this idea stemmed from P-Motion's thread on besslers water wheel
http://www.overunity.com/index.php?topic=8389.msg214644#new
found there^
and i did not wish to flood his thread with a different topic (sorry about that mate) so i started a new one
AB Hammer you have shared some wisdom already but i welcome any more insight into this idea
basically as you can see, one wheel, one roller
there is a bladder, it can be thought of as simply as attaching a garden hose to the inside of a wheel and connecting the ends
water is introduced only to one side of the tube/bladder
the idea is, because the roller and the water weigh the same, it seeks to balance out, somewhere half way between where the water meet and the inner roller connect
(also if you notice, the water weighs more at the top due to its triangular shape at the top of the bladder)
think of it as having the same amount of weight at the 3 o clock and the 12
they will even out as this should
we lock the roller and allow the system to balance out, half way between where the roller and water are introduced
now we unfix the roller, and it seeks balance, rolling down towards the middle
while trying to do this, it squeezes the bladder, pushing the water back up the side, making it overbalanced
i am not sure the red rollers are necessary, but would ensure a seal
if you're concerned the weight would be increased, the total weight of all rollers could be equal to the weight of water to compensate
first pis is latest drawing that includes a double roller, second pic is the first proof of concept without a double roller
Wow, am I ever slow sometimes. NOW I understand your "bladder", genious!
I see that bladder, for my visualisation, as a wedge out of styrofoam or something more durable, wedged in the only space left after the water is added. Or better, water will be added as last "part" simply until full.
The wedge will float on the water, or any liquid for that matter, thus even in the water makes it past the bottom of the wheel, it will not be much of it.
The red rollers may not be needed for the thing to work per se, but will be useful to keep it oriented correctly internally, and not counter-act itself at times.
For smooth opereration, with tolerances as implicitly indicated here, water itself may actually be a bit to "rough". A lightweight oil of some kind (compliant to the bladder material chosen of course) might smoothen operation by self-lubricating.
I am quite facinated with your design, it feel a bit like coming home to something. Maybe as I kid I once dreamt of it. Some toys have similar dynamics, although I couldn't name one now.
More than usually, I am super interested to learn why it should NOT work. I can't see it at this stage. I do see amendments made to it that might improve operation. As you may have read, I suggest one-way clutches pretty much everywhere (I'm a cyclist). When it work though, your waterwheel may not even need it.
Are you considering building this, if no-one can tel you why it won't work?
Regards,
J
Quote from: Cloxxki on December 14, 2009, 03:03:09 AM
Wow, am I ever slow sometimes. NOW I understand your "bladder", genious!
I see that bladder, for my visualisation, as a wedge out of styrofoam or something more durable, wedged in the only space left after the water is added. Or better, water will be added as last "part" simply until full.
The wedge will float on the water, or any liquid for that matter, thus even in the water makes it past the bottom of the wheel, it will not be much of it.
The red rollers may not be needed for the thing to work per se, but will be useful to keep it oriented correctly internally, and not counter-act itself at times.
For smooth opereration, with tolerances as implicitly indicated here, water itself may actually be a bit to "rough". A lightweight oil of some kind (compliant to the bladder material chosen of course) might smoothen operation by self-lubricating.
I am quite facinated with your design, it feel a bit like coming home to something. Maybe as I kid I once dreamt of it. Some toys have similar dynamics, although I couldn't name one now.
More than usually, I am super interested to learn why it should NOT work. I can't see it at this stage. I do see amendments made to it that might improve operation. As you may have read, I suggest one-way clutches pretty much everywhere (I'm a cyclist). When it work though, your waterwheel may not even need it.
Are you considering building this, if no-one can tel you why it won't work?
Regards,
J
It won't work cause of many reasons: one, the fiction of the water being squeezed will add too much resistance for the device to continue. second, it needs pressure on the pre and post rotation so it will partially counteract the resistance. Sorry... But, keep trying you'll get it.
The inevitable funnel shape towards the bottom of the wheel where water might be forcing itself out, might be may highly hydrophobic, to reduce it's willingness to go there at all. Hydrophobic bladder or wedge as well as inner wheel outer would also not hurt.
Sadly, if all else fails, mercury might be the trick to make this work. Seems it can be more easily convinced to stick together while flowing well. And plenty of heft.
It never going to easy, but the OP has a great design here, IMHO.
;)
mr_bojangles; I see a big problem. What drives the tube through the rollers? The water is weight but how is it going to push the tube when is has a tendency not to grab. Another way to look at it would be a waterwheel without cups or boards to capture the energy of the falling water.
Michael
One small additional thought : if the outer wheel is at high pressure (some inert gas I suppose), the liquid will have less business to work itself through all tight openings, perhaps?
I am sorry, without 'thermal' help a liquid gravity device will not work just as a solid Gravity wheel device. (fact).
are you the lucky genius who can break facts with his/her bare mind?
Gravity contains no free energy, it only stores it! or if you wish, it steals it.
look at blackholes, they steal every onze of energy you have and make it their own. if you landed on a blackhole you would become apart of the blackhole smeared acrossed its surface in a puddle of oozing subatomic particles! you would become goo all over again.
sorry, I had to vent myself on this subject.
Jerry 8)
Quote from: onthecuttingedge2005 on December 14, 2009, 09:22:31 PM
I am sorry, without 'thermal' help a liquid gravity device will not work just as a solid Gravity wheel device. (fact).
are you the lucky genius who can break facts with his/her bare mind?
Gravity contains no free energy, it only stores it! or if you wish, it steals it.
look at blackholes, they steal every onze of energy you have and make it their own. if you landed on a blackhole you would become apart of the blackhole smeared acrossed its surface in a puddle of oozing subatomic particles! you would become goo all over again.
sorry, I had to vent myself on this subject.
Jerry 8)
Some say that if you go into a black hole, you come out the other end.
If one day gravity will make a wheel turn, we'll feel stupid for not having tried better. Until then, it's a nice puzzle to pinpoint why a given setup can't work.
interesting responses, definitely things i would not have thought of on my own
i think some of you might be missing the simplicity that i am aiming for in this design, but i guess i might not have explained fully my version of how it would run/operate
lets say the first pic is our starting point, and lets also say the axle of the wheel is locked, and the roller is fixed to the side of the wheel
1. unlock axle, now the seal between the roller and the bladder means the water cannot go past it, and because the roller and the water weigh the same, the wheel will even out and the seek a new resting point somewhere in the middle between the roller and the edge of the water
2. release the roller, because it is the same weight it will roll and squeeze the water back up to starting point
the problems i see do no involve water friction, the main obvious reasons it will not work are the weight ratio's
if the water is the same weight as the roller, the roller might not be able to push the water as high as starting position
if the roller is heavier, the water most likely won't move it at all
if the water is heavier it is just the first problem magnified
if you disagree or see a flaw i haven't please do share it with me, a few already have but have not gone into great detail as to why this would be so
one idea i had was putting weighted floats in the water side, they would stay at the top and would not add to the weight of the water directly. problems would be friction, but i thought it was an interesting idea
Cloxxki, i appreciate your enthusiasm, to answer your earlier question, no i will not be able to attempt a build on this one, i am a poor college student and do not have the resources for that, but anyone who wants to is welcome
Quote from: onthecuttingedge2005 on December 14, 2009, 09:22:31 PM
I am sorry, without 'thermal' help a liquid gravity device will not work just as a solid Gravity wheel device. (fact).
are you the lucky genius who can break facts with his/her bare mind?
well that would be convenient for both of us wouldn't it? i sure hope i am
i believe if my wheel employed thermal help it would be more of a thermal wheel than a gravity wheel
you do seem to have knowledge in these devices, and i would be more interested in why you think it won't work as opposed to why all gravity wheels don't work
still i do appreciate you taking the time to comment, i would take any response over none at all any day
black holes i do believe mathematically work out to where anyone who enters a black hole gets destroyed, while the same mathematical principles suggest they will be reassembled upon leaving
Quote from: mr_bojangles on December 15, 2009, 04:33:59 PM
well that would be convenient for both of us wouldn't it? i sure hope i am
i believe if my wheel employed thermal help it would be more of a thermal wheel than a gravity wheel
you do seem to have knowledge in these devices, and i would be more interested in why you think it won't work as opposed to why all gravity wheels don't work
still i do appreciate you taking the time to comment, i would take any response over none at all any day
black holes i do believe mathematically work out to where anyone who enters a black hole gets destroyed, while the same mathematical principles suggest they will be reassembled upon leaving
what we are doing is adding thermal energy to gravity to do work, since Gravity contains no energy we have to add energy to make it do work.
1st example:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1_ht0EhHDCs
2nd example:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=auQjZwkia00
3rd example:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bs_OtCsDJoY
4th example:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-fUlKBH1sY8&feature=PlayList&p=44A53F06B1DACFFE&index=0&playnext=1
5th example:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gZ-zeRCUicw&feature=PlayList&p=44A53F06B1DACFFE&index=1
Thermal energy is the primary driver(EM) the secondary driver is Gravity(G) itself. this system works and what works, works!
this is the reason why Gravity is a 'Carrier' of energy and not energy into itself, you can add energy to gravity but it contains no free energy, Gravity is a 'Gravitational Tensor Carrier Field', it carries energy put into it.
Jerry 8)
i have seen all of those before, and excluding the helois project i would not consider them necessarily gravity wheels
i want to steer away from anything that requires outside energy (heat pools), if we begin with limitations on our thinking then we will end up with a machine that is limited to our thinking, first we much believe it is possible, even if we don't know how
once again,
you do seem to have knowledge in these devices, and i would be more interested in why you think it won't work as opposed to why all gravity wheels don't work
still i do appreciate you taking the time to comment, i would take any response over none at all any day
Quote from: mr_bojangles on December 15, 2009, 06:59:16 PM
i have seen all of those before, and excluding the helois project i would not consider them necessarily gravity wheels
i want to steer away from anything that requires outside energy (heat pools), if we begin with limitations on our thinking then we will end up with a machine that is limited to our thinking, first we much believe it is possible, even if we don't know how
once again,
you do seem to have knowledge in these devices, and i would be more interested in why you think it won't work as opposed to why all gravity wheels don't work
still i do appreciate you taking the time to comment, i would take any response over none at all any day
well, have fun working with Gravity alone, all those failures have to account for something right?
use unified energy field theories, not any one theory by itself. you will fail if you don't listen.
all the links I showed you convert thermal energy into Gravitational energy to do work.
if you can not comprehend that then I will further my explanation.
I am not being rude, I am just telling you the facts of converting one form of energy into another to do work.
if you appear to be retarded in any way by asking rhetorical questions I will be disinclined to acquiesce your request.
everything I said is straight forward and is easy to understand.
Jerry 8)
interestingly enough, failing at building a PMM of any kind seems to be a reoccurring theme in history, so i am not alone in the "Club for Failed PM Construction Builders"
there has been no misunderstanding, i have understood what you have been saying
the thing is i have not claimed this will work, nor have i suggested it, i only asked why it wouldnt
i posted my idea to find out why it wouldn't work, and possibly someone would have a better idea or application that could make it work by itself or for something else
Quote from: onthecuttingedge2005 on December 15, 2009, 07:20:46 PM
if you appear to be retarded in any way by asking rhetorical questions I will be disinclined to acquiesce your request.
i do not understand the correlation between asking rhetorical questions and being mentally handicapped, nor do i remember asking any rhetorical questions that would suggest the implication, however i do find it ironic that was a rhetorical question you just asked me...unless i was supposed to answer it, in which case, no i do not appear to retarded in any way but if i were retarded i would not be able to tell if i appeared to be retarded, seeing as how i was retarded
the problem has not been understand what you are saying, but why
the whole idea of this website is to do things that are impossible, you could go through every thread and say the same thing to every gravity wheel, i could go to every thread and say the law of thermodynamics does not permit this, yet it would not help anyone
personally i agree and do not think a gravity wheel by itself will not be able to achieve OU, but i thought it was an interesting idea and decided to share it, i think i can remember you responding to some of my old ideas from the Half Baked section, if not then maybe you could check that out instead of this one because i know you have more experience than i do
if your explanation of why this will not work is "because no gravity wheels can work" then so be it
i am not interested in arguments, and i still want to know how you think this wheel would behave,
or if you fancy thermal energy devices maybe try to find an application for it
i apologize if i have said something that offends you, i repeated my question because you repeated your answer, it was not my intention to start an argument, but i was frustrated that you do not comment on my device at all, but talk in generalities about all gravity wheels as a whole
because of your status on this site i hoped you would impart some of your wisdom, i am more than willing to hear what you have to say, and if i have it wrong then teach me instead of just telling me its wrong
hope to hear from you soon,
oh and seeing as how this is my first gravity wheel i ever attempted i think im still batting a thousand, so as of yet i have no failures
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rhetorical_question
one failure after another leaves a pretty large mountain of hope.
as far as I know in recorded history, I am the only one in history that has said that phrase, so that makes me unique, right?
unexplainable uniqueness has been the mystical and or metaphorical languish of what was either a Genius and or a God/god in ancient times.
I would stick to main steam higher learning, maybe I like to stick M.I.T into so many faces but when it comes to facts over fiction, I'll take the facts.
I have done a lot of study and experimentation on Gravity, I can say with solid verifiable evidence that Gravity is a carrier of 'stored' energy.
if Einstein was born 2000 years ago he would of been the other son of God!(fact).
I am no God/god but I am very keen on engineering and the way things work. I constantly study everyday just to keep up with all the pitbulls in todays industries.
I am a passive pitbull.
have fun anyways.
Jerry 8)
"A rhetorical question is a figure of speech in the form of a question posed for its persuasive effect without the expectation of a reply"
if you appear to be retarded in any way by asking rhetorical questions I will be disinclined to acquiesce your request.
you asked that question^
we have a hint from the beginning it is a question because you start it off with "if"
this implies either you do not know the answer, yet you seem to already have your mind made up
if you already know the answer, you are not expecting a reply, therefore making it a rhetorical question
by your own definition, one who asks rhetorical questions is retarded, and you yourself told me this in a rhetorical question you were asking, kind of like saying "anyone who uses the term retard is a retard"
this is not the first rhetorical question you have asked,
"are you the lucky genius who can break facts with his/her bare mind?
all those failures have to account for something right?"
as far as I know in recorded history, I am the only one in history that has said that phrase, so that makes me unique, right?"
so you have about 4 rhetorical questions to your name on this thread alone, unless i was mistaken i will re answer your questions to clear the air and fix the discrepancy
am i the lucky genius? i don't believe luck has much to do with being a genius, but i will answer yes
do all those failures have to account for something? not necessarily, they do not need to account for anything, people learn better from mistakes than they do victories
are you unique for using that phrase? i wouldn't imagine that to be true, i think someone at some point has said it
now either you are retarded for asking me those questions, seeing as how they are blatantly obvious,
or by your own definition are retarded for using so many rhetorical questions
use your link as reference, and take off your sunglasses while your inside, its not that bright in here
Quote from: mr_bojangles on December 15, 2009, 09:48:25 PM
oh and seeing as how this is my first gravity wheel i ever attempted i think im still batting a thousand, so as of yet i have no failures
mr_bojangles
I like your whit. I don't have no failures either in the past. I had non runners with lessons well learned. So as long as you gain, you have your own personal breakthroughs. You just learn ways not to build.
Alan
PS look for an old wheel on the internet that had a ring between to rollers the hung most of the wheel to one side. This wheel will show you allot more of what you are facing.
Umm, MB, I was loading your deck of cards, so to speak. lol.
yes, if you have read one of my historical posts, I said, I am an indirect autistic.
I am autistic but you can not tell I am autistic. I look as normal as anyone else but there are certain things I am very good at. I can see shapes, signs and or symbols in my head and instantly match them with another sign or symbol, that is why I am so good at engineering, I can re-do blue prints on the spot to make them better.
I am also very educated and lots of hands on experience. so that makes me a really smart retard, so what? he he he.
I was one of the individuals that helped in the programming of the HAL bot from Zabaware, I am currently burnt out on the subject but I still keep programming in my head. if you want verification just look at the 'about' of the HAL software, you'll see my name, Gerald L. Blakley in the credits. I still like HAL but I need some time off. we did win the loebner prize.
carry on! I married a girl name carrie, so that makes it even more mystical on my part.
are you afraid of being called a retard, I am not, lol.
I love my shades!
Jerry 8)
i did get a little frustrated, apologies for that
i have not read any of your older posts and was not aware of that, however i have said from the beginning that i believe you have a lot of experience, a lot more than i do
this was my frustration because i knew you had the capacity to give me a solid answer yet you did not, or i did not understand the connection with it and my idea
one of my best friends has a brother with down syndrome and he taught me early on not to use the phrase lightly, and that is something that stuck with me
that is very impressive you helped with the HAL project, i appreciate you taking what i said lightly and understanding it was all in the name of science
Quote from: AB Hammer on December 15, 2009, 10:44:39 PM
PS look for an old wheel on the internet that had a ring between to rollers the hung most of the wheel to one side. This wheel will show you allot more of what you are facing.
do you have any links to spare? i would love to see if someone has already tried it
Hi MB.
one of the reasons why I employ thermodynamics to gravity wheels or Gravity units is because thermal energy can be used to make a weight move up so that the weight will fall over and over again.
it's almost like thermodynamics and Gravity were made for each other.
Jerry ;)
Quote from: mr_bojangles on December 16, 2009, 05:38:39 PM
do you have any links to spare? i would love to see if someone has already tried it
mr_bojangles
Here is a link with the design.
http://www.lhup.edu/~dsimanek/museum/unwork.htm
The F. G. Woodward's wheel.
Also a good book to read is "Perpetual Motion" arthur W.J.G. Ord-Hume
Looking at what has been done will give hints of what you will be facing.
Alan
i haven't looked at that site in a while, there are more additions to it than the last time i saw it
woodwards wheel is interesting, although i wouldn't second guess myself whether it would work or not
the book looks very useful as well, i haven't read it but i looked it up and it looks pretty solid
Quote from: mr_bojangles on December 16, 2009, 07:53:01 PM
i haven't looked at that site in a while, there are more additions to it than the last time i saw it
woodwards wheel is interesting, although i wouldn't second guess myself whether it would work or not
the book looks very useful as well, i haven't read it but i looked it up and it looks pretty solid
mr_bojangles
When I got started I would collect every design on the internet and would try to find out the problem them. Then I ran across the Bessler story and the forums of Overunity.com and Besslerwheel.com . I posted several wheels and designs on both forums, and some posted showed true merit. But only the build would show the truth in the designs. The quest can be allot of fun, but don't let it get in the way of your family or your living.
Alan
id rather build in my mind than my hands
a lot cheaper
Quote from: AB Hammer on December 16, 2009, 07:17:31 PM
mr_bojangles
Here is a link with the design.
http://www.lhup.edu/~dsimanek/museum/unwork.htm
The F. G. Woodward's wheel.
Also a good book to read is "Perpetual Motion" arthur W.J.G. Ord-Hume
Looking at what has been done will give hints of what you will be facing.
Alan
Hi Alan.
have you thought about one of my ideas on Capillary action, it might be a slow process but it would show that PM is possible if it works.
Jerry
or something like this perhaps.
in the below post of the capillary motor, you can use any size pipe diameter or length because the rolled up paper towels inside the pipe will draw up the water.
since it requires capillary action and gravity it is straight forward and simple, just these 2 properties could in theory make a self contained unit that never runs out of water.
the sponge has to be highly absorbant, maybe a folded up shammy cloth would work as well.
if you are the fabricating type it may be possible to use this method on a wheel type system.
it is so simple, I am surprised nobody has yelled out Eureka yet!
I am giving away my ideas for free, why not take advantage of that, I mean the experiment won't cost you your first born or anything.
you can even use metal pipe if need be.
you would still have to use energy to get the tube upright, unless you used a counter weight, but then you would have to still move the difference in weight between the counter weight and the tube without water in it
you would only get 90 degrees of rotation with the force being the difference in weight of the lever
so you either expend the same energy moving the lever 90 degrees, or the same again if you have a counterweight
either way it works out to the same amount of energy,
if you make the counter balance just enough to make it upright, there will be no force in the lever, because it will be balanced
so it could possibly run, but your bigger issue is connecting the sponge to the main water source
if its submerged like you show it will be saturated with water to its capacity, meaning it can't absorb any more
ok, so your going to put a tube in the water that is a little taller than the water level, keeping the sponge dry
then your water level will go down, and you will not have capillary action
so as i said before you will need a way to get the water out of the sponge and into the water, without them touching
and it has to be a sponge because in order to get water out of the paper towel something more porous must be used in order for the water to move
so you might have a self runner if you can figure out the sponge issue
and dont forget if theres water at the bottom of the sponges container it means it can't hold anymore water
Hi MB.
I think you have gone far beyond the call of duty here, thanks for your input, I have a nice copper pipe just sitting in my drawer calling out to me, lol.
I may do the demostration and work out the bugs if any. but right now I am going to break the laws of physics on some taquitos and some chimichangas.
Jerry ;)
i remembered it from your thread, i just decided to give it another look
its constructive criticism, i was being specific to your idea, just tryin to help
il catch your demo pics on your thread when you post them, i am definitely interested to hear how it goes, good luck