Roll on the 20th June

[purepower]

Hi,
New here and I am building a wheel that I am losing faith in. But, I drew this up today and think it has possibilities. What do you think. I know it is hard to see and is sort of jumbled but it's all there.
Bob   Thought I'd repost this here to see what a interested group would think
I'll try to state in other words how it is supposed to work. Each inner wt. is 4LBS. Each outer is 3LBS. Weights are hooked together by cables and in some cases have to go over pulleys to pull each other in the right direction. The inner wts. are used to pull the outer wts to where they need to be. The inner wts are 4lbs but only pull 2lbs worth of pull on a  individual outer by use of a tension spring that takes 2lbs to stretch it out, so it only pulls 2lbs. then as the wheel turns another inner weight comes into play and pulls another 2lbs. Thus pulling the outer wt into a favorable position. There are times when there are slack lines. When I state "strait through",  I meant for instance, that a wt was pulling from arm 1 to arm 4. The large circled number is what I perceive to be the "leveraged" weight of that arm. I start the inner wt at 1lbs because it can't be at the center and thus has wt on the lever. The outer, I start at 4lbs,because it is just beyond half way up the arm. I realize that I probably don't have the math down on the leverage, but moving a weight out twice as far doubles its weight force. The two numbers with the "+" sign and an arrow to a weight is the numbers of the arm that the weight is acting on or being acted upon by. So picture a maze of cables or strings with extention (tension) springs in line and some pulleys to reverse the pull at some points. The total weight  on the falling side should be heavier than that of the rising side. So to pull a outer wt out(Say arm 1), it takes the inner wt on the arm directly across (arm 4) and the inner wt on the next trailing arm (arm 3), to lift it. The inner wt on arm 4, also lifts on the outer wt on arm 2. Now at the bottom of the rotation the outer weight needs to be pulled in and this done by the inner wts again but in different combinations  of inner wts than they were pulled out by. For instance, Arm 4's outer wt is pulled in by the inner wts on arms 1 and 2, so the arm strait across and the next arm leading it.  And so on.  Hope this helps. I don't have time to build it right now, but if someone wants to, and it works, I'd be inclined to share patent rights. Or they can just buildit and use it for themselves.   Alaskabobb

Okay, my knee-jerk reaction was that this could work. Then I jumped into it a lil more and found some problems.

If you intend to use pulleys to sift the wiefhts in relation to each other, the positions drawn can not exist with one another.

For the balls to be in positions 5 and 10 (I know those are torque notes, just play along), the cable would need to be longer than required by the bottom position to function as designed.

With 5 and 10 not functioning as drawn, the wheel would not work.

This is assuming I understand the placement/function of the pulley. Would you mind posting another pic with the pulley placement?

Edit: I meant to question position 7(s) also. How is the inner weight going to lift the outer weight in the top and bottom positions relying on the same mechanism?
-PurePower

[purepower]

Hi alaskabobb,

Which way is this wheel supposed to turn---clockwise or counterclockwise?

Counter-clockwise. It's drawn on the pic, note the arc above the wheel.

-PurePower

PS @AKbob... So do you live in Alaska? I worked/lived up there for a couple summers. Liked it so much I thought about transferring to UAA, until I found out their ME program sucked. Have really good CE though. I wonder if this is the reason why you had a bad experience with the professors.

[madsen]

Counter-clockwise. It's drawn on the pic, note the arc above the wheel.

-PurePower

Oops---so much for my reading comprehension.   

[alaskabobb]

Hi Purepower,      Now live in Michigan, Went to school in Hawaii, Born in Palmer Alaska and all my friends call me alaskabobb to differentiate me from the other Bobs we hang with.  Not down on Profs., Just science in general is unwilling to embrace what is outside their view of excepted knowledge. Yes there should be an acid test, but the dismissal of ideas that deal with things they deem empirically wrong without a real look is in my view stupid and wrong, this poisons the air so no one else will look at it either. One shouldn't throw out blind comments without proper examination. I think this would work, and I wanted some one that is competent to look at it and try to find real flaws or build it, ( I just don't have time). Blanket comments just don't address the real feasibility.  Alaskabobb

[alaskabobb]

Hi again power, Heres more. Alaskabobb