstration for moving water...the biggest and foremost use of such a device at that time. Leibniz mentioned the draining of mines many times in his communications with others as far as a high priority for uses of such a device. As far as the funneling of the water out...if you were draining a mine, that is what you would want it to do.


Steve

[Fletcher]

I really cannot see any kind of a flame sourced heat being used in one of Besslers wheels. His first two wheels had to be tied off...so, the wheel is sitting there with a flame source burning...I don't think so. Now, the idea of heat transferrence with alloys. The thing took off as soon as the leash was unhooked. It didn't need heat! It was OOB.

If there was a heat engine principle here as his prime mover the long duration test (54 days) would seem to seriously question that possibility. These are open systems like combustion engines that require fuel.

It probably also rules out thermal energy from body heat as it had to run thru the nights when people weren't viewing it presumably (other tests) & in a locked empty room for 54 days for the long duration test.

And as you say, what happens to the heat built up while it is tied down, it has to go somewhere which would mean the surroundings of the wheel should get noticeably warmer the longer it is not turning.

If the prime mover was diurnal ambient changes in temperature like Harrison's bimetallic pendulum then this also stretches the imagination as those changes happen over a relatively long period during the day & its hard to see how the energy captured can be used super efficiently & provide any power to do work. Unfortunately imo barometric pressure changes fall into the same class of inefficiency to do work over long periods.

DT, page 191...J. Collins...."To this end they are enclosed in a structure or framework, and co-ordinated in such a way that not only are they prevented from attaining their desired equilibrium or "point of rest", but they must forever seek it, thereby developing an impressive velocity which is proportional to their mass and to the dimensions of their housing."

The "structure or framework" seems to provide the path...I know I have mentioned this before and maybe some are tired of it, but....they can't get out. They're stuck in this cycle..."enclosed"..."encased"..."prevented"

No one gets tired of it Steve .. just need to make some real moves forward on determining just what this framework is.

He says they are enclosed in a structure or framework & as long as they are co-ordinated they cannot achieve equilibrium once started rotating.

This is an extraordinary statement when you think about it. No known device can follow a path (any path) & NOT END UP BALANCED (keeled) without being repositioned which uses up equal amounts of energy as gained.

So they work in pairs, there is an interconnected principle, the path is eccentric & co-ordinated by a structure or framework AND the prime mover must operate in such a way that it never again leads the whole wheel to balance (it CANNOT keel).

All our combined experiences & those who came b4 us say that it WILL keel UNLESS that structure or framework has something unusual about it. It must be able to break the normal rules of symmetry & action : reaction.

As far as the Archimedes screw goes, I think that was just a demonstration for moving water...the biggest and foremost use of such a device at that time. Leibniz mentioned the draining of mines many times in his communications with others as far as a high priority for uses of such a device. As far as the funneling of the water out...if you were draining a mine, that is what you would want it to do.

Fair comment Steve, but given Bessler was a stickler for accuracy & did corrections himself this seems a major oversight as he knew it was a recirculating system & it was completely unnecessary to show piped off water. It would have been more than obvious that a wheel that could turn an Archimedean screw would also be able to take the water away.

[KAS]

I believe that the prime mover in Besslers wheels ran independently for the main wheel structure. His vailed explanations of upper and lower weights (which personally, I don't believe was an description of the complete wheel) may be the key to this enigmatic driver.

IMO, It had to contain an independent system that rotated with the wheel but only interacted with the weights on the main structure at a certain point(s) in the rotation. Pulling the weights out of their natural orbit is probably the best bet.
This could possibly explain the pendulum on his earlier wheels. If a secondary system needed additional energy to get it passed a blank spot, the pendulum, whilst charged (swung) would prove ideal in that the energy stored in it could be utilised on it's return swing.

This is an area that I have been concentrating my efforts on lately
and have come up with an independent device that does indeed alter the orbit of the weights. Getting over the the counter action is so far proving a problem though. I have yet to utilise a pendulum which could be the answer.

Kas