Helmut has given me permission to discuss his design.
Myself, I like it. There a re a few things that would keep it from working. But by modifying his design using Bessler's engineering as a guideline, I believe it is a possible runner.
One problem in the original design was that the primary weights are to far from ( radially advanced ) the arms they rotate from. This can cause a lot of counter torque.
The second is, the weight that moves them, moves in and out from center. This can cancel any gains.
The changes I made was to move the primary weights closer to where they rotate. And the second was to have use long levers as in Mt 20 to move the primary weights back to their starting postition.
How this happens is actually quite simple. If the weight of the lever is 1 meter from center, it can have a drop of 10 cm's. This will mean that a paoint on the lever that is 75 cm's from center can lift a weight at bottom center 7.5 cm's.
This would allow for a weight that is between 275 to 300 grams to lift a 1 kg weight.
What is nice about Helmut's design is that once the fixed arms move past top center, their weights are over balanced. They will be hanging from their point of rotation.
This would give helmut's weights the following relationships;
1kg @ 1.075 meters from center, over balanced.
This would consider the following; can 75 grams of force at 1 meter rotate 5.2 kg's plus supprting structure ?
With bearings, this should be something easily accomplished. His design would also work with some of Bessler's clues. 8 weights which Bessler said he used. The wweights would work in pairs. Also, the weights would gain force from their swinging motion ( in a way ). If they did not swing, then the force would not be from their pivot point until swinging into their starting posiution.
Also, this design would have almost no counter torque. This emans that the weights would not be in their over balanced postion after bottom center.
This is Helmut's design and any questions about permissions to build would need to be asked of him.
This drawing highlites some of the details in the math.
Depending on how fast the wheel would rotate would determine the weight on the end of the long levers. This would be to account for inertia.
Please note, the drawing was done to allow the seperate functions to be more visible.
Helmut, thanks for allow me to discuss your design :)
Jim
edited to add; the weight on the long levers could eb as much as 800 grams or more. This would require about 75 grams of force at 1 meter to rotate 9 kg's of weights plus the supporting structure. With bearings, this is something that could work.
p.s. The name BAHammer actually means one Bad Ass hammer in tribute to Thor. My father is from Norway ;D and it is a part of my heritage.
Hope y'all don't mind me Hammerin' on this while I can upload pics :)
If the rod the primary weights is on were extended to about 11cm, then this relationship would exist.
At bottom center, it would be rotated about 45 degrees ( a lift of 7.5cm's ). This would allow the rod to rotate another approximately 3.5cm's after it passes 45 degrees after bottom center.
I'm not sure if this would work better or not.
the second drawing shows the leverage the long arm produces. With a line attached 75cm's from the center of the axle, this is the focal point. Since the center gravity of the weight is 25cm's further from center, this increases the force of the weight. It is calculated by dividing the weight by 3 and multiplying by 4. When this is done, 800 grams has more force than 1kg.
The ratio from the axle is 3:4, 75cm's:100cm's. this would mean the 800grams would have 33% more force on the point where the line is attached that goes to the weight 90 degrees ahead of it.
Hope y'all can understand this part of it. If so, then you should be able to understand how it could work.
edited to run spell check ;D
@ BAHammer
Thanks for the Work, that you invest in this design.
I want ro express a way, to do the shifting of the Masses by force of gravity.
But to become a runner, one might find a way to fight the counter forces from high rotation.
(Fliehkraft) centrifugalforce
I guess, that this design needs a diameter of at least 2 meters and max 0,5 rotation per second.
helmut
Quote from: helmut on February 21, 2009, 04:34:35 PM
@ BAHammer
Thanks for the Work, that you invest in this design.
I want ro express a way, to do the shifting of the Masses by force of gravity.
But to become a runner, one might find a way to fight the counter forces from high rotation.
(Fliehkraft) centrifugalforce
I guess, that this design needs a diameter of at least 2 meters and max 0,5 rotation per second.
helmut
Thanks Helmut.
Tonight, I will post a drawing of the build I am doing. It is what I borrowed the math from.
With your design, there is something that might help it work better. That would be to remove the levers.
Then the swinging weights could be connected to each other. What would need to happen is to limit their swing to 45 degrees from the arm. Then, when one swings down, it lifts another back to it's starting position.
This would let you remove the 4 - .8kg weights. The amount of overbalance would be 70% the length of the cg of your weights. Basically, if the cg is 10cm from the pivot point, then you would have 7cm of over balance.
I'll draw it up for you by Wednesday :)
Jim
edited to add;
Helmut,
With a swinging weight, the simplest design would look something like Mt 24 without the levers.
If the weights swing out 60 degrees, then with a cg to pivot distance of 10cm's, the over balance would be 5cm's. An example is if the starting position is 90cm's from center. It would swing to 95cm's from center.
By lifting it 20 degrees, the wheel might rotate under it when it is past bottom center. It might be that a 6 or 8 weight configuration would work better than a 4. With a 4, the force of gravity would also be acting on the weight. Still, by using a hoist type set up, a weight above it swinging out could lift it sufficiently.
@Helmut,
If Mt 24 sans lever is built, it will work.
There is a neat trick when the swinging weights are connected. Take a close look at Mt 24. When the weights are hanging from an arm, they are not at an angle of 90 degrees. I wondered why. It's odd.
The reason is, the weight does not exceed the radius of the wheel. This does something.
When another weight swings out, it can move the one that needs to be restored to it's starting position at 1/2. What this does is allow a weight to swing out to maintain an over balance while moving a weight towards it's starting position. That is, half way to it's starting position. Because the angle will become less than 45 degrees, the axis of it's rotation will move underneath the weight. This is why springs are necessary. They will absorb the impact of the weights falling into the arm and help maintain it's momentum.
Yep, Bessler knew how to use gearing on a weight that would swing out to control how it affected the motion of another weight.
With this design, weights gain force by swinging, they work in pairs, springs are used but the wheel can work without them, with 8 swinging weights- 8 knocking sounds would be heard (no springs used ? ).
As for the over balance, if the weight swings out ona rod that is 20cm's long at 1m from center, about 96% of weight's mass is calculated as force, opposing resistence ? 80%. That's not bad.