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

[path_finder]

The suggestion expressed by ABhammer (to oversize the red drum and include the flywheel inside) is possible.
But a more elegant way to solve the problem consists in a prime-mover keeping a big hole in it's center.
This is the purpose of the animation 'wattA.gif' hereafter showing a prime-mover based on the 'Watt linkage'
(for the new guests: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Watt%27s_linkage)
The prime-mover has FOUR linkages consisting of THREE equal legs and the attachment points are precisely chosen in view to obtain the left to right shift at 12:00, in accordance with the rule of the optimal path (as explained earlier).
The lenght of the legs is equal to ONE HALF of the flywheel radius.
Instead to put one single weight on the middle of the sliding leg, we have TWO weights at each end (wich is the same for the COG) but leaves more room for the hollow center hole of the flywheel. Also the radius of the weights has been selected not too much big.
These values allow the maximum moving space for the weights without to obstruct the center hole (for the red drum axle).
So far the size of the prime-mover is about the size of the flywheel itself.
The geometry respects the requested principle: an action every 90 grades.
This prime-mover can replace the previous one shown in the 'hamsterF.gif' animation above.
Remember we need two prime-movers of this kind dephased of 45 grades (The animation shows only one for a better view)

[path_finder]

I'm a builder, too (like defended in another topic)...
A clever combination of practice and theory is fundamental.
One example of prime-mover of this kind I made in 2006. The big difference with Bessler is that everything is transparent (except the weights) including some nylon wires (not visible on the picture).
It was a triple prime-mover (3 groups of 4 weights, mutually dephased of 30 grades).

Scott, many thanks for the help.

[scott]

On the upload form there is a link that reads "Allowed extensions and sizes" which links here:
http://www.besslerwheel.com/forum/attach_rules.php?f=1
Best,
Scott

[path_finder]

I'm hearing some noise: What is the torque summary of this kind of design?
On the next animation the couples of medium-sized weights have been replaced by a single one, in the middle, with no change in the COG (Center Of Gravity).
The weights giving an useful torque (CounterClockWise, like the clocks) are colored in green.
The weight consuming some energy are in red.
The weights with no action (on the axis, or balanced together) are transparent.
This allows to see the effective path of the weights, wich is summarized in the second picture 'watt_path1.png'.
You can observe that the areas A and B are self compensating, also the half-circles C and D.
The surface E in green represents the available energy given by this assembly.
If we ignore the areas A and B in yellow, where the energy gained in B is destroyed in A, we respect the ideal path I'm defending since a long time (see my logo).

Humm, was the 'Watt linkage' known at the Bessler's time?
Dear Stewart, is it there any link with the ABtoys of MT138?

[Michael]

Um pathfinder, I for one am not going for a patent but I feel the need to tell you that any kind of patent can be obtained as long as it shows some unique quality or use for a function of a form. Please understand that very carefully.
I want to ask you as well, you mentioned you knew how to make a pm machine and you promised you were going to reveil it here. So when can we see it?

[path_finder]

Dear Michael,

you mentioned you knew how to make a pm machine and you promised you were going to reveil it here. So when can we see it?

Where did you found that?
I just promised to share some data (I did it).

[Michael]

You know what, your right. I thought that is what you said somewhere but I can't see it, I might have just thought that's what you meant in one of your posts, sorry about that.

[broli]

PF, there's one question that arises. Does the path on the outside indeed lead to more torque contribution resulting in more energy? Attached I laid down the math for you. All you have to do is either solve it for all cases or just put numbers in it and see what you get.

[path_finder]

Dear Broli, many thanks for reacting.
I don't refute your equations but with seeing the following picture, it's obvious that some configuration give an unbalance (the green part is apparently much more greater than the red part). Remember I selected a particular case (as explained just at the begining, see http://www.besslerwheel.com/forum/downl ... 1abb3b7b0e).
Due to the selected ratio of my radius (a particular case), the figures are much more simple:
r2 equals 2 times r1
alpha equals 2x30=60 grades
beta equals 180 grades
Your calculation could be more easy.

But I don't understand your way to limit the energy given by the torque at the right side.
During the top horizontal shift, there is still a torque wich is not taken in account in your green conical area.

[broli]

Having torque on the horizontal part would lead to some paradox. Because the weight would be then just moving to the right at the top remaining at the same height and the wheel would rotate due to this movement with a torque. If this is possible our quest would have been over already.

Also you can not use r2 or alpha like that. They are a product of your x variable not a paremeter on their own.

Edit: Using your variable would make it simpler indeed. But the result would remain the same, namely both equations give the same result no matter how big r2 gets.

[path_finder]

Dear broli,
I agree with your remark: the horizontal top path could be a light curve in the reality.
And even if we forget the torque during this path, the calculation (in my particular case, where r = R / 2 ) gives:
- total area of the big circle S = PI x R^2
- red area: PI x (R^2 / 4) / 2 = S / 8
- green area: S / 6 (60 grades are 1/6 of 360 grades)
So far the green conical area is greater than the red one with a ration of 4/3

I forgot to precise an important point for the 'Watt linkage': this is the only linkage WITHOUT any friction lost AT ALL
As shown in the picture 'watt_4cords.png' hereafter, instead to use two rods for linking the central bar to the both opposite axles, the best way is to use four cords
The lenght of the four cords (and of the central bar) must be equal to the circle radius.
In any position the assembly will be stable. Try it!

[broli]

What does a bigger area exactly mean? The problem is that the weight on the green side will win only at the calculated alpha angle. On the horizontal side it's doing nothing while on the red side it's losing energy. You can below see how the energy is segmented.

[path_finder]

Dear broli,
May be you are right (the equality you are refereing is true for the gravitic energy, but not for the torque), but according with my figures above, if you give the value 3 to the red area (with a radius of R/2), the green area (with a radius of R) has a value of 4 (four) not three, essentially due to the greater momentum (twice).



In the next picture 'float_path2.png' we are trying another way for allowing the red drum axel to pass trough the flywheel (the both flanges of the red drum must be linked on the same rotation axle).
If we keep the 2:1 ratio for the radius (red drum inner rim versus flywheel axle) as until now, the red drum axle is coincident with the flywheel axle external rim.
So far the first idea coming is: what's happening if we chose another ratio?
In the picture this ratio has been selected within 3:1 the radius of the flywheel axle being equal to 2R/3 (two thirds)
Let's forget the previous one (in grey) and see the new one (blue).
When the flywheel axle (light blue) rotates a complete turn around itself, it rolled on two third of the red drum inner rim, and therefore made a 240 grades rotation around the red drum axle.
We see here that the order 4 of activity has been replaced by an order 3 (every 60 grades).
In that case the two prime-movers must be dephased of 30 grades, and the number of 'Watt linkages' must be TWELWE (like in my shot).

note: the flywheel axle is colored in blue for a better comprehension, but finally it is hollow, allowing the red drum axle to move freely inside. With this design the circular plate supporting the two prime-movers will be exactly in the middle of the flywheel axle and in the middle of the red drum too.

[path_finder]

I respect the fascination of the fans for the Bessler wheel.
Therefore I think any suggestion could be useful.
Please consider this proposal as a simple contribution for the quest of the truth.
I don't pretend to have found the Bessler's secret.

Hereafter just an X-ray view using the hamster principle described above and applied to the Merseburg wheel..
May be this is the principle used by Bessler. Who knows?
The prime-movers (yellow squares) are not detailed.

Hummm..I have a stupid question:
Are the prime-movers (by chance) these pendula oscillating on both side of the wheel.
And then pershap included later inside the wheel (yellow squares)?
Any idea?.

[primemignonite]

Dear path_finder,

I have seen enough!

You are un tres marveleaux artiste, non?

Are your mobiles for sale?

Sacre bleu!

I cannot endure it any longer!

I am coming to Paris!

Let's do lunch at The Ritz - on me!

(SHADES of Josef and Magda Goebbels!)

What do you think???

I shall breathlessly be awaiting word, of
the details of our coming rendezvous.

Until then, once again with heart longing
for gay Paris of '69, I remain

Yours Truly

James

Vivre la France!

At all costs - Restore the Kingdom!