Fletcher's Wheel - Ingenuity verses Entropy

[triplock]

Ovvyus
Be careful that massive chip on your shoulder doesnt twist your back out mate.

Chris

[ovyyus]

Relax, don't be sooo serious.

[Dunesbury]

How much weight do you think was removed?

[daxwc]

The air of 'intellectual snobbery' from you and Ovvyus does amuse me greatly.

Probably amuses you as much as greed amuses me.

[triplock]

Ovvyus

I don't have a serious bone in my body tbh. Life's too short

Chris

[daxwc]

Yes, I thought about the box of weights but the horizon has to be huge not to affect the stability. I wonder how heavy it has to be?

[triplock]

Anyway Waldorf and Butler, as lovely as you two are, I'm off for a latte from a late night garage. If I can't sleep I might as well stay awake with style !
X

[Dunesbury]

Yes, I thought about the box of weights but the horizon has to be huge not to affect the stability. I wonder how heavy it has to be?

It depends on how much weight it needs to stabilize.
How much weight do you think was removed for new location?

[daxwc]

Dunesbury:

It depends on how much weight it needs to stabilize.
How much weight do you think was removed for new location?

Well you would have thought only 8 weights could have been easily detected, so I would say 16 to 32 making it 80 to 160 lbs. One had to carry the box.
So 160lbs grounds 300+ lbs … with all the axle leverage. Can’t see it; wouldn’t it have to weigh more than the wheel plus all the torque it produces? Of course maybe Bessler’s wheel slowing down under load is the horizon slipping and working like a pendulum.

[Dunesbury]

I agree. I can't see it either, and artificial horizon doesn't go around like Bessler said everything did.
Not that this wouldn't work. But if it can't be simmed, then someone has to make one to find out for sure.

[ovyyus]

I would think a 160lb artificial horizon weight hanging from the axle might easily hold a 3lb force imbalance at the wheel rim.

[Fletcher]

Yeah, I agree Bill - it actually doesn't matter too much if it moves a little - at least not in a force design - the further from center it moves the larger becomes the torque until it self rights - btw, that was a good idea about the box of weights the witnesses saw coming from an artificial horizon - nobody said whether Bessler stood on a ladder etc to remove the weights, so probably he was accessing thru a portal below axle height - it can't be ruled out.

Dax .. I've struggled to come up with another way where the axle turns with the wheel - it's so much easier to just have the stator pinned (grounded) to the upstand support, but then if you did that it would quickly give away a valuable lead - if the axle turns then nothing concrete is known as he wanted - he was a clock maker after all & even Wagner's wheel had a hanging gear mechanism - AFAIK all designs need an anchor point of some sort i.e. something to push against.

Actually this argument is one of the most perplexing to me from the start - a wheel that turns with the axle & develops power when all parts retain the ability of free movement - it just doesn't seem possible to achieve imbalance while EVERYTHING moves around.

Dunesbury .. that quote had me scratching my head for ages - I kept coming back to artificial horizons then abandoning them precisely because of that quote - eventually I decided that not all things said by Bessler should be taken as the literal truth - he did not pull up Wagner for using one when he should have been all over him & taunting him if his definitely did not, as he would have us suppose - I decided there was a good possibility his did, no matter how he worded it.

[ovyyus]

nobody said whether Bessler stood on a ladder etc to remove the weights, so probably he was accessing thru a portal below axle height - it can't be ruled out

I agree. From memory, Wagner complained that during a demonstration the wheel lost power and stopped. Bessler said something to the effect that parts must have rubbed together and he reached into the wheel through an opening and quickly corrected the problem. Wagner wondered how the problem, which could have been anywhere in the wheel, might be fixed through the single access opening in the wheel. Good question if everything supposedly moved around the axle together.

Something Steve (bluesgtr44) has pointed out many times over the years is the reported very rapid acceleration of the wheel, achieving maximum RPM in only 2 or 3 turns after a light push start. Wagner reported that the wheel could be easily stopped by Bessler's skinny assistant grabbing hold of the axle. These two reports appear at odds with the suggested heavy weight of the wheel. How could such a supposedly heavy wheel be accelerated and stopped so easily? If the outer wheel was constructed of a light framework and covering, as was described by witnesses, and the weight of the internal mechanism was hanging from and carried by the axle, then these reports become less contradictory, ie the outer rotating wheel was just a light-weight shell to house the short perpendicular rim boards upon which the much heavier internal axle mounted artificial horizon and drive mechanism hit/pressed against.

...it just doesn't seem possible to achieve imbalance while EVERYTHING moves around.

I achieved this with my self-rotating hot air overbalanced engine design here: http://www.orffyre.com/speculation.html The timing of the falling displacers is governed by geometry and everything turns around the axle. Of course, your design is in no way similar and much more interesting... if it works.

[Trevor Lyn Whatford]

Hi Fletcher,

What I could not understand about your design is the use of the RBGs to play the Angular Momentum Game, wherein all experiments that show the advantage of gaining wheel speed by pulling weights in and out are on the horizontal plain, and the RBGs is a gravity game of balancing levers and their torque. I must there for conclude that you meant to use the RBGs on the horizontal plain wherein CF then becomes the greater force on the mechanism, if that is the case then the RBGs would not be the right mechanism and would act as a CF break.

The RBGs only works because, "as one weight raises another weight falls in the field of gravity, with use of CF it has two opposite forces working against each other that act like a CF breaking system, the CF force vectors are all wrong for the RBGs to do its job.

If it was your intention to use the RBGs to play the gravity game then there is a chance of success but not for a out of balance wheel.

In regards to the use of CF for motion wheels, all of the "so called" empirical experiments show that to play against CF to gain wheel speed, there needs to be more energy in than you will get out from a small advantage.

Edit, + on the mechanism.

[daxwc]

Fletcher:

Dax .. I've struggled to come up with another way where the axle turns with the wheel - it's so much easier to just have the stator pinned (grounded) to the upstand support, but then if you did that it would quickly give away a valuable lead - if the axle turns then nothing concrete is known as he wanted - he was a clock maker after all & even Wagner's wheel had a hanging gear mechanism - AFAIK all designs need an anchor point of some sort i.e. something to push against.

Fletcher can we pin to the wheel .... if we pin (ground) 4 separate RBGS to the wheel then the wheel is turned by the RBGS that is finding its real MOI.