The secret behind Bessler's wheel...

[john.smith]

@Raj,
Hope you don't mind too much but I'll be able to do my own build. I do believe that wood working is in my future among other things.

[preoccupied]

I believe that I have Bessler's Wheel in my drawings. I'm practical some of the time... What should I do with the design? I don't think that gravity should be used for generating power, and I mean that really though I think it could hurt the planet. I think gravity's energy is super sacred. In Bessler's time people exploited the Earth and it was religious, we have dominion over the land and animals. But now in the modern days we know the world is not invincible and relativity exists and gravity is part of relativity and we should probably assume that a small change in the Earth's gravity could be very dangerous and cause a chain reaction. I know you all don't believe the same thing as me. So my drawing should work on a swastika which might be easier to construct and with the string suspended higher up like Raj. The thing that I explored is Raj idea, and I looked at all of the different weight displacements on a string. The horizontal position displaces the entire weight of the lever. I'm using the lever as one weight. So because I'm using the lever as one weight, if it's a lever and a lever and not displaced on a string then the weight is spread out over its horizontal position, based on how far it is from the axle up and down that we all know is how you know how much force a weight applies to a wheel. So I think it's cos or sin of the angle depending on which angle attached to the string for how much weight is displaced, and if it's horizontal positions it displaces the entire weight of the lever into the connecting point to the wheel. My first drawing that I made in this thread showing this horizontal positioned levers had the strings the wrong length because I didn't use a scale to measure them. But actually if horizontal long weights placed only on one side of the inner wheel my previous drawing in this thread is unbalanced at every position of the inner wheel but hangs lower in some positions with the correct string length that deviates from my previous picture and it works for a Swastika with the arms of the swastika suspended from a string close to the upper part of the swastika near the center. It should make a 2 to 1 box shape with the string when the arm is hanging out horizontally. And I think this is unbalanced when the arm is tipped out horizontally to one side which would keep a pretty steady horizontal position against the wheel/cross for part of the turn. I'm depressed enough that I don't care if I'm right about this discovery for my own benefit and I think I'm risking all life on Earth if it's used. Death death death. I might be incorrect if the weight displacement on a string actually functions differently for a reason that I lack knowledge in due to insufficient education on my part in Physics.

[john.smith]

@preoccupied,
Thank you for explaining why I understand Bessler's wheel. Please be mindful that engineers, astrophysicists, etc. do not understand how it works. This is because they have other interests that they are pursuing.
Some of the physics is quite basic, I will explain.
The Earth's momentum relative to perpetual motion is
5.972 × 10^24 kg x 322 m/s. For the Earth's rotational velocity I estimated it's moment of inertia at 70% of it's surface velocity.
Then if your wheel has a rotational velocity of 6 m/s and has a mass of 22 kg then to understand how much momentum our Earth would lose we would have to consider
5.972 × 10^24 kg x 322 m/s - 22 kg x 6 m/s = X
5.972 x 10^24 kg = 5,972,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 kg.
And if we subtract 22 kg's x 6 m/s of momentum we still have 5,971,999,999,999,999,999,999,999.6 kg x 322 m/s.
I seriously doubt what you've realized would be noticed as a result of the Earth's momentum being so much greater. I think this demonstrates why taking the time to consider the math is important.

@All,
A basic consideration that has been over looked but is the "angle" that I have always considered a perpetual motion wheel from, Conservation of Momentum. The diagram shows a 2 axis rotation. One axis represents over balance (in red) while the other axis (in black) represents conservation of momentum.
A workable design such as what I have been pursuing is based on this principle and it is what I believe Bessler did. Since work is mass x distance, the red path is longer because it has a greater radius. And if both paths of 180° are calculated, the ascending side will require less work than the descending side performs.

@Raj,
I sometimes wonder if most of the people in here doubt that Bessler was actually successful. I also think the engineering scares people.

edited to try and clarify some points of interest

[raj]

Congratulation to all of you who are about to show us your wheels.

In the last hour, I found the missing ( the most simplest) idea that should make my Auto Motion Wheel that much more promising.

It was the result of a long intensive study of Bessler's AP drawings. That thing that been seen there for years, but I had never ever noticed it.

This idea fits beautifully with my current Auto Motion Wheel concept. Luckily I found it just in time as I needed it so badly.

Raj

[rlortie]

john smith,

your depiction above tells me you have not did your homework of reviewing past designs on this forum.

Your above attempt was built and and used to scam certain people into financial investment. The member was Darrell Vandugegs, he was of course banned from this forum.

http://www.besslerwheel.com/forum/searc ... 53&start=0

[eccentrically1]

Work is force times distance, not mass times distance.

And if you plug any numbers into your diagram for the mass, and calculate both paths, the work required and performed will zero out. If it didn't, we would have discovered perpetual motion already using this design.

[raj]

So here it is my next promising idea about my Auto Motion Wheel concept:

Not in the first drawing (I posted on the 16 August).

But in this second drawing.

You will need hawk eyes to see what's so NEW in this second drawing.

Clue?: Bessler's wheel was not fixed on stands on either side. The whole wheel was hanging on pendulums on either side.

Raj

[raj]

@ Sam Peppiat.

You asked " What drives the pendulums?"

The answer is in the new concept idea shown in the second drawing above.
Find Bessler's clue I have given, in my drawing.

I know it's a bit difficult to find. I took me years to notice it in Bessler's AP drawing.

If somebody has found it already, be proud to show me what you've found.

Raj

[Fcdriver]

The secret? Try changing the fulcrum instead of shifting the weight! We all know the differences between the three types of levers. Shifting the fulcrum points with a slight shifting of the weights, causes a much greater result! Lift from center, drop from the rim. The fulcrum carries the load, equal to the weight! If you are shifting weight, but not the fulcrum, you are only shifting 1/2.

[raj]

@Fcdriver.

Pertinent observation.

What I have found is much simpler to do.

But I'll have difficulty explaining it, when I'll try to explain.

We'll see soon enough.

Is there some other detective Colombo who can find this new hidden mystery from Bessler's AP drawing.

Raj

[john.smith]

Work is force times distance, not mass times distance.

And if you plug any numbers into your diagram for the mass, and calculate both paths, the work required and performed will zero out. If it didn't, we would have discovered perpetual motion already using this design.

If a 1 meter radius is used with 20 cm's of retraction then the descending side's path is 1m x 3.14 = 3.14 meters
The ascending side would be .85 x 3.14 = 2.67 meters

This would give a ratio of 3.1 to 2.7
Then if 2 levers dropping limit their drop to less than 20 cm's the potential exists. And to lift 1 weight 20 cm's a drop of 10 cm's is all that is required. This could be the 2 weights working together clue, maybe.
I am looking forward to starting on the build in a couple of weeks (am hoping to move soon so I'll have a place to work) as I wouldn't mind seeing Bessler's wheel realized. I think it'd be an interesting piece of history.
What might be difficult for people to grasp is that the 2 weights that shift to create an over balance would be independent of each other.
And E1, the wood might cost less than $30 and the lead about $20. I have been working to lower the cost so I can afford to do it myself. There might be a wood shop in it for me so to me that is a reason to be motivated :-)

[john.smith]

@Fcdriver.

Pertinent observation.

What I have found is much simpler to do.

But I'll have difficulty explaining it, when I'll try to explain.

We'll see soon enough.

Is there some other detective Colombo who can find this new hidden mystery from Bessler's AP drawing.

Raj

Raj,
I know you'll probably be upset by this but hopefully we are wanting to understand Bessler's wheel, okay ? He did say there was an inner (Around the firmly placed horizontal axis is a rotating disc (low or narrow cylinder) which resembles a grindstone ) and outer drum ( this wheel consists of an external wheel (or drum) for raising weights ).
quotes in parenthesis are from http://besslerwheel.com/writings/das_triumphans.html
edited to change image

[raj]

Here I go explaining what Bessler's wheel secret I have found with drawings:

1. drawing 1 below shows two types of stands for the wheel.
On the left of the drawing is one of a pair of usual type of stands on either side of the wheel.
On the right of the drawing is what I think bEssler used as stands.
The red dots shows how and where the axle of the wheel will be found.
2. drawing 2 shows how the main flywheel will look on the two types of stands separately.
3. drawing 3 shows the smaller cranking wheel part of the whole wheel, on the outside of either stands on the separate types.
4. drawing 4 shows:
(a) the whole wheel system with the two pendulums connected to the small crank wheels.
(b) The pendulums hangs/swing from their pivots fixed to both type of stands.
(c) But the axle and bearings of the main wheel/flywheel are fixed on the usual type of stands on the drawing on the left.
Whilst on the drawing on the right, the axle and bearings of the main wheel/flywheel are in the vertical openings in the new types of stands, making it possible for the whole wheel to move/slide up and down in the vertical opening.

Now look closely to the drawing on the right. The whole wheel is in fact hanging on both pendulums.

Just as it says in this quote from Bessler:
"...With two curves around the axle( I have used two small crank wheels in my design) provide the rotational motion of the whole vertically suspended wheel through application of pendula..."

Finally you can see the vertical opening in bessler's wheel stands in AP drawing in drawing 5 below, showing where the rope passes through and the wheel curve cranks come out through the stand.

As for the motion of the wheel in my Auto Motion Wheel concept, It's now much easier to visualise...

Raj

[ME]

You will need hawk eyes to see what's so NEW in this second drawing.

For the ones not having a 20/2 vision (or not even 20/20) here's one way to spot the difference [see attachment].
I eyeballed the needed deformations to match the images in size and orientation; in hindsight it seems a pixel off. :-)

As for the motion of the wheel in my Auto Motion Wheel concept, It's now much easier to visualise...

I don't see how a hopping wheel benefits rotation. It's still PE versus KE (with friction).

[eccentrically1]

Work is force times distance, not mass times distance.

And if you plug any numbers into your diagram for the mass, and calculate both paths, the work required and performed will zero out. If it didn't, we would have discovered perpetual motion already using this design.

If a 1 meter radius is used with 20 cm's of retraction then the descending side's path is 1m x 3.14 = 3.14 meters
The ascending side would be .85 x 3.14 = 2.67 meters

This would give a ratio of 3.1 to 2.7
Then if 2 levers dropping limit their drop to less than 20 cm's the potential exists. And to lift 1 weight 20 cm's a drop of 10 cm's is all that is required. This could be the 2 weights working together clue, maybe.
I am looking forward to starting on the build in a couple of weeks (am hoping to move soon so I'll have a place to work) as I wouldn't mind seeing Bessler's wheel realized. I think it'd be an interesting piece of history.
What might be difficult for people to grasp is that the 2 weights that shift to create an over balance would be independent of each other.
And E1, the wood might cost less than $30 and the lead about $20. I have been working to lower the cost so I can afford to do it myself. There might be a wood shop in it for me so to me that is a reason to be motivated :-)

Ok, good luck.
But if you do the math before you start a build based on this principle, you'll see why it doesn't create an over balance.