Perpetual Motion is Impossible

Trevor Lyn Whatford · Post by **Trevor Lyn Whatford** » Thu Dec 17, 2015 6:22 pm

Hi CC,

Friction is only a small part, the biggest problem is when you move weights on cross bars a good percent of the weight transfers onto the pivots, also if it is the intention to move the weights on the horizontal where it is easy to move them, then there is a very small window of opportunity even at low speed, this problem will only get worse as the wheel speed is increased.

Then there is the cross bars and weights travel limits, there would be a lot of energy lost to collisions and shock on the pivots.

I do not see how the wheel can react like a ice skater arms unless all of the weights move in at the same time, and that will load all the pivots and would need more energy to pull in 16 weight against the centrifugal forces. If you move one set of weights in, and one set out then the wheel will not feel any benefit.

All of the above is before the effects of gravity are taken into account.

I think most agree that the Conservation of Angular Momentum can only be achieved in very low friction environments, if not Angular Momentum is less than conserved.

So where is all the energy coming from to do all this work? It could not be from a light push.

Edit, + E1's quote,

There are physics laws that prevent the motion transfer from re-occurring, though. It's a one shot occurrence, the same as a gravity wheel. I'm surprised you don't see that. I guess you will when you try it.
How big is your wheel diameter? How much will it weigh?

Well, it is a one shot occurrence if not using gravity that is, orbits work just fine, as does angular momentum when gravity is working on them.

jim_mich · Post by **jim_mich** » Thu Dec 17, 2015 6:32 pm

Seems some of you missed the point that there are four mechanisms. Thus, 16 weights divided amongst 4 mechanisms gives only 4 weights per mechanism.

All will be revealed in time.

rlortie · Post by **rlortie** » Thu Dec 17, 2015 6:40 pm

Sorry cloud camper, I believe you are over-emphasizing structural requirements. This could have negative effect on the newbies and those wishing to build on a limited budget.

Structural rigidity: I have built many 48" wheels using 49" wide industrial grade MDF using 1/2 to 3/4" thickness. For larger wheels I use 48" wide by .125" thick tempered hardboard laminating two sheets together, alternating lap joints, making a disc .25" thick X (up to) 96" diameter.

I build the drum with two such discs using 3/8" double nutted all-thread around the perimeter (stay bolts) the desired length of wheel thickness.

As for bearings, if find that common low cost 3/8" ID X 1-1/8" OD wheelbarrow bearings capable of handling up to 7 cubic feet of wet cement more than efficient. I use pillow block bearings for the main axle and have yet to overload the capabilities of a 7/16" ID bearing. These can be found at your local NAPA store or most farm supply outlets,

A milling machine is not required, I very seldom use my Bridgeport. A bench or floor mount drill press can suffice. I have an off-bear table built in such a manner that I can use it for rotating wheels as large as I can get out the shop door. Like any drill press or mill, I am limited to it's swing capacity, My drill has a 20" swing, meaning that I cannot bore over 10" deep into the radius of a disc.

3/8" hot roll rod or all-thread with either shaft stops or jam nuts will suffice for shafts depending upon span of support and load carried,

As I progress and learn more of machining and utilizing self-lubricating plastics I am leaning more on its usage.

Ralph

ME · Post by ME » Thu Dec 17, 2015 6:44 pm

As I understand correctly the weights (when going outwards) perform some reversed coriolis effect, and the wheel tries to compensate the weight rotation (by means of inertia) and flattens that circular motion (from an external point of view) - and thus moving forward.
I'm not sure, but I would guess the trick lies in path-reversal (perhaps by nullifying the angular force)...?

(not mentioning friction problems here)

Trevor Lyn Whatford · Post by **Trevor Lyn Whatford** » Thu Dec 17, 2015 6:48 pm

Hi Jim,

I did miss the point, is that 4 wheels with one mechanism each, or 4 mechanisms on one wheel with 16 weights?

jim_mich · Post by **jim_mich** » Thu Dec 17, 2015 6:53 pm

One wheel. Two mechanisms on one side. Two on the other side.

The stand has room for two more wheels between the uprights. And a wheel could be hung out on each end of the axle shaft.

eccentrically1 · Post by **eccentrically1** » Thu Dec 17, 2015 7:09 pm

How deep is it?
How much did all the parts cost?

jim_mich · Post by **jim_mich** » Thu Dec 17, 2015 7:33 pm

The wheel assembly is about 7 inches thick.

If you were to buy everything new, the price would be in about us$400, By switching some parts to aluminum, I added about us$100.

My time and labor are the biggest "cost".

eccentrically1 · Post by **eccentrically1** » Thu Dec 17, 2015 7:48 pm

Is the 852 the parts that have been assembled?
And you're assembling the 45 new aluminum parts now?

jim_mich · Post by **jim_mich** » Thu Dec 17, 2015 9:03 pm

No. The 852 parts are what have been manufactured, bought, scrounged, etc.

Some parts have been assembled. The A-frame support is fully assembled. The wheel is resting on its bearings.

All the previously assembled mechanisms have been disassembled.

When all the aluminum parts are finished, then assembly should not take long.

rlortie · Post by **rlortie** » Thu Dec 17, 2015 9:31 pm

By stating:"All the previously assembled mechanisms have been disassembled." You are referring to the cross bars made from MDF?

This leaves me to assume that at one point you had it assembled and functional to a status the particle board proved incapable of handling the stress.

By keeping in contact with City, State and Federal highway and park maintenance shops I have collected a considerable stock of aluminum obsolete signs. Giving me a good source of sheet aluminum of various sizes.

Ralph

eccentrically1 · Post by **eccentrically1** » Fri Dec 18, 2015 2:04 am

How fast do you think it will turn?
As fast as the Gera wheel?

jim_mich · Post by **jim_mich** » Fri Dec 18, 2015 2:31 am

How fast?
I don't really know. Best guess would be about 52 RPM. Or maybe faster.

jim_mich · Post by **jim_mich** » Fri Dec 18, 2015 3:08 am

Ralph wrote:As for bearings, if find that common low cost 3/8" ID X 1-1/8" OD wheelbarrow bearings ...

For the wheel axle I'm using:

Steel Ball Bearingâ€”ABEC-1
Open Bearing No. R6 for 3/8" Shaft Diameter, 7/8" OD, 7/32" width.

McMaster.com #60355K504 $5.59 each + shipping.

Trade No. R6

Radial Load Capacity, lbs.
Dynamic 750
Static 310

2 bearings Ã— 310 lbs = 620 lbs static load capacity. More than enough.

eccentrically1 · Post by **eccentrically1** » Mon Dec 21, 2015 6:54 pm

jim_mich wrote:
eccentrically1 wrote:There are physics laws that prevent the motion transfer from re-occurring, though. It's a one shot occurrence, the same as a gravity wheel. I'm surprised you don't see that. I guess you will when you try it.
This is your opinion. You don't know the design. There are no physics laws that prevent the motion from re-occurring. But you'd need to see the mechanisms to understand this.

Your thinking of this a being just a one shot deal is only your opinion or guess.

After all, we are seeking what is said to be impossible, right?

It's only your opinion or guess since you haven't tested the mechanism. It's a law, not my guess, until then. And after, because what you're seeking is impossible.
All will be revealed in time, by the end of the year, you said.
10 more days away!

BesslerWheel.com

Perpetual Motion is Impossible

re: Perpetual Motion is Impossible

re: Perpetual Motion is Impossible

re: Perpetual Motion is Impossible

re: Perpetual Motion is Impossible

re: Perpetual Motion is Impossible