The Clockwork approach

[bluesgtr44]

Hey P-M....I am not sure just how much you are willing to divulge as far as the math concerned. My questions as far as that aspect goes.....

As this arrangement accelerates, there are going to be reaction forces (unless I really don't get it) to contend with....and from my basic knowledge, these will not be directly proportional. Can you give us a little math lesson on how trig can deal with this?

Have you already worked out the functions for a specific size of wheel and if so could you show us the math, how the trig works to determine the expected performance of the wheel? I mean like acceleration rate....max. rpm's....max. torque?

Very, very rusty on my trig....haven't used that since apprentice class in about 1980-81! I could really use the math lesson, P-M....help me see it...I want to learn!


Steve

P.S. are you sure you and ANT aren't working together....I really see some similarities in the concepts....

[P-Motion]

Steve,
We're not, but I will take a look at his concept(s). Maybe we can help each other out a little bit.
I use trig to help layout and understand my design. An example of this is if you use a 24" bar with weights at each end. Of course it would rotate in the center.
If it rotates 30 degrees in a clock wise motion, the relative resistance/force is .886.
If the arm moving downward extends 3", the ratio will be about 10.68:13.35 units of force. the 13.35 would be 15 times .89, the horizontal distance from the axis. And the 10.68 would be 12 times .89.
So at 30 degrees, the motive weight would have about 2.7 units of force.
I will be open sourcing the design. I do believe it fits quite well with Besslers descriptions. Also, if the design is successful, then others will know how to build one for independent varification.
It will be about a month (I think) before I test the design. Until then, it would be difficult for me to say how much force will be generated.
I will use both 2.5 and 5 pound weights. I will try the lighter weights first.
I will be using a 5 foot long tube. This will give me a length of 2.5 feet per arm from center. Gravity does have an acceleration of 32fs^2.
The arms should be long enough to generate sufficient momentum.
One reason why I am not hurrying more is a good carpenter would measure twice and cut once.
Of course, generating momentum is meaningless unless it can be conserved. I will explain this over my next few posts.

Jim

Hey P-M....I am not sure just how much you are willing to divulge as far as the math concerned. My questions as far as that aspect goes.....

As this arrangement accelerates, there are going to be reaction forces (unless I really don't get it) to contend with....and from my basic knowledge, these will not be directly proportional. Can you give us a little math lesson on how trig can deal with this?

Have you already worked out the functions for a specific size of wheel and if so could you show us the math, how the trig works to determine the expected performance of the wheel? I mean like acceleration rate....max. rpm's....max. torque?

Very, very rusty on my trig....haven't used that since apprentice class in about 1980-81! I could really use the math lesson, P-M....help me see it...I want to learn!


Steve

P.S. are you sure you and ANT aren't working together....I really see some similarities in the concepts.....

[P-Motion]

I would suggest that even the act of side shifting the axis the first time will effectively be like releasing the pendulum from the wheel for a short period - in that time it will be unable to apply its full compliment of torque to the down going side & so a penalty in momentum will be incurred - strangely this will be equal to any imagined advantage you may or may not get after normal system losses.

Fletcher,
I'm not sure of a simple way to put this. Bessler would have had to have done it to get his wheel to work as far as I am concerned. Momentum does need to be conserved.
I think this is what he used his warped boards for. One one each side of the axis. The wheel was between the boards.
While the radius was shortened for the weights, they still applied constant force to the wheel.
This way, when a weight was extended from center, it created force because of leverage.
When it was redirected, it created force by its' pendulum motion. If you put a pendulum in a wheel, you would see, it would move the wheel.
However, it would a similar but different path.

Jim

[Fletcher]

I've just read your reply to Steve [bluesgtr44] & myself - couldn't access BW.com for a while today - so I see that you are about to start a build experiment to test your theories - that's a very good thing & should make things clearer for all concerned - open sourcing of designs that lead to working wheels is commendable & I note that both yourself & Alan are basically duplicating your posts on Overunity.com which is proudly promoted as only Open Source - between the two membership communities there should be some interesting & thoughtful feedback & discussion as things evolve.

My thoughts on internal curved boards [ramps/guides] that are a 'fixed in position' part of the wheel structure is that once something is leant/placed on them they act just like a lever creating torque, no doubt - but here's where it gets interesting - depending on the angle of intersection between pendulum bob & curved board & whether the bob must run downhill or uphill relative to its contact position with the ramp, determines whether this torque will serve you or hinder your objectives - things don't like to be forced to run uphill without creating back torque issues & like water finding its lowest level mass tends to find its lowest potential.

Anyway Jim .. best of luck with the build !

[Bessler007]

Hello Jim,

I think it's great you've posted your ideas. That's the whole point of the forum in my opinion. It might be a forum is a good place to tell everyone the idea you were hyped about didn't work. That's big news everyone needs to know. :) So far all ideas haven't worked.

I move like molasses when it comes to design and building. I'm still in a design mode with an idea (intercontinental ballistic cat-o-pelt). I've bought materials twice but I haven't cut once. :)

I will get around to looking at your idea a little further but I'm still not sure the weight will catch the wheel at the bottom. I've briefly looked at it in simulation but as you might know I'm a little distrusting of wm2d.

[Bessler007]

one other thought Jim...

I don't agree that you've done a thorough job on the math but I think it's commendable you are using that tool. Math is a unique tool everyone uses whether they understand it or not.

One can either do a little math before a build to see if the idea is worth perusing or go through the trouble and expense of building then let reality do the math. Either way the math will be done.

[P-Motion]

what,
perpetual motion is impossible because it violates the law, Conservation of Momentum.
But then, I did say I believe that Bessler figured out how to conserve momentum.
And no one yet has shown the idea to have been tried at anytime in the last 300 years. Care to cite a specific example ?
This would be where all work is accomplished in either the lower right or left quadrant of a wheel with the extended weight(s) not going lower than the distance they were at before extending.
Please cite the example. I think it only fair.
I think while I am at it, I do have other interests in my life more important than this. For me, it is a hobby. And more than that, it is a major headache dealing with people that will not take the time to analyze a design before criticizing it. Just as you are criticizing my effort but provide no examples of been there, done that.
So if you can not show a specific design that used a pendular motion to restore a weight to its' location. do some research please.

Fletch, Ralph et al,

"Many would-be Mobile-makers think that if they can arrange for some of the weights to be a little more distant from the centre than the others, then the thing will surely revolve. A few years ago I learned all about this the hard way"

If you read this carefully he is not saying that he didn't also do this. He is just saying he too went through a great deal of effort trying what everyone else was trying.

[P-Motion]

Thanks Bessler.
If it doesn't work, then the math will help to explain why. But seriously, I do love the potential. If it does work, then I think more than a few aspects of it will be compared directly to what Bessler wrote. It is what I have based the design on.
But it does come back to conserving momentum. And the pendulum effect does that. I haven't seen a simpler idea tried that has so little resistance and about all motion is converted to momentum, not work in lifting a weight.
And it is the weight lifting where about all ideas have failed. WIth this design, they will be together. In a counter-balanced position.
By the way, I worked on my first design around 1990 using the method in the thread, Conservation of Momentum. Let's just say if I could have gone a different direction in life, I would have.

one other thought Jim...

I don't agree that you've done a thorough job on the math but I think it's commendable you are using that tool. Math is a unique tool everyone uses whether they understand it or not.

One can either do a little math before a build to see if the idea is worth perusing or go through the trouble and expense of building then let reality do the math. Either way the math will be done.

[winkle]

The Windmills Of Your Mind
Round
Like a circle in a spiral
Like a wheel within a wheel
Never ending or beginning
On an ever-spinning reel
Like a snowball down a mountain
Or a carnival balloon
Like a carousel thats turning
Running rings around the moon
Like a clock whose hands are sweeping
Past the minutes of its face
And the world is like an apple
Whirling silently in space
Like the circles that you find
In the windmills of your mind

Like a tunnel that you follow
To a tunnel of its own
Down a hollow to a cavern
Where the sun has never shone
Like a door that keeps revolving
In a half-forgotten dream
Or the ripples from a pebble
Someone tosses in a stream
Like a clock whose hands are sweeping
Past the minutes of its face
And the world is like an apple
Whirling silently in space
Like the circles that you find
In the windmills of your mind

Keys that jingle in your pocket
Words that jangle in your head
Why did summer go so quickly?
Was it something that you said?
Lovers walk along a shore
And leave their footprints in the sand
Is the sound of distant drumming
Just the fingers of your hand?
Pictures hanging in a hallway
And the fragment of a song
Half-remembered names and faces
But to whom do they belong?
When you knew that it was over
You were suddenly aware
That the autumn leaves were turning
To the colour of her hair

Like a circle in a spiral
Like a wheel within a wheel
Never ending or beginning
On an ever-spinning reel
As the images unwind
Like the circles that you find
In the windmills of your mind

I believe that even those who are not ignorant, should they attempt to use pure REASON alone to achieve their ends will, all of them, suffer from the same noted madness, and that thus their great chance of fame will be missed.

do you suppose Bessler really believed that

quote from John Collins book


sorry just couldn't help myself

[Bessler007]

Gregory,

I've made simulations that appear to wind up. Nothing real yet.

What if when Bessler's wheel was only a strange kind of clockwork mechanism which was actually able to rewind itself while running, due to gravity and its own rotational motion which is changed the reference point for some other mechanism inside the wheel?

(So, what if it was actually not an OOB wheel?)

Anybody thought about this before?

This is a quotable quote. Ironically funny.

.. it's a rare gift to have the wisdom of youth & the energy of age !

[Fletcher]

I believe that even those who are not ignorant, should they attempt to use pure REASON alone to achieve their ends will, all of them, suffer from the same noted madness, and that thus their great chance of fame will be missed. - quote from John Collins book

do you suppose Bessler really believed that ?

Yep, he believed it & also lived it himself until he alone rose above the madness inflicted on PM seekers [seeking something for nothing] - he is pointing out that even the educated [in mechanics, math & physical sciences] who are capable of supreme rational thought, will not find the answer by the sole 'crunching of logic & extrapolation of [current] learning' alone - they will not know some fact or observation that makes it all possible & so will go mad trying to connect the dots, where there is a gap in the relevant information, that would otherwise make the connecting of dots entirely possible.

Imo, he is saying that the force he found for his principle wasn't at all well known or understood in his day & therefore most unlikely to be recognized [by even learned, clear thinking men] for the potential it promised & he alone used in his wheels, where he did get "something perceived to be for nothing".

[DrWhat]

I'm frustrated with this Bessler wheel thingamy, and I've only being working on it for a year :-#
Can't we just add a motor and be done with it!!

ps Winkle, that's freaky, I just downloaded that song (a dance version) 2 days ago without much though to the lyrics.

[Gregory]

Gregory,

I've made simulations that appear to wind up. Nothing real yet.

Hi 007,

That's great. I've also made the first test on my new idea and it appeared to keep moving. However it is too rough for a sim to be trusted entirely, it showed me the necessary promise I looked for to continue my search.

By the way, my word-play 'Clockwork' is not to be taken literally.
The idea is similar in logic, in the build up & the function of the machine components, but principally it is not the same mechanism as the one in a clock.

In my idea the assisting force is not coming from a spring, nor coming from gravity, but from the 'weights themselves', as Bessler may played on these words in this meaning... (I guess)

Imo, he is saying that the force he found for his principle wasn't at all well known or understood in his day & therefore most unlikely to be recognized [by even learned, clear thinking men] for the potential it promised & he alone used in his wheels, where he did get "something perceived to be for nothing".

You put that very nicely Fletcher! Thanks.
I can only agree and hope for the same to be the truth.

[Clarkie]

What about this from the clues.

"A great craftsman would be that man who can 'lightly' cause a heavy weight to fly upwards! Who can make a pound-weight rise as 4 ounces fall, or 4 pounds rise as 16 ounces fall. If he can sort that out, the motion will perpetuate itself. But if he can't, then his hard work shall be all in vain." - pg 295

Pete.

[Gregory]

Hi Pete,
Great quote!

I think Bessler meant that quite literally, almost word by word. Or maybe half-literally with a few logical/mechanical twists... Btw, Does it reads the same in the original German??

Anyway, it seems clear for me that it is the only way he was saying.
The mechanism must be over the efficiency, ability & restrictions of normal leverage trade off.
It sounds like he doesn't talking about leverage. It must be something other... Too bad he didn't make it clear what he are talking about.

But he clearly put: there is no other way.
You can work your fingers to the bone and nothing will happen unless you can sort that out!

Lift more with less,
Or more likely in the meaning of: Lift more with (his) something which is actually less.