Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant

[i_ron]

Hello Ron,


As Bessler stated and translated by John Collins; if it will not run with one then adding more is futile. Adding more increases the symmetrical pattern and the points of equilibrium will stay the same. If it will not run with one with a counter weight at 180 from the point of expulsion from the inner ramp then it will never turn.

Ralph Lortie

Ralph,

Just to keep you on your toes, I wonder if that is true?
To be precise the weights operate in pairs, so the corrected
statement should read not one but one pair of weights.

But if you look at the 'input' to the wheel then it would seem to be, for arguments sake, the right hand weight from 2:00 to
5:00. Then this exact same input is complimented by the left
hand weight from it's position from 6:00 to 9:00 as it drives
the wheel as it's orbit is changed inwards by the ramp.

But when the right hand weight is at the bottom position it is
providing minimal input to the wheel. So what drives the left hand weight through 11:00 to 1:00? Why the next pair of weights!, and so forth...

Because in my mind the weights don't operate in pairs at 180 degrees but rather the the two inputs from the RH weight at
3:30 and the LH weight at 7:30 drive the wheel and lift the
freeloading weight at 11:30.

Ron

[rlortie]

Ron,

OK! I willingly concede from part of my quote, your reply does show the benefit of doubt. It makes room for second thoughts and at present I do not have the objectivity to back up or disprove my statement.

The last thing I would ever do is mislead anyone by error or intentionally.

I am not attempting to duplicate this machine as I have a phobia gained through experience fighting the back torque and/or friction found in most stationary ramp designs.

I am however working on one that you may say is a deviation of this design; The weights travel a similar path without ramps and the acceleration by angular momentum is introduced at an earlier stage stage of rotation.

By the way! how come we are not talking about a wm2d simulation here? 

Ralph
   

[i_ron]

Ron,

OK! I willingly concede from part of my quote, your reply does show the benefit of doubt. It makes room for second thoughts and at present I do not have the objectivity to back up or disprove my statement.

The last thing I would ever do is mislead anyone by error or intentionally.

I am not attempting to duplicate this machine as I have a phobia gained through experience fighting the back torque and/or friction found in most stationary ramp designs.

I am however working on one that you may say is a deviation of this design; The weights travel a similar path without ramps and the acceleration by angular momentum is introduced at an earlier stage stage of rotation.

By the way! how come we are not talking about a wm2d simulation here? 

Ralph

Well Ralph, I got away with challenging the master that time!
My sole gravity machine was that floppy spring thingie some
time back... so back to studying the patent and scratching
my head....I am sorely puzzled as to what we may have missed...but not to worry, the sim's will show the way, lol

Ron

[hartiberlin]

Stefan,

Wonder if a dxf from @Jubjub's device will do any good. This 30 degree offset of the second pair of wheels will be lost in the wm2d sim. As a matter of fact, I think we already have wm2d sims with that kind of slotted wheel. Although, @rlortie may have a point in that if one wheel doesn't work more won't help. Hard to tell. Too many factors are involved and we see sometimes we observe counter intuitive things (CCW rotation while intuitively it appears the expected to be CW and so on).

Well, we could do it in 2D by putting 2 wheel side by side and using a gear to combine them
and have one wheel "weight phase shifted".

So a DXF would be good.
Regards, Stefan.

[ruggero]

I am not attempting to duplicate this machine as I have a phobia gained through experience fighting the back torque and/or friction found in most stationary ramp designs. ...Ralph

Wouldn't a smoother curve transition between weight-in-slot trajectory and ramp trajectory eliminate any possible back torque?

ruggero