Wheel acceleration...

[ken_behrendt]

Jonathan...

I have re-evaluated my "Spacer Ball Injector" designs in light of your analysis and I now find myself in AGREEMENT with your criticisms. These types of designs only look impressive when they are considered from a STATIC point of view...however, when the DYNAMICS are analyzed, a fatal flaw emerges.

As you noted, WHENEVER an ascending stream of balls is composed of a MIXTURE of balls of differing weight from two or more separate channels, then the ascent speed MUST be increased with respect to the drop speed of the balls in the separate channels that "feed" the ball mixture. There is no getting around this effect. It's simply a demonstration of the mV=Mv conservation of momentum within a closed system demanded by the 3rd Law of Motion. Since this equality must exist, there is no way that the kinetic energy of the balls can increase due to their motion and the device will not be capable of performing external work. Indeed, when friction is taken into account, the device would rapidly slow to a stop.

Anyway, anybody who is contemplating building any kind of device along these lines should keep this in mind.


bluesgtr44...

You quote the following from John's book:

"The inventor started it with the merest little effort. As soon as just one of the internal weights began to fall, the machine started to revolve with such strength that it turned forty or more times a minute."

The implication is that Bessler's wheel was a simple overbalancing wheel of some sort...yet, we have all been told repeatedly by the orthodoxy that such a system can NOT produce a net torque. If his wheels were not fraudulent (and I do not think they were), then the only solution that makes any sense to me is that, somehow, he found a self adjusting mechanism that managed to keep the c.g. of the wheel's weights on the descending side at all times...at least as far as the one-directional wheels were concerned. It must have involved some highly unusual geometric arrangement of weights that has never even been seen in the natural world. Maybe it's akin to the process of walking...one begins to fall, then catches oneself, then begins to fall again, then catches oneself again, and so on and so on... Now what kind of SIMPLE mechanism could do something like that so that the c.g. of a set of weights would ALWAYS stay on one side of a rotating wheel?

ken

[bluesgtr44]

Ken...that is what I believe, and the whole reason I started this acceleration thread. In my estimations and from the little WM2D experiments, there is little doubt that this cannot be achieved if you have to contend with that force. Think about it...it is a "force"...one to be dealt with, or one that can be used...hmmmm, "here it is empty, there it is full"...or something like that. He was WAYYYY out of the box of traditional thinking for his time.

Silver Eyes...you mentioned that there was no real information to connect all the wheels with the acceleration speed because of lack of info. I believe they all came from the first one (wheel) in it's most basic form...and acceleration NEVER really was compromised from wheel to wheel...this was one of the most basic realities of his find that would not change. The measurements and the design might influence the resultant mathematics of the acceleration, but the principle never changed.

Steve

P.S. I have an idea...and it is pretty much out of the box...and it is simple. And yes Ken...it is the geometrics right now that are proving a bit difficult for me. I am starting now to figure the best kind of material and how to produce this with the most flexibility for "trial and error" as I can. I do not want to have to start from scratch everytime an idea does not pan out.

[bluesgtr44]

Hey guys...ran a couple of things through WM2D. The enclosed is the acceleration....I do not know how to figure out what my acceleration rate would be after 1 to 2 revs....can anyone help me with this? The results are after only 1/4 of a turn.

[ken_behrendt]

I do not think that the chart you supplied would allow one to determine what the acceleration would be after 1 or 2 rotations. Why didn't you just let the assemblies complete 1 or 2 rotations?

Actually, the instantaneous acceleration of the assembly is not that important. I always try to include the angular momentum curve graph with my assemblies. IF your assembly is accelerating, then it will be obvious from the shape of its angular momentum curve because of the constant increase in velocity of the parts.

ken

[bluesgtr44]

OK...two of my hopes were dashed a bit. Just by reading the books I do not think that was where he was going. Now, I'm going to try it still on WM2D the next chance I get. I have a cram class all next week on the newest piece of equipment at work, so it may be a couple of weeks before I actually get to sit down and do it.

You know, That Wagoner guy REALLY pissed him off!

Steve

[Gregory]

Hello Steve,

I see no problem with the reported acceleration rate of Bessler's wheels, it is normal. This is the thing which happens when the weights are lifted properly each revolution. As I said many times, the only thing have to be done is lifting or shooting the weights up without disturbing the wheel's rotation. The quicker is the better...

Here is two wm2d models capable to reach terminal velocity within few seconds, dependent on design. The electromagnetic one with four weights and two cross-bars reaches 50 Rpm within 2.5 seconds.

Anybody ever built such an electromagnetic wheel? It would be an interesting thing when you enter your workshop / laboratory, switch on the lights and with the lamps the small wheel immediately begin to rotate.
Would be very inspiring when you enter your workshop ;-)

The other model with the automatic latching mechanism uses an imaginary force which is a function of the velocity. (you have to work against CF, so you need a greater force when the wheel velocity rises)

Happy Xmas to everyone!

[bluesgtr44]

Hey Greg....wow! That last post of mine is about 2 1/2 yrs. old! At work right now, when I get home I'll download those and check them out.


Steve

[Gregory]

That last post of mine is about 2 1/2 yrs. old!

Yeah, I know. I just always wanted to post these models and this topic was the best place to do so.

[bluesgtr44]

Greg, first off....your workmanship in WM2D is to be commended and complimented! I am not even close to what you do.

On the first file....I changed the air resistance from the .0003 high setting to a .1 low setting and it keeled pretty quickly. That is how I would envision it working if that were a real setting, however. I have not had the time nor the space to set up anything.....I need to do that, WM2D is just not cutting it for me anymore. Again...very nice work, Greg!


Steve

[Gregory]

Hey Steve!

Thanks for your compliment!

Well, I checked and see why it keeled with that setting... It is like underwater, which is far from being real.

Here is a mathematical pendulum, with your air-resistance settings. You can see, it stops within a few seconds, while in the real world such a pendulum would swing for long minutes or hours!

It does not mean that Wm2d accurately figures air resistance and corresponds to reality, but it do mean that your resistance settings inside the simulated world is really unrealistic for the actual model. And this is why it keels... ;)

After all, if you check my settings in different kinds of models, you will find that it accounts for a standard approximation. This is how I arrived at those settings, I experimented on many different models, and identified the best settings for first tries. High air resistance is also better because it exponentially places a greater drag on the objects as the speed rises.


Wish you happy wheeling in the new year!

G.

[bluesgtr44]

OUCH! I see your scale now for the air resistance. I have a template saved that I use where all the basic settings work for me....I use "lb/ft-sec" and this value for me is .202....not saying this is the best setting, but so far it seems to be practical and realistic. If it is not, correct me! Please!


steve

[Gregory]

Yes, in "lb/ft-sec" it is a correct & realistic setting.
But any time you want to change air resistance, just open a new sim, swing a simple ball weight with a rod and check how much it slows down over time. Then use another setting, and compare...

[Gregory]

To All,

I have no time to read through all of this thread or another, but I have a question which would be good to answered! I don't know if there is accurate information exist for this, but it would really good to know...

How quickly Bessler's wheels accelerated through their FIRST complete revolution?
This a very important piece of information... I really hope somebody can answer it, because it can throw us a hint where to search for the prime mover force, and what measurement & mass proportions may be better to use.

We know that the wheels at Gera & Darschwitz was different than the wheels at Merseburg & Kassel.
My guess is that the two earlier wheels were accelerated up quickly in their first revolution, and the two later wheel's velocity remained much slower during the first rotation.

Anybody to confirm this or the opposite? Stewart?

Thanks in advance!

[John Collins]

Perhaps I can answer your question Gregory. I have checked my files and as far as I can see the only reference to acceleration was in Fischer von Erlach's letter to Desaguliers in which he says that the wheel gains its full speed of 26 rpm within 2 to 3 turns. I tend to think that the earlier one-way wheels would accelerate a little more quickly because they had no braking effect to overcome as in the two-way wheels. The Merseberg wheel turned at 50 rpm but even so, less than two full turns to reach 50 rpm seems to me to be unlikely. If I find anothere reference to acceleration I'll gert back to you.

JC

[Jon J Hutton]

That does seem to rule out any weight being dropped on the rim.....

JJH