@All,
From early on, I considered the possibility of Bessler having built more than one wheel.
One reason for this is no one has yet found a way all his clues can describe a singular wheel.
This has lead me to consider how his clues could be used in various combinations.
With this "wheel", some clues do fit. the important part though is if a working concept can be built. To that end, it does take developing an idea and it's build process. If someone has build experience with similar mechanics, it would be easy for them to jump ahead on something like this.
Also, as Veljko Milkovic has built an efficient water pump using pendulums, this is something that could make them self powering. Then people from Serbia to Africa to India could benefit from something like this.
Myself, I happen to like Bessler's engineering and his work. To this end, I will start explaining how a double pendulum could work and the math behind it.
The picture illustrates how one side of a double pendulum could work. In time, I will explain some ways the mechanics can work.
Most people probably believe that the lifting of a weight cancels out the force of the swing weight causing it to be lifted. I do not think this is so. I believe as the weight is being lifted, that it increases the efficiency of the pendulum. This is because there is less counter torque resisting the downward swing of the prime mover. Also, as the weight being lifted rises, it requires less force to move it towards center, much less
What is of concern is that the pendulum being lifted does not rise above the level of the axle. If so, even with springs, it would be difficult to move the weight outward again.
Also, in the coming days, I will show how some of Bessler's clues do fit this which includes a spinning top that he drew as a picture clue. It describes quite well the mechanics of the weights on the double pendulum. And as such, if 2 double pendulums are used, then when the weights are released outwards, they could make knocking sounds, 8 per rotation of the wheel as described. I am not sure if the knocking sounds location were noted.
Jim
edited to correct spelling, etc.
@All,
Since I will be having surgery Friday morning, might as well start now.
The attached diagram shows shafts A and AC. Shaft A is the main fulcrum.
And as it rotates, it can rotate shaft AC in the opposite direction. This will allow the downward swing on the left to pull in the weight on the right and vice versa. It is basically the heart of the mechanics for a double pendulum. Shafts A and AC could have meshing gears as found in any clock or a strap/tether.
And by using shafts AC, different cogs http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ilsB_KtTSAU (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ilsB_KtTSAU) might be tried. With a 1/4 rotation added, .785 in addition to .57 per 1 value of radius would calculate the retraction of a weight towards center. I think it totals 1.355 for every cm or inch of radius of the cog. What the cog allows for besides retracting a weight is it's release without extra work needing to be done. It allows the line to slip of the hoisting mechanism which is what the cog really is.
The weights of course would be round and have a place where a line could be attached to bothe sides for equal pull upon being retracted. If such could work, then I believe all that is necessary has been posted.
The diagram with shaft AB is another possiblity. By having a seperate shaft rotate both shafts attached to the weights, it might allow for a design that's easier to work with.
It is a simple idea. And is open for any person to try. If they are successful, there are those who would be helped.
Jim
@All,
This diagram shows why I believe using weights only in a rotating wheel is not a very good idea.
If you consider the torque generated by over balanced weights, it will need to be sufficient to move all other weights. And to lift the weights above the axle and move other weights, it seems it is to much work for one or 2 weights to do.
With a double pendulum, it is one weight moving an opposing weight. This requires much less work to be performed than a rotating wheel.
Jim
@All,
I might be able to make non working models to demonstrate how both types of pendulums can work.
This one and the one I described with the top moveable weight and the fixed weight. It is this one that if it could work, might better be suited for what Vejlko has been working on.
Jim
Hi Johnny874!
I agree with you ("...using weights only in a rotating wheel is not a very good idea...").
I can add even more:it's an obstructive idea.
Why?
Because the most important factor is impetus m*v=m*g*t ,or the "free falling TIME".
As a matter of fact,for a repetitive device (weight-counterweight),we have an acceleration a<<g...so,the falling height must be greater .
Regarding kinetic energy,we must consider the nonlinear development of falling mass,that is 1/2m*v*v...so time becomes a very important factor.
Take a look at "Wheel vs. lever" topic.
All the best! / Alex
Quote from: iacob alex on December 08, 2011, 03:06:31 PM
Hi Johnny874!
I agree with you ("...using weights only in a rotating wheel is not a very good idea...").
I can add even more:it's an obstructive idea.
Why?
Because the most important factor is impetus m*v=m*g*t ,or the "free falling TIME".
As a matter of fact,for a repetitive device (weight-counterweight),we have an acceleration a<<g...so,the falling height must be greater .
Regarding kinetic energy,we must consider the nonlinear development of falling mass,that is 1/2m*v*v...so time becomes a very important factor.
Take a look at "Wheel vs. lever" topic.
All the best! / Alex
Hi Alex,
I believe the fundamental mistake people make is that as has been mentioned, it is when we accept that we don't understand how it is possible, only then can we learn how it is.
Even the water wheel I will be building will use levers. And they will be balanced. What is not understood is that the water that creates the overbalance is the weaker force. And all the levered motion will create no gain nor any loss of energy or motion.
The water being the weaker force merely responds to the greater force. As for 2 levers competing against each other. If they alternate having greater potential, then their potential becomes limitless. It would only be over what period of time. Be it as it may, a competing lever system would have limited immediate potential. But as Vejlko has demonstrated a potential out put, it is one whose benefit could be realized in more than just power, but something that could benefit those not fortunate enough to live in a country like I do where such things are taken for granted.
It gives a previously unrecognized value to the potential that might be realized. Not just engineering for the sake of demonstrating a repetative behavior, but one that has meaning beyond the engineering itself.
Jim
Alex,
While a spiritual pursuit sounds nice, one thing is over looked.
That levers working together can allow a wheel to work. It's not a
competition.
An example of this is what I have already posted. If a lever is 1m
long with a 1kg weight, it's drop to 45 degrees is 70.7cm's.
The opposing lever is lifted 29.3cm's. If the 2 levers are thought
of as a wheel spinning, then people think of the momentum they
would have. And with the weight being lifted, if it's retraction is
16cm's, then at 45 degrees, it is half that or 8cm's.
This favors the dropping weight that has twice the potential as
the potential of the weight being lifted has been reduced to 92%
of it's value. And by the time it is lifted, it would be at 84% of it's
potential. In engineering, this is something to think about.
As for Bessler and his wheel, it is as I told John Collins, I believe
he called it Orffyreus because of Orpheus. This is where Hermes,
like Bessler was the inventor. And it was someone else who made
it sing. Orpheus made the lyre sing because he loved a woman.
It could be that Bessler believed the same about his wheel. It
would only sing when a woman is more important to a man than
the wheel.
It could be that for how ingenious his engineering is, it's not as
desireable as that one special woman.
As for his water wheel, the levers work together.
Jim
Hi Jim !
I have a lot of topics,regarding the subject of this section.
In the "language" of this forum (overunity concept),take a short look at "Same input-greater output..." (March 26,2010).
All the best! / Alex
Quote from: iacob alex on December 09, 2011, 05:06:39 PM
Hi Jim !
I have a lot of topics,regarding the subject of this section.
In the "language" of this forum (overunity concept),take a short look at "Same input-greater output..." (March 26,2010).
All the best! / Alex
Hi Alex,
The link is for those who haven't had the chance to read your thread.
I think what you posted accurately describes the considerations for this type of behavior.
With time, we can consider a or acceleration. When Cloxxki asked about the 2 levers being in balance when they are both 45 degrees from bottom center, f=ma helps to understand why they would have two very different potentials. And this with no over or under balance.
And dropping from 90 degrees, a downward weight would have achieved 70% of it's potential force.
And with time being considered, then we can understand that much acceleration has taken place. In a wheel, we would know that it would have a good start on rotating.
With that in mind, we could then consider the energy needs of the weight being lifted.
Jim
http://www.overunity.com/8915/same-input-greater-output/msg233171/#msg233171 (http://www.overunity.com/8915/same-input-greater-output/msg233171/#msg233171)
Hi Jim !
The last my message at www.BesslerWheel.com (http://www.besslerwheel.com) (General discussion/ "PM illusion..." topic ) can illustrate my opinion...
All the best! / Alex
video
http://www.megaupload.com/?d=12Y06BBT
Quote from: caccr2000 on December 10, 2011, 11:44:04 AM
video
http://www.megaupload.com/?d=12Y06BBT (http://www.megaupload.com/?d=12Y06BBT)
Password is missing ! ;(
What is it ?
Many thanks.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vbJDks7TBb8
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aMzf6epjTug
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0TmBewOyIeo
Quote from: caccr2000 on December 13, 2011, 09:32:01 AM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vbJDks7TBb8 (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vbJDks7TBb8)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aMzf6epjTug (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aMzf6epjTug)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0TmBewOyIeo (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0TmBewOyIeo)
Interesting. Maybe gearing like a clock would allow for uneven rotation ?
Utilizado en lÃnea traductor
Interesante. Tal vez maniobrable como un reloj permitirÃa desigual rotación ? Jim
@All,
This picture illustrates some of the basic understanding of how swinging
weights could work.
By kowing how trigonometry reflects on the motion of a lever and being faniliar with Newton's Laws of Motion, we can have an understanding of the dynamics of this type of behavior. It is after all engineering.
When 2 levers are 5 inches or even cm's long as an example, if one lever is at the level
of the axle and the opposing lever at an angle of 30 degrees, we can see how the force of 2 weights effect the motion or lack there of.
As an example, position 1 is 4.33 from center, the same distance as the opposing weight which is 5 from the center. yet they both have the same force relative to their interaction with gravity. If both weights were 5 from center, then the weight level with the axle would have more force.
By understanding these relationships, we can know that 2 levers at a 90 degree angle would have same f=ma if one is dropping and one is being lifted. What might be missed is when both weights are 45 degrees from bottom center, they will have different values.
This is because the weight moving upward would be retracted 1/2 of it's total. This would allow the dropping weight to be the greater force and it should reach bottom center rather easily. And the weight being lifted ? If it goes above the level of the axle, it will still have more force after the rotation of the 2 weights have stopped. And then it would swing down.
What is interesting to note but might be of little value is the weight dropping would drop 2/3 of it's height before the weight being lifted is in an opposing postion. This however is what would allow for acceleration which of course is converted into momentum.
It seems in understanding this, it takes the work of both Newton and Liebniz.
Jim
And if I found a way to fit all of of Bessler's clues into one wheel ?
Congrats but could you stop trolling, keep it in one thread and form useful constructive threads at that please rather than one-liners that get you or anybody else nowhere.
:P I wish to draw a distinction here between those that are doing and those that are merely trying to be involved in what others are doing,albeit in a negative sense . In other words, mind yours, I'll mind mine .
Christo,
All of Bessler's clues will not fit into one wheel. This is possibly because he said there is a reason they sound different, they use different principles. You might get along better with rlortie and ab hammer @ besslerwheel dot com. They are highly credible people and as to what they have ? Have to take their word for it.
Jim