SimonsWheel

[zoelra]

s1m0n,

There are a lot of points to reply to so let me break it up into parts.  You sound like a seasoned PM researcher so if I speak in simple terms, or concepts you already understand, it is for anyone else with less experience.  No offense is intended.

"I just can't see that there could be a prime mover".
The prime mover is simply the force of mechanical advantage that promotes rotation.  It could be from a unique lever design or centrifugal force.  In your wheel design, the prime mover would be the mechanical advantage that comes from overbalance.

"An exaggerated view would be a Ferris wheel with thousands of weights on each side. The net gain from all those weights still only has to lift two weights".
This will take more space and prep that I can provide at this point and will reply with more details as soon as I can.  That said, the angular distance between crossbars is the displacement in which the upper and lower weights need to be lifted.  More weight pairs mean less distance between pairs and less time to lift and so more weights does not equate to more energy to lift.  Work/Energy = Force X Distance.

"What spikes my curiosity is that the only large PMM attempt that I'm aware of was the BesslerWheel".
There are many accounts of PM wheel attempts throughout history.  From Divinci thru modern times.  Two examples in US history are from Asa Jackson and the Pop Keeney (the Buzzsaw Wheel).

That said, I'm expecting someone really good at maths to tell me I'm a fool anytime soon.
I am a mathematician and I can tell you that your design has been modeled mathematically and using SIMs and it will not work no matter how many weights you add.

[guest1289]

.

[MarkE]

s1m0n,

There are a lot of points to reply to so let me break it up into parts.  You sound like a seasoned PM researcher so if I speak in simple terms, or concepts you already understand, it is for anyone else with less experience.  No offense is intended.

"I just can't see that there could be a prime mover".
The prime mover is simply the force of mechanical advantage that promotes rotation.  It could be from a unique lever design or centrifugal force.  In your wheel design, the prime mover would be the mechanical advantage that comes from overbalance.

There is the first problem:  Finding a way to sustain an imbalanced condition while extracting energy.

"An exaggerated view would be a Ferris wheel with thousands of weights on each side. The net gain from all those weights still only has to lift two weights".
This will take more space and prep that I can provide at this point and will reply with more details as soon as I can.  That said, the angular distance between crossbars is the displacement in which the upper and lower weights need to be lifted.  More weight pairs mean less distance between pairs and less time to lift and so more weights does not equate to more energy to lift.  Work/Energy = Force X Distance.

And there seems to be the doom of all prior attempts at an overbalanced wheel.

"What spikes my curiosity is that the only large PMM attempt that I'm aware of was the BesslerWheel".[/b]
There are many accounts of PM wheel attempts throughout history.  From Divinci thru modern times.  Two examples in US history are from Asa Jackson and the Pop Keeney (the Buzzsaw Wheel).

That said, I'm expecting someone really good at maths to tell me I'm a fool anytime soon.
I am a mathematician and I can tell you that your design has been modeled mathematically and using SIMs and it will not work no matter how many weights you add.

BINGO!!!

[guest1289]

The   'gravity-principle'   in the following   gravity  device   https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_gAchuS8SyU     ,     is  very impressive  .

Assumedly,  a hidden  Electro-magnet  acts on  Point  'A',   in the diagram of the device,  below,  but  obviously  the   Electro-magnet   is actually hidden  in the  base of the device, where   point  'A'  touches the base.

It may be possible to replace the hidden  Electro-magnet  at point  'A',   in the diagram below,  with some type of  Permanent-Magnet design or device (  or,  even with a  second-replication  of this actual device,  linked to the main device,    and the  mid-cycle  of one device would be  linked to the  end-of-the-cycle  of the second device,  and maybe throw in a magnet to break symmetry  ).   

UPDATE : Firstly, the problem with the device must be that,  eventually,  the system would run out of enough force to  Bend  point  'A' .  So,  maybe some type of  tilt-switch( activated by gravity )  could somehow trigger a permanent-magnet,  to always  Bend  point  'A',  and then  'that'  could be deactivated  when the  ball rolls onto it.   

ONE POINT COULD BE,  THAT COMBINING THE TWO FORCES,  GRAVITY  AND  MAGNETISM,  COULD  'BREAK THE SYMMETRY'  USUALLY PRESENT IN DEVICES RELYING ON JUST  GRAVITY  OR  MAGNETISM

[zoelra]

guest1289,

The information you are presenting is interesting and deserving of it's own topic or at a minimum should be placed in another topic related to magnetic devices.