Leverage over an axle seems to me to be about the same as attached to the perimeter. Why would the torque over an axle be different from that developed at the perimeter?
IMO leverage/fulcrum over an axle relieving the ascending side of all lifting mass, is to say that the ascending side is light as it should be. I have proven this many times. Problem is that most designs do not achieve this point until at or past 9:00 of the ascending side where gravity and CF will pull it to the descent. That lower left quadrant on a clockwise rotation will kill you every time. Oh! I must not forget: to reiterate this is my opinion!
Bessler speaks of pairs and connectivenes in Mt 9,10 and I believe 11. This is what I interpret. The oposing weights connect by a lever and said leaver rests on the vertical point of the axle. All supporting weight is resting on what could be described as the vortex of the axis. On an atomic level it does not turn.
Some where buried in the achieves is a thread that discussed a spoke attached to the rim at nine and extended horizontally across the face of a stub axle and past 3:00. Worth the time to find it as it is relative to your quote.
IIRC, the Merseberg wheel had an axle that was 6" dia. and then the Kassel had the 8" axle. Also, there was a mention by J. Wolf that the Merseberg axle was hollow....nothing of that sort noted for the Kassel wheel. Nice work Ben and Alan!
Steve
Finding the right solution...is usually a function of asking the right questions. -A. Einstein
Just want to Clarify, Chas's GRAVITY Wheel has been shown to have
potential to work, but is NOT working ATM, we are still working with
him to keep the R and D alive the latest i got from Chas is as follows.
" I am now delighted to let you know the results were as follows using
the same .075 motor that has a speed of 1430 RPM and driving my 3.5
KVA alternator I was able to loop the motor back to one of the outlets
on the alternator without loosing any speed I was then able to plug
into the second outlet a bed lamp with a 75w bulb and yes they both
worked.The unit I assembled has a flywheel that is unbalanced as a
mater of fact its like standing in front of a fan, one of the bearings
over heated and no mater how I tried I could not stop the belt
slipping on the motor . so a hell of a lot of improvements could be
made. I do hope you will continue to show interest in my project and
any simple advice you can give me would be wellcome .Chas "
Regards
Ashtweth
Edit: Oops! sorry I posted this on the wrong thread.
He has an interesting viewpoint but the vibration would be a negative effect from my testings. Not to mention that that design would not make any of the Bessler wheel sounds that have been reported.
"Our education can be the limitation to our imagination, and our dreams"
posted this to another tread, but thought I'd add them to this one as well..
My thoughts on the axle come from MT 135 which seems to show its construction....
That being a large dia. wheel with 6 holes bored through, offset along the length and its circumference to achieve the radial nature of the spokes.
This then allows the spoke to slide within the hole.
I keep returning to wanting to make the rim wanting to turn independent of the internal mechanism. I kept thinking that witnesses would have noticed the free-wheeling action, not to mention the axel would not correspond. No witness have said the axel rotates at a different speed... but what if the machine had sides, rim, axle and a hidden internal axle? The axle was big enough to hide another one inside. Any options on this or problems you see associated? Is there more then one idea as how to do this?
When Bessler mentioned in AP that his axle had many holes and compartments, I would guess it could
be taken to mean that either (1) the axle was some sort of guide for the mechanism(s) or (2) irrelevant entirely because he had to make holes/compartments in it to facilitate his mechanism(s). Are there any other possibilites for why his axle would be described the way he described it?
lol thanks Ralph... now its like two people that believe in the boogie man.
rmd3, If the machine ran with an internal mechanism that ran independent of the wheel, would not the people who actually pushed it not have noticed that constant pressure was not there? That the wheel felt light until coming agianst something, when in stationary mode? I think the hole in the wheel in Wagner report gives a clue that it could be.
Sorry had to edit part of ths post... not enough coffee this morning and got two different wheels mixed up. Anyway how could the Drashwitz wheel be free-wheeling and self starting at the same time would be the easy way to ask.
Sorry Ralph not laughing at you... laughing with you ;)
Last edited by daxwc on Sun Feb 10, 2008 4:19 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Laugh all you wish, but my statement stands, I hope to be able to reveal my objective proof in the near future.
daxwc, I am not sure exactly how to interpret your statement. There is no mention of constant pressure being felt while pushing the wheel until the mechanism falls into place described as "until the first weight falls"
