A Cracker of a WHEEL???

A Bessler, gravity, free-energy free-for-all. Registered users can upload files, conduct polls, and more...

Moderator: scott

Post Reply
User avatar
raj
Addict
Addict
Posts: 2981
Joined: Wed Dec 09, 2009 6:53 am
Location: Mauritius

A Cracker of a WHEEL???

Post by raj »

A HEAVY RIM flywheel in the form of a drum wheel with four ELLIPTICAL channels connected at 45 degrees intervals to rim of drum wheel at adjoining vertical planes, with one spherical weight rolling non-stop inside each channel, impacting on descending side of rim, providing continuous imbalance unidirectionally, and torque on and off for added momentum, continued rotation of flywheel, as it rotates after given initial push or pull.

Raj
Attachments
Auto Gravity Wheel - drawing(2) - 170316 001.jpg
Auto Gravity Wheel - drawing - 170317 001.jpg
Keep learning till the end.
User avatar
raj
Addict
Addict
Posts: 2981
Joined: Wed Dec 09, 2009 6:53 am
Location: Mauritius

re: A Cracker of a WHEEL???

Post by raj »

The beauty of this concept/design/wheel is that when in motion, the wheel and every single weights, in the clockwise and conter-clockwise side of the wheel, rotate towards the descending side, without stopping, a smallest fraction of a second, unless friction or outside force stop the wheel.

Raj
Keep learning till the end.
John doe
Aficionado
Aficionado
Posts: 409
Joined: Fri Feb 26, 2016 4:34 am

re: A Cracker of a WHEEL???

Post by John doe »

It's a good start needs more work. Pun intended, but also literal.
Once you have eliminated the impossible whatever remains however improbable must be the truth.
spinner361
Devotee
Devotee
Posts: 1136
Joined: Thu Mar 09, 2006 2:34 am
Location: Wisconsin, U.S.A.

re: A Cracker of a WHEEL???

Post by spinner361 »

Have you ever built a model with rolling weights? I found that anything that causes them to speed up and slow down causes them to roll back and forth, not just in just the forward direction that you want. I see that this is most likely the case. Try it though, because if it is truly unbalanced, it should go even though it will be shaky. Maybe there is a way to keep the speed of each weight consistent. I did not find a good way to stop the weights with some kind of catching mechanism, some sort of ratchet.
spinner361
Devotee
Devotee
Posts: 1136
Joined: Thu Mar 09, 2006 2:34 am
Location: Wisconsin, U.S.A.

Post by spinner361 »

It looks like it will find balance very quickly, unfortunately.
User avatar
raj
Addict
Addict
Posts: 2981
Joined: Wed Dec 09, 2009 6:53 am
Location: Mauritius

re: A Cracker of a WHEEL???

Post by raj »

Thanks a lot, Spinner361!

Kindly, all of you, follow my reasoning, and give me your comments.

Look closely at the following drawings, showing TORQUE on wheel at static moments of an already rotating wheel, at 0, 11.25, 22.5, 33.75 and 45 degrees rotation clockwise from a 12 o'clock starting position.

The small circles 'O' show the positions of the weights as the wheel rotates, which should indicates which direction torque is being applied to the wheel at that instant of rotation.

The vertical lines parallel to the vertical line through the axle show the exact positions of the weights on their respective channels.

From the starting point, before the wheel is given the initial push or pull, at zero degree rotation, the wheel is shown at a balanced state.
The black weight in the black channels is taken to be at the central vertical line, below the axle.

N.B: the wheel is given enough initial force for it complete at least one revolution.

THEREFORE:

Drawing 3 -
At zero degree rotation, the wheel is in balance state. (the black weight could be further on the right, because it is on a horizontal, flat part of the black channel, making the wheel in a clockwise torque state.) SEE drawing 7.

Drawing 4 -
At 11.25 degrees, wheel is in clockwise torque state.

Drawing 5 -
At 22.5 degrees, wheel is in a balance state.

Drawing 6 -
At 33.75 degrees, wheel is in a counter-clockwise torque state.

Drawing 7-
At 45 degree, wheel is in clockwise torque state. (As drawing 3 must have shown?)
N.B : the wheel is continuing to rotate at this position, and the red weight in the red channel is continuing to roll and have reached a flat horizontal part in the red channel. ThEre is no way to stop it rolling to the end of the horizontal part of the channel on the clockwise side of wheel.

CONCLUSION:
From start of an already rotating wheel, we have the wheel:
1, At zero degrees, with net positive clockwise torque.
2. At 11.25 degrees, with net positive clockwise torque.
3. At 22.5 degrees , in balance state.
4. At 33.75degrees, with net negative counter-clockwise torque.
5. At 45 degrees , (BACK to reset of overall weights positions), in NET CLOCKWISE state.

The above conclusions show that the wheel can be in continuous rotation.

Raj
Attachments
Auto Gravity Wheel - drawing 7 - 180316 002.jpg
Auto Gravity Wheel - drawing 6 - 180316 002.jpg
Auto Gravity Wheel - drawing 5 - 180316 002.jpg
Auto Gravity Wheel - drawing 4- 180316 002.jpg
Auto Gravity Wheel - drawing 3- 180316 002.jpg
Keep learning till the end.
User avatar
Tarsier79
Addict
Addict
Posts: 5002
Joined: Fri Mar 12, 2010 2:17 am
Location: Qld, Australia

re: A Cracker of a WHEEL???

Post by Tarsier79 »

Raj, how can you design something symmetrical and expect it to be overbalanced?
John doe
Aficionado
Aficionado
Posts: 409
Joined: Fri Feb 26, 2016 4:34 am

re: A Cracker of a WHEEL???

Post by John doe »

It looks to me like you are depending on the net torque of 1 weight to generate enough force to move 4 or 5 weights. I agree there looks to be a positive torque I just don't think there will be enough to generate positive momentum.
Once you have eliminated the impossible whatever remains however improbable must be the truth.
User avatar
raj
Addict
Addict
Posts: 2981
Joined: Wed Dec 09, 2009 6:53 am
Location: Mauritius

re: A Cracker of a WHEEL???

Post by raj »

Hello Tarsier79,

The wheel is symmetrical as all balanced wheel should.

The positions of the ROLLING weights are assymetrical on and off during a 45 degrees positions resetting time.

I have tried to show that during this 45 degrees resetting cycles, there seem to be more positive torque than negative torque towards the descending side on the wheel.

Now with weights of reasonable mass, say 4 lbs, rolling continuously inside a reasonable flywheel, providing more positive torque than negative torque 8 times every revolution, COULD BE expected to provide an enough net positive torque on the descending side to pay back energy loss through
FRICTION (only at the axle) and a little bit more.

@John Doe.

There are only 4 weights in all, and I am expecting one top weight with more PE and more KE, rolling furthest from the centre to lift three bottom weights, already in momentum rolling towards the descending side, more so, because of their respective leverage.

Raj
Keep learning till the end.
John doe
Aficionado
Aficionado
Posts: 409
Joined: Fri Feb 26, 2016 4:34 am

re: A Cracker of a WHEEL???

Post by John doe »

I see this as a modified,offset and multiplied MT01.
4x0=0. But this is just my opinion.
Once you have eliminated the impossible whatever remains however improbable must be the truth.
User avatar
raj
Addict
Addict
Posts: 2981
Joined: Wed Dec 09, 2009 6:53 am
Location: Mauritius

re: A Cracker of a WHEEL???

Post by raj »

Do you really see any comparison between my design and MT001??? apart from both expected to be wheels.

Raj
Attachments
180px-Mt_001.gif
Auto Gravity Wheel - drawing 3- 180316 002.jpg
Keep learning till the end.
User avatar
ME
Addict
Addict
Posts: 3512
Joined: Wed Jun 08, 2005 6:37 pm
Location: Netherlands

Re: re: A Cracker of a WHEEL???

Post by ME »

Raj, the issue is this:
raj wrote:rotate towards the descending side.
Thus the weights will be on the ascending side.

Many years ago I let my computer spend some time in finding the perfect shape. It could have been any shape with loops and all. I just randomized the possible paths and then applied some genetic-like algorithm.
In multiple instances it homed in on a dot, making it essentially a flywheel.
As stubborn as I am I still made a wheel doing some curve, but unfortunately performed exactly as calculated....
It's always possible some magical solution was overlooked.

Nice try though.
Marchello E.
-- May the force lift you up. In case it doesn't, try something else.---
User avatar
raj
Addict
Addict
Posts: 2981
Joined: Wed Dec 09, 2009 6:53 am
Location: Mauritius

re: A Cracker of a WHEEL???

Post by raj »

Hello Marchello,

The weights WILL NOT ALL BE on the ascending side.
See my drawings. They show explicit positions of the weight through one 45 degrees RESETTING cycle.
AT WORSE, there are ONLY TWO weights on the ascending sides and two weights on the descending side of wheel.

What I like about my new concept, is that ALL moving parts are NEVER at rest, and are in continuous motion, never losing any MOMENTUM, while motion of rolling weights provide cyclical torque eight times per rpm, when the top weight with PE changing to maximum fast KE rolling on the horizontal channel instantly from the ascending side to the descending side, impacting on the rim, possibly enhancing torque.

I have not said IT IS A RUNNER.

If only any of you could try a computer simulation, it would be a tremendous help.

Raj
Keep learning till the end.
User avatar
ME
Addict
Addict
Posts: 3512
Joined: Wed Jun 08, 2005 6:37 pm
Location: Netherlands

Post by ME »

If only any of you could try a computer simulation, it would be a tremendous help.
My computer said: "no".

Perhaps you can make yourself a quick first proof of principle by bending some marble-sized-PVC-piping or cardboard-tracks, or perhaps in this case even easier: squashed bicycle tire-tracks;
User avatar
raj
Addict
Addict
Posts: 2981
Joined: Wed Dec 09, 2009 6:53 am
Location: Mauritius

re: A Cracker of a WHEEL???

Post by raj »

A BIG thank to your COMPUTER for having tried!

Raj
Keep learning till the end.
Post Reply