A working ball wheel

[armagdn03]

I hope you are correct! and I dont doubt you are!
Im only having a bit of trouble understanding why it would work if it does. Thants my point, is that I think there is something there to be taken advantage of, but I cannot figure it out on paper which bothers the F*$K out of me!

[hartiberlin]

Stefan any luck with working model 2d in replicating this design?

Haven?t had the time to try it yet,
Still want to finish first my test with the TEP and transformer thing.

Well, maybe it could be modelled in WM2D by using 3 wheels
and coupling them via gears or belts and have one ball in each wheel ?

But I think the Bob Kostoff device is much interesting,
but I also still ponder how to simulate this in WM2D...

[AB Hammer]

armagdn03

I took a little longer lunch to add a couple more attachments to the snowflake wheel now 2.0.

Between all that I have added there is one extra part to look at, the ball excelerator. Now I hope this will help your math to clear what up what is needed to fill the gap. Like a Poker player I don't show all my cards to soon, but it is time to lay another down.

[hansvonlieven]

Sorry Hammer,

Your working Ball Wheel is not what it is cracked up to be, unless there is something you have not told us about. My original assessment was right. It does not work as drawn.

Your design states:



Here is my analysis in detail:



Each sector drawn is 5 degrees anticlockwise from the previous one. It must be borne in mind that at all times there are two additional balls "parked" in the centre which are not shown in the drawings for sake of clarity. The drawings cover the full 60 degrees of revolution, which is one cycle out of three per revolution. The other cycles are identical in function only the sectors in play vary.

I am aware that each ball has its own disk to run in and that the disks are stacked horizontally.

This raises another point that I find difficult to evaluate. Since there is a cavity in each disk where the ball rolls the disk by necessity is an eccentric wheel by itself. The axis is no longer the centre of gravity.



The centre of gravity was determined in the standard way. The disk was suspended in turn by three points and allowed to settle. A plumb line was used to determine the point immediately below, as dictated by the gravitic forces. A line was drawn connecting both points. Where the three lines cross there is the centre of gravity. Actually, strictly speaking only two lines are required, the third one is only to eliminate errors. This is also standard practice.

This is the cardboard cutout with the plumb lines that I used to determine the centre of gravity. The cutout lies on a piece of green cardboard for better visibility. The disk was suspended from the points where the arrows are.



In my analysis I have assumed that this discrepancy is being compensated for by counterweights in order to have the empty wheel run true.

If leaving the eccentricity in place is helpful or a hindrance is a matter of trial. Without knowing the displacement weight relative to the weight of the balls it is impossible to calculate since everything depends on the materials used in the disk and in the balls and their specific gravity and relative dimensions.

Hope this is of help to those contemplating to build the device.

Hans von Lieven

[AB Hammer]

Thanks Hans

Now I guess it is time to try to figure out what happened with the cardboard model that made it run, for something happened and I want to know what. Like I said it didn't move that well but it did move deformed in a loping kind of way. All and all it wouldn't have helped free energy anyway. The 2nd version would work better than the first, and the third version I have no droughts. It has a really cool snap to it, which I believe fits Bessler's 12 ft wheel to a T. I am redrawing it to make it clear on how the mechanisms works, and I think you will be surprised. Just give me a couple of days.