Power output

nicbordeaux · Post by **nicbordeaux** » Tue Mar 08, 2011 7:22 pm

Pure dreaming o' course... but what minimum output would a PM device need to be to be of any practical widespread use ?

My personal criteria would be 2 hp per cubic meter of space occupied by device.

And those 2 hp I wouldn't use to drive a generator (you'd get maybe 1 kva ?). Would seem a bit more logical to use friction to generate heat for direct use in water heating, house heating.

Trevor Lyn Whatford · Post by **Trevor Lyn Whatford** » Tue Mar 08, 2011 8:05 pm

Hi nick,

I would use it on a generator and sell back to the gid and then your electric buy back would cost next to nothing, it would be better than a roof full of solar panels at over Â£5,000 pounds a go you know the ones, here in England there out side the super markets selling free energy, with a payback if you live to be 100! I know a lot here will be thinking a pay back in 2 years thats not bad : 0

Regards Trevor

ovyyus · Post by **ovyyus** » Tue Mar 08, 2011 9:08 pm

Bessler's smallest wheel developed around 12 Watts per cubic Metre. That's about 120 x less than your minimum criteria Nick.

Of course, most here might be happy to see 12 Watts per cubic Metre, or even less :D

nicbordeaux · Post by **nicbordeaux** » Tue Mar 08, 2011 10:46 pm

Less than 2 hp and it's a gimmick. A desktop toy for overpaid executives. Better to bury it and take up knitting, it wouldn't be worth the hassle .

nicbordeaux · Post by **nicbordeaux** » Tue Mar 08, 2011 10:54 pm

Trevor, if you are in England, solar is a joke. It rains all the time. The only way to tell the difference between summer and winter is by the temperature of the rain. You'll be better off collecting rainwater in a 10 cubic meter container 200 feet off the ground, and dropping it once a day on a rope which turns a gen. Might get a nice bit of juice from ten ton at g pull over 200 ft. In Wales, you can drop it 3 times a day.

ovyyus · Post by **ovyyus** » Wed Mar 09, 2011 12:16 am

nicbordeaux wrote:Less than 2 hp and it's a gimmick...

Well, I can't agree with that Nick. If Bessler's large 5 cubic metre Kassel wheel could output just 1 HP, constantly day and night until it's parts wore out, then I think it would be very useful.

However, the single greatest criticism levelled at Bessler was that his wheel was too weak to be of practical value. Bessler obviously could not practically increase the volume to power ratio of his discovery. He said that more power required a larger wheel, which of course doesn't addresss the problem at all.

Interestingly, the historical reports indicate that power to volume ratio might actually decrease with wheel size:

Gera: 12 Watts/M3
Draschwitz: 50 Watts/M3
Merseburg: 31 Watts/M3
Kassel: 21 Watts/M3

greendoor · Post by **greendoor** » Wed Mar 09, 2011 4:10 am

Bessler was very restricted by his need for secrecy. He needed to be able to remove the essential parts, and/or be able to smash it with an axe in the event of being dragged to prison, etc, etc.

I have no doubt that he could have made an extremely powerful machine if he didn't have to hide anything.

Nic - for such a smart guy, your comments seem a lot like the people in Edison's day who couldn't see the usefulness of the electric light bulb. Or the guy from IBM who though the world might one day have a need for a dozen computers, max. Or the many record labels who didn't sign The Beatles ...

Once the secret is out, the physics books will have to be rewritten. When industry gets a hold of it, you won't recognize the Bessler wheel. Smaller, lighter, faster, cheaper ... if it works, it will be big.

And big oil and the big political war mongers will just sit silently by wringing their hands as their power structures evaporate. Yeah, right ...

ovyyus · Post by **ovyyus** » Wed Mar 09, 2011 4:34 am

greendoor wrote:I have no doubt that he could have made an extremely powerful machine if he didn't have to hide anything.

Extremists have no doubt about matters in extreme doubt :D

greendoor · Post by **greendoor** » Wed Mar 09, 2011 5:33 am

That's an extremely big "IF" ... but even you, Ovyyus, would have to admit that a working Bessler wheel is of far bigger consequence than a desktop ornament for bored yuppies ...

ovyyus · Post by **ovyyus** » Wed Mar 09, 2011 7:18 am

Bessler's wheel may have great consequence for everyone, or no consequence at all. Belief in either extreme is meaningless without knowledge.

Irish Oracle · Post by **Irish Oracle** » Wed Mar 09, 2011 2:00 pm

If we new how the inner workings opperated then it might be very possible to increase the power, without having them contained within a wheel. Bessler made his wheel extremely slender, maybe with modern eingeneering we can increase the output to weight ratio.

550 foot-pounds in 1 horsepower.

bessler lifted 70 pounds 2 feet (approx) so 70 foot-pounds of work, thats =to 100 watts (approx) not counting rpm for simplecity here.

Thats not too bad, if it can be doubled or more its a source of constant power. Use it to charge batteries that can give power when needed.

Grimer · Post by **Grimer** » Wed Mar 09, 2011 5:19 pm

greendoor wrote: ...
Once the secret is out, the physics books will have to be rewritten. ...

For me this is the most important aspect of Bessler's discovery since it affects ideas about so called "conservative" fields in general, in particular the conservative magnetic field. Science is halfway there in this endeavour since we already have a magnetic refrigeration cycle involving adiabatic and iso-magnetic legs.

Steorn have been attempting (unsuccessfully) to invent a magnetic power cycle. I believe the insights obtained from harnessing the gravitational field will lead to success in the Steorn quest.

This is why I also believe that the important objective at this juncture is merely to demonstrate that power, however small, can be obtained on a continuous basis from the gravitational field.

Grimer · Post by **Grimer** » Wed Mar 09, 2011 5:28 pm

Irish Oracle wrote:If we new how the inner workings opperated then it might be very possible to increase the power, without having them contained within a wheel. Bessler made his wheel extremely slender, maybe with modern eingeneering we can increase the output to weight ratio.

550 foot-pounds in 1 horsepower.

bessler lifted 70 pounds 2 feet (approx) so 70 foot-pounds of work, thats =to 100 watts (approx) not counting rpm for simplecity here.
...

One has to know how long it took to lift 70 pounds 2 feet before one can make a statement about power output.

From Google calculator:

"70 (foot pounds per second) = 94.9072564 watts"

Did Bessler accomplish that lift in one second?

AB Hammer · Post by **AB Hammer** » Wed Mar 09, 2011 8:15 pm

Well! How many watts of power, does it take to operate the equipment in the pictures and then Bessler's wheel still ran? For some reason I feel our calculations of Bessler's wheel is wrong. How much power is at the axle? Just remember. One lb 100 times out is 100lbs at the axle. So 100 lbs at the edge of the wheel that is 10 foot is 60 times the 100 lbs at the axle. (estimated due to distribution 6,000 lbs) I believe that is plenty strong enough.

Alan

PS just think of it if it was a 12 ft wheel by 10ft wide. That can be massively powerful energy producer. ;-)

Grimer · Post by **Grimer** » Wed Mar 09, 2011 8:37 pm

That rather assumes all those bits of equipment were running at the same time.

BesslerWheel.com

Power output

Power output

re: Power output

re: Power output

re: Power output

re: Power output

re: Power output