We don't care the Bessler wheel, the most important is to build a working wheel...

[path_finder]

Dear ectropy,
What you mention above, that's exactly the point:
fixing the cam in any configuration is immaterial
It will not work if the cam is fixed to a point referenced with the earth (as made commonly and unsuccessfully through the central axis).
But if the cam is fixed to a point referenced to the outer rim, the COG is entirely linked to the outer rim.

As promised I give you this suggestion of 'crossbar'.
The purpose of this mechanism is to obtain a fixed point independent of the main axis (without any physical linkage with this central axis)
where we can further attach the cam showed in the previous animation above.
I preferred to show now a picture instead a new animation where it would be more difficult to see the details.
Anyway an animation will follow showing the related motion.

A (in green) is the main wheel (rotating clockwise like the clocks), where the inner rim has some teeth.
B (in blue) are four double gears, the bigger part being a quarter of A in size, and rotating on an axle fixed on the violet cross D (rotating clockwise four time quicker than A). One the same axis is locked a smaller gear, four times smaller in size than the gears C.
C (in yellow) are four gears with their axis fixed to the violet D cross, and each linked to the nearest small blue gear.
Each C gear has an axle rotating free at 3:00 position, where an arm of the E cross is linked.
D (in violet) is the main cross supporting the four blue satellites
E (in rosa) is the secondary cross, with each arm linked to the C yellow gear spot.

How it works:
When the main wheel A rotates clockwise, the four blue B satellites rotate clockwise with a rotation speed equal to four times the speed of the A speed.
This is possible if the D violet cross is linked with a pendulum (not shown on the drawing)
The yellow C gears rotate anticlockwise with a rotation speed equal to one quarter of the B speed because the blue reductor, so far at the same speed as A but in the opposite direction.
Therefore the four axles located at 3:00 of each yellow C gear, keep their position at 3:00 during the whole rotation of the mechanism.
Thus the rosa E cross rotates clockwise around it's center.
But the most interesting is: the center of E remains still fixed at the same position.
We do have now our independent fixed point. We can now attach the cam.

Note that this mechanism can be made with any size (the bigger the best?)
And if it was the 'prime mover' used by Bessler, it could be with a limited size at the center of the wheel and not particularly observed by the witnesses.

[Michael]

Pathfinder from what I see;

When the main wheel A rotates clockwise, the four blue B satellites rotate clockwise with a rotation speed equal to four times the speed of the A speed.

Yes

This is possible if the D violet cross is linked with a pendulum (not shown on the drawing)

Okay... from Fletcher;

the counter_weight had to be very heavy to keep the cam in position & still it moved or rocked a little.

From Pathfinder;

any single T-bar system will require a very heavy pendulum for stabilize the cam.

But Pathfinder this new method also requires the use of a heavy pendulum. So what is the fundamental difference?

The yellow C gears rotate anticlockwise with a rotation speed equal to one quarter of the B speed because the blue reductor, so far at the same speed as A but in the opposite direction.

Yes

Therefore the four axles located at 3:00 of each yellow C gear, keep their position at 3:00 during the whole rotation of the mechanism.

Pathfinder if the purple cross is held steady by a large pendulum, and if all gears had a mark on them that was at their 12 oclock positions, when a gear reached 1:00 oclock position gears B would reach their 4:00 oclock positions. Gears c would reach their 11:00 oclock positions. So anything fixed to these gears would move, not rotate.

Note that this mechanism can be made with any size (the bigger the best?)
And if it was the 'prime mover' used by Bessler, it could be with a limited size at the center of the wheel and not particularly observed by the witnesses.

I thought this thread was about We don’t care about the Bessler wheel?

[path_finder]

Dear Michael,
If there are some corrections to do in my drawing, don't hesitate: make it and post it.
I regret a little bit the low number of practical experiments and/or shots versus the plethoric amount of arguties.
Therefore don't count on myself for increasing the number of any polemical process and in particular about Bessler.
I don't try to convince anyone
I have nothing to prove.
I don't need money.
I don't need investors.
My data are shared for those finding an interest.
It's for take 'as' or for forget.


Dear all,
Please find hereafter the animation I promised earlier, a little bit different but using the same principe.
The primary cross here is replaced by a plate (sector) supporting the eight axles.
The blue center of the rosa cross is the fixed point independent from any mechanical direct link with the earth, but linked with the wheel itself.
This point remains fixed at the same position when the mechanism rotates.
All gears have teeth. The size of the four blue satellites is the same as the inner rim. The size of the small yellow gears is indifferent (they are here only for inverting the direction of the rotation).



On a practical point of view, I did never build one within the order FOUR like in this animation, but I built all my mechanisms within the order THREE (tripod like used in the 'flowerbowl'): The result is the same but this kind of design (tripod) is much more efficient.

[wheelrite]

great animation...hypnotic even.
regards
Jon

[Michael]

As usual it's a great animation Pathfinder but it is different from your drawing. The only way the animation works is if the axle of the cross is fixed to something, or if the center wheel is stationary and the gears rotate around it.

Do understand the points of my first post? I don't reall need to paste a drawing right?

Pathfinder if the purple cross is held steady by a large pendulum, and if all gears had a mark on them that was at their 12 oclock positions, when a gear reached 1:00 oclock position gears B would reach their 4:00 oclock positions. Gears c would reach their 11:00 oclock positions. So anything fixed to these gears would move, not rotate.

[ectropy]

Hi Pathfinder, Hate to be a stick in the mud again but your animation is a non runner. I can state this with utmost certainty because I have built not one but many variations of the design. Dump the cross. It is serving absolutely no purpose. The motive force would be on the Blue gears. The Blue gears, although appearing to be not rotating are actually rotating anti-clockwise. Insert the motive force (not shown) to the Blue gears and the Blue gear will tend to rotate clockwise. ie; There is a conflict of rotation. We have lockup. Believe me, it does not work. The mechanism to allow this type of design to run is very very complicated indeed. Yes as you have stated, the Idler gear geometry is of no concern but all other gears (in this scenario) will be of equal number of teeth and Module. Regards.

[path_finder]

Dear Michael,
Your remark is pertinent: this animation is valid only if the inner rim is stationary.
But your forgot to mention that the motion of the main green wheel (and therefore the inner rim) can be any: if the main wheel rotates ANTIclockwise, the rotation speed of the blue satellites will decrease and pershaps stop, but the fixed point always remains stationary at the same place with no dependence from any other rotating part. Speaking by another way, the question is: what should be the relation between the inner and the outer rim of the wheel (in this animation they are the same object)? Any idea?

Dear ectropy,
I know you are in advance on this subject. Be patient.

[ectropy]

Hi Pathfinder, No, not impatient at all. Been there, done that. Just curious as to how long it will take for somebody (yourself)? to latch on to the required mechanism. I just had to mention the conflicting rotational forces as this phenomenon is the Achilles Heel of this design of which you are no doubt aware. PS; Not that it will matter in the final design but the Idler Gears? Why so small? Even if the Idlers were the same number of teeth as the other gears, they will still rotate twice for every one revolution of the wheel. I did post a lead on this issue a while back. Larger idler, fewer revolutions, less friction. You will find that velocity ratios are going to play a big part in the final analysis. Have fun. Regards.

[path_finder]

It seems to me that some strange things happen since few days.
Today (less than one hour ago) I posted a new message with a new animation.
This new message has been displayed for ten minutes but then disapeared.
The same thing happened few minutes ago when I posted a message to Fletcher's topic in the Community's forum. The message disapeared after few minutes.
What that means?
So far I post it again. We will see.

The next animation uses the fixed point as axis for the rosa cross shaped gear, wich itself is linked to the outer rim of the green wheel by some teeth.
No weights are drawn at all (think about where?) for the moment.
At the start time the inner rim of the green wheel is stationary.
Let's suppose that for some reason the blue satellites and yellow idlers start to rotate clockwise.
The rosa cross rotates clockwise and moves the big green wheel clockwise.
The inner rim rotates but we saw that has no incidence on the cross center, remaining at the 3:00 position.
The difference of radius gives a beneficial torque to the rosa wheel, the mechanism accelerates...
What wrong in this scheme?

Note for the Bessler fans: 'The wheel inside the wheel?'

[Stewart]

Note for the Bessler fans: 'The wheel inside the wheel?'

path_finder - you say you don't care about Bessler's wheel and yet you keep making references to it/him! But once again I feel I have to challenge you on a misleading quote - please show me where Bessler said that his wheel consisted of a wheel inside a wheel - thanks. Stewart

[path_finder]

Dear ectropy,
Don't throw away the cross. We need it. The rosa cross, linking the four axels located at 3:00 of each blue satellite, allows to physically fix the position of the fixed point wich remains virtual as long no part exists allowing it's existence.
So far this point can then be used for mechanical purposes. Remember the earlier design of this topic
(you can see it here again: http://www.besslerwheel.com/forum/downl ... a113566934),
suggesting to use a skateboard rolling inside the outer rim for lift-up the weights between the 4:00 and 6:00 position of the wheel. Now we can use a plate like a skate board, as shown in the picture legsQ1bis.png bellow (I did not made yet any animation). The big difference now is: in the previous design the skateboard did not contribute to the motion of the wheel and some torque were lost. Now the weights roll on a plate linked to the virtual fixed point and due to it's excentricity they continue to contribute to the main motion.
Note the small arm linked to the violet plate and locked under the main axis.
The purpose of this arm is to lock any rotation of the violet plate no further than 6:00 clock.

[path_finder]

Dear ectropy,
The reason why the yellow idlers are so small is coming from the necessity to obtain the maximum of excentricity for the virtual fixed point.
Therefore the radius of the blue satellites must be as biggest as possible, thus obliging us to reduce the size of the idlers.

Dear Stewart,
May be yes, may be not. So many words have been put in the mouth of Bessler.
As titled in the topic, and although the full respect I keep for Bessler, he is not the alone solution, and without minoring his contribution, I think the most important is to build a working wheel, with any kind of design. My intent here is not to polemicate with the Bessler fans nor to offense them, but instead, it is to incitate all readers of this forum to share their experiments and results. For the moment I'm still remaining on my hungry.

[ectropy]

Hi Pathfinder, I am obviously not on the same page as you. You seemed to be going in the same direction that I have been going for over 3 years but suddenly you deviate from a design that has REAL promise. My experiments have shown that what is required for the control mechanism is a MINIMUM of excentricity but having said that, my design of the mechanism is somewhat different. The ideal is for the mechanism to rotate about the axis of the main shaft and which path be concentric to the mainshaft axis. ie; no excentricity. All the torque will still be available to the main shaft. Tall order when the weights are off center but not impossible, just ever so complex. PS; Animations don`t tickle me. Sure I use animations to prove Geometry but when it boils down to physics, animations, although impressive, are useless. If I may say so without any predudice, dump the swinging weights and the cross and stick with your basic design. There is so much promise with this design. Even if I were of a mind to post a 2D or 3D drawing at this stage, without having proved the mechanism in real time, it is so complex with parts behind parts behind parts within parts etc. that it would require much explanation of what the hell everything is supposed to do anyway. Regards.

[path_finder]

Another application using the virtual fixed point for positioning the cam
(see the 'legs_Pbis.gif' animation in the previous page 12 above or click here:
http://www.besslerwheel.com/forum/downl ... 3db2e104fb).
The springs are not shown.

[path_finder]

Now we know how to build a 'virtual fixed point' (by using a cross like in the previous animations).
But the next step is much more important: How to build a sliding 'fixed point' in view to obtain a sliding axel (moving along an horizontal segment)allowing the realization of the designs shown earlier and visible at:
http://www.besslerwheel.com/forum/downl ... ec8e9c52ac.
and at:
http://www.besslerwheel.com/forum/downl ... ec8e9c52ac
and at least hoping to solve the final design shown earlier and visible at:
http://www.besslerwheel.com/forum/downl ... ec8e9c52ac)
To do that we need to move the axles until now fixed at 3:00 clock on the blue satellite outer rim of the cross.
At that point some geometrical basic issues must be reported:
The rolling of a circle B on the inside path of a circle A is an hypocycloid.
This curve is reduced within a diameter if the radius of B is the half of the radius of A, like shown in this animation bellow.
(for some reasons the animation is not correct here, click on it for a better view)

Thus the key is to install the same mechanism inside the blue satellites.
The axles will be then fixed not on the blue satellites like before, but now on the outer rim of the new gear.
By the way the 'virtual fixed point' will swing from 9:00 to 3:00 at each half turn of the mechanism (and back again on the next half turn)