MT135
Moderator: scott
re: MT135
Thank you both your posts.
Both are correct is so many ways.
@Raj you are correct MT135 is not showing how.
It only shows rods moving through a hub.
Yes ??? lifting horizontal agreed odd.
@daa agreed nothing going horizontal is going up.
My thoughts are on improving understanding of the images in my previous
post.
Can you see the arrows?
Each force Gravity, Inertia & Spring (PE) interact.
I am working on the how. Or should say we are if you want to help.
Regards
Both are correct is so many ways.
@Raj you are correct MT135 is not showing how.
It only shows rods moving through a hub.
Yes ??? lifting horizontal agreed odd.
@daa agreed nothing going horizontal is going up.
My thoughts are on improving understanding of the images in my previous
post.
Can you see the arrows?
Each force Gravity, Inertia & Spring (PE) interact.
I am working on the how. Or should say we are if you want to help.
Regards
re: MT135
@Raj
Really good presentation and it needs it's own thread.
It does not look like an MT135 devise.
Really good presentation and it needs it's own thread.
It does not look like an MT135 devise.
re: MT135
I tried something and got an interesting result.
I started with a pendulum and got the KE+PE to be stable a conservative value.
Then I had two pendulum fixed together.
The mass at the ends 1kg.
Lengths 0.9 & 1.1 meters
g 9.8
The PE drops as the KE goes up, fine with me;The KE+PE changes?
Does anyone see this with their sim software?
I started with a pendulum and got the KE+PE to be stable a conservative value.
Then I had two pendulum fixed together.
The mass at the ends 1kg.
Lengths 0.9 & 1.1 meters
g 9.8
The PE drops as the KE goes up, fine with me;The KE+PE changes?
Does anyone see this with their sim software?
re: MT135
@Raj @Daa
This simulation starts with a horizontal bar.
The bar has two sections with different lengths.
The same as MT135 when looking at one section.
I have used formula below for
Mass 1kg
Length1 1.1m
Length2 0.9m
Inertia(MOI) Mass*Length1**2/12 + Mass*Length2**2
C22 (Mass*Length1**2)/4 + (Mass*Length2**2)/4 + MOI
gravity ((sin(theta)*Length1*Mass)/2
- (sin(theta)*Length2*Mass)/2)/C22
The C22 term is in the simulation.
The cross bar should not be creating variable total energy?
My thoughts on this area of MT135.
Learning: https://www.khanacademy.org/science/phy ... tic-energy
Regards
This simulation starts with a horizontal bar.
The bar has two sections with different lengths.
The same as MT135 when looking at one section.
I have used formula below for
Mass 1kg
Length1 1.1m
Length2 0.9m
Inertia(MOI) Mass*Length1**2/12 + Mass*Length2**2
C22 (Mass*Length1**2)/4 + (Mass*Length2**2)/4 + MOI
gravity ((sin(theta)*Length1*Mass)/2
- (sin(theta)*Length2*Mass)/2)/C22
The C22 term is in the simulation.
The cross bar should not be creating variable total energy?
My thoughts on this area of MT135.
Learning: https://www.khanacademy.org/science/phy ... tic-energy
Regards
re: MT135
The M_Terbine_MKII from 28th Jan 2017
This concept requires a drum around the outside of the rods.
As the rods bang into the drum wall it re-sets the movement.
If you do not have this the rod movement action is effected by
the previous rotation condition.
So this chaotic behaviour is stopped.
This design should have 4 rods.
Regards
This concept requires a drum around the outside of the rods.
As the rods bang into the drum wall it re-sets the movement.
If you do not have this the rod movement action is effected by
the previous rotation condition.
So this chaotic behaviour is stopped.
This design should have 4 rods.
Regards
[MP] Mobiles that perpetuate - external energy allowed
-
- Enthusiast
- Posts: 158
- Joined: Fri Apr 14, 2017 2:20 pm
Re: re: MT135
Hi Michael,Michael wrote:I did look at the drawing before. Basically everything balances out (typically) like every other machine. I have some doubts as to the decoder because the lines it creates aren't exactly parallel. But still feel it holds as a possible reference to 142, the image you posted it against.
Did you look at 142? did you see the small three levered compression jack (like in the toy page), on the left side, where the arm attatches? I am wondering (thinking) that maybe this compressed a spring.
Best regards,
Michael
In the link if you look at what is numbered 5,5,6 and 6 you'll see what he's probably referring to in Mt 135.
http://besslerwheel.com/images/Merseburg_wheel1.jpg
re: MT135
Hi All
Without reading all posts; I trust the engraving 'MT 135' having 12 potential impactors and the castle demo reported only 8 impact sounds per rotation.
Could this mean the castle demo was using a lighter version?
Also has anyone worked on the specification of the external pendulum?
We need it to support 26 rpm for it to be useful.
Also we have no confirmation the pendulum were used in the castle demo.
Or is this another lighter version alteration?
Without reading all posts; I trust the engraving 'MT 135' having 12 potential impactors and the castle demo reported only 8 impact sounds per rotation.
Could this mean the castle demo was using a lighter version?
Also has anyone worked on the specification of the external pendulum?
We need it to support 26 rpm for it to be useful.
Also we have no confirmation the pendulum were used in the castle demo.
Or is this another lighter version alteration?
[MP] Mobiles that perpetuate - external energy allowed
-
- Enthusiast
- Posts: 158
- Joined: Fri Apr 14, 2017 2:20 pm
re: MT135
Basic on my last suggestion I am thinking the 'Third wheel - Merseburg' wheel was a 12 arm rather than an 8 arm implementation.
So more powerful and also having more weights.
Also the external pendulum would have a second purpose.
As the castle wheel could be stopped by holding the rim.
This one can be stopped by slowing the pendulums.
The castle was just on the brink of lifting a person trying to stop it's motion.
The third wheel possible could.
Lets see if this can be proved.
P.S. many bangs in the third wheel not countable due to speed of rotation and number.
So more powerful and also having more weights.
Also the external pendulum would have a second purpose.
As the castle wheel could be stopped by holding the rim.
This one can be stopped by slowing the pendulums.
The castle was just on the brink of lifting a person trying to stop it's motion.
The third wheel possible could.
Lets see if this can be proved.
P.S. many bangs in the third wheel not countable due to speed of rotation and number.
[MP] Mobiles that perpetuate - external energy allowed
re: MT135
Hi All
I am working on the belief Bessler had a 6 and 4 rod two directional design.
The 12 weight design is the work horse and the 8 weight version used in the castle 54 day validation test.
Note. I am treating the hub illustration in MT135 as the actual hub for the
6 rod version. The thing that puts people off is object do not go up
hill. So they walk way from MT135.
P.S. I am finding the 64bit floating point rounding errors a little tricky.
I am working on the belief Bessler had a 6 and 4 rod two directional design.
The 12 weight design is the work horse and the 8 weight version used in the castle 54 day validation test.
Note. I am treating the hub illustration in MT135 as the actual hub for the
6 rod version. The thing that puts people off is object do not go up
hill. So they walk way from MT135.
P.S. I am finding the 64bit floating point rounding errors a little tricky.
[MP] Mobiles that perpetuate - external energy allowed
re: MT135
Just updated my supporting web site and the centre part of the Apologia Wheel seems to fit with the devices movement?
I was not expecting that to happen.
I was not expecting that to happen.
[MP] Mobiles that perpetuate - external energy allowed
-
- Devotee
- Posts: 1546
- Joined: Wed Oct 27, 2010 7:43 pm
re: MT135
I was going to suggest that there was a incorrect translation of the drawing right from the start , but I should refrain .
re: MT135
The road to enlightenment is not a straight one.
However the journey can be shortened with good company.
However the journey can be shortened with good company.
[MP] Mobiles that perpetuate - external energy allowed
-
- Enthusiast
- Posts: 158
- Joined: Fri Apr 14, 2017 2:20 pm
Re: re: MT135
agor95,agor95 wrote:Hi All
I am working on the belief Bessler had a 6 and 4 rod two directional design.
The 12 weight design is the work horse and the 8 weight version used in the castle 54 day validation test.
Note. I am treating the hub illustration in MT135 as the actual hub for the
6 rod version. The thing that puts people off is object do not go up
hill. So they walk way from MT135.
P.S. I am finding the 64bit floating point rounding errors a little tricky.
With his different wheels, as he learned more how he built them could have changed. And as you suggested for a demonstration he might have built it differently as well.
re: MT135
@John
I agree; that is why only the last two approx' 12 foot uni-directional wheels are being used as a guide.
I am hoping the build process was refined by that time.
The mono-directional early wheels would have been more contrived.
I have done my best guess on that wheel type.
Regards
I agree; that is why only the last two approx' 12 foot uni-directional wheels are being used as a guide.
I am hoping the build process was refined by that time.
The mono-directional early wheels would have been more contrived.
I have done my best guess on that wheel type.
Regards
[MP] Mobiles that perpetuate - external energy allowed