PROCESS RESTART

[SHADOW]

Cela reste toujours floue pour moi!

[Roxaway59]

Hi Shadows, as far as I can make out it makes the simulation more accurate by tightening the action of springs, ropes and axles and the boundary between objects. You will notice that the higher you have the number that objects overlap less. This makes a big difference to how the simulation behaves and means it will be less likely to go over unity.

If you wish you can put larger numbers in by typing them. I sometimes put 4800 in.

The reason they picked 60 is because this is the screen refresh rate for a lot of monitors and in the UK the screen refresh rate is usually 50. This is because of the electric A.C mains supply which runs at a frequency of 50hz. In other countries it is 60hz. When you match the screen refresh rate to the figure put in Algodoo there is less flicker on the screen. So if you take the figure up and your screen refresh rate is 60 then do it in multiples of 60. Like 60, 120, 240, 480 and so on.

Hope that helps

Graham

[SHADOW]

Essai de motorisation lestée.
Cet essai permet d'émettre l'hypothèse que Bessler à utilisé le subterfuge du lest pour embarquer son prime moteur dans sa roue.
Détail de l'essai:
Une roue motrice en arrière plan qui représente la trouvaille de Bessler!
Au premier plan le train d'engrenages lesté qui transmet le mouvement au tambour masquant l'ensemble pour créer l'illusion.
Nota : le tambour peut tourner plus vite ou moins vite que la roue en arrière plan.
Mais cela reste une hypothèse!!!

Test of weighted motorization.
This test makes it possible to make the hypothesis that Bessler used the subterfuge of the ballast to embark his engine premium in his wheel.
Details of the test:
A driving wheel in the background that represents Bessler’s find!
In the foreground the weighted gear train transmits the movement to the drum masking the whole to create the illusion.
Note: the drum may turn faster or slower than the wheel in the background.
But this remains a hypothesis!!

[preoccupied]

https://www.besslerwheel.com/forum/view ... 98#p207398

https://www.besslerwheel.com/forum/view ... 01#p207401

I brought up an interesting idea here in this other thread part of community buzz section in which I had something in mind similar to what you just posted as part of it. So your mechanism there motorisation lestee is just what I need! Why do I need it? Because a heavy flywheel would be forced to turn and then the heavy flywheel would move in unison and turn the track of the device to make it move. So the heavy flywheel in this case would turn several revolutions to turn the device a few revolutions. The device is of course in my description in the other thread if anybody has seen it yet, it is oscillating levers with a swinging weight swinging them back and forth. I'm not saying I know all of the ideas shared on this forum but if anybody had something similar in mind, this is why I think it would work. If the lever pushes the flywheel in one direction if it's moved in either direction then it can oscillated back and forth with the random swinging of the weights. By probability if the track it's on moves some gradually it will continue to cause the weights to swing at random and if it moves a change in direction up down or left or right it will move one of the levers causing the flywheel toe accelerate. So the gear set up at the oscillating levers base would just be a crossbar pedal or it could be called a pedaling bar connected to two ratchet gears, the ratchet gears going towards the gear arrangement that would turn the flywheel in one direction.

When I was making conversation or trying to about the right angles to the axis in the other thread, my proposal was that right angle to the axis means the direction the wheel is turning or its opposite direction. If that's true then an oscillating lever would be Bessler's solution and randomly swinging weights would drive the wheel. A two pole lever with a cylinder weight in between would swing freely without hitting anything. And the levers could move along a track that is pushed by the flywheel that the swinging weights accelerate. Why would the right angle to the axis clue mean the direction the wheel is turning or its opposite direction? Well during the time of Newton that was part of math I think. You have the right angle intersection of the tip of curve that you calculate. It goes either towards the direction the curve would be heading as if if you let go of an object and let it fly away. On a circle that would be the direction the wheel is turning and its opposite direction is where the line would be drawn. If you were to swing an object on your arm like a baseball throw and let go of it it would move in a straight line based on your curve and that straight line would always be the right angle to the axle and its opposite direction. That's what I thought. One or more weights must apply force at right angles to the axis so therefore an oscillating lever would do this and allow the force to push a heavy flywheel that the heavy flywheel then slowly moves the track the levers are on to give the swinging weights on it some oscillation motion.

Basically I find your motorisation lestee a possible interesting use for this idea.

[SHADOW]

Roberval Test

[SHADOW]

Test ascenseur négatif!

Negative lift test!

[SHADOW]

Essai 1 pour 4 avec crémaillère.

Test 1 for 4 with cremaillère.

[SHADOW]

Essai crémaillère à couple constant: les limites d'Algodoo selon le PC!
L'utilisation d'une chaine contrarie Algodoo!!!

Constant torque rack test: Algodoo limits according to PC!
The use of a contrarian chain Algodoo!!!

[Robinhood46]

I had the same message in my older computer.
Now that i have a more recent computer, i haven't had it since.

I think it is very unlikely, but it may be worth trying, when you click right on the background, and select "zoom in on scene", does it zoom in on the scene, or do you find yourself in front of a green screen?

[SHADOW]

Bonjour Robinhood,
Pas d'écran vert et mouvement identique en vitesse si je lève uniquement un poids!
C'est génant quant à la fiabilité des tests.
L'idée de base est de voir le comportement de la crémaillère pour une autre application.

Hi Robinhood,
No green screen and identical movement in speed if I only lift a weight!
It’s annoying as to the reliability of the tests.
The basic idea is to see the behavior of the rack for another application.

[johannesbender]

Shadow , perhaps you find this interesting , to show how minds think alike ,many years ago i designed these two versions A and B (but B had 3 arms and 3 rack+pinions) , A was suppose to displace the COM up.

B was a folding version to fold a long lever made up of short sections connected to pinions with dropping racks , the racks was suppose to lift the arms by folding the arms up (rotating) and then unfolding again when up (rotating) , the end arm sections had pulleys connected to pulleys on the first arm section etc. each rack controlled its own pinion and arm section , one rack and pinion would work before the other rack and pinion and each rack and pinion had their own travel distance , and one rack and pinion rotated both sections of arms together upwards while the first rack and pinion continued to un fold the second arm section ,to imagine follew drawing sequence 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5.

[SHADOW]

Bonjour JB,
Effectivement j'explore les possibilités de ce système.
Merci pour votre contribution.
Et plus j'avance dans ma recherche, plus je m'apperçois que d'autres on foulés ces terrains!

Hi JB,
I am indeed exploring the possibilities of this system.
Thanks for your contribution.
And the more I advance in my search, the more I see myself that others have trod these grounds!

https://sciences.gloubik.info/spip.php?article2143

[johannesbender]

Thats also a good example of how people tend to think alike , imagine how many times when we think we could have been thinking the same things like Bessler did , in fact MT proves that people think alike .

[Robinhood46]

It also helps us understand that when we have an amazingly brilliant idea that nobody has ever thought of, we're probably talking bollocks.
Loads of people have had exactly the same thought, when they thought of the idea for the first time, and loads of people have realised the thought wasn't as amazingly brilliant, or original, as they thought.

[johannesbender]

And the cherry on the cake usually "why didn't I think of that!"