New accelerating gravity wheel ! Converted video from www.newenergymachine.com !

[unbalanced]

I am new here but I feel as though I know many of you well, having read till my eyes blurred. Bessler said something to the effect; "...taking various illustrations together and combining them with a discerning mind, it will be possible to find a valid description of motion." but motion may not be the best translation, perhaps movement as in the movement of a clock.

I believe that Bessler's movement has been right in front of our eyes for 300 years and no one until perhaps me, saw it for what it was. What I have to say will give credence to Bob's design and lend a great deal of insight into what I preceive to be the most logical explanation. I like the idea of open source but remember where this comes from... Bessler himself.

In the following illustration of Bessler's, note the stampmill on the extreme left. This was not placed in this illustration to denote that his wheel was capable of doing work. This is the internal mechanism of the machine. A close examination will show that the lifters on the shaft of the stampmill are not the cam shaped lifters and shaft collars of a traditional stampmill. Bessler's illustration shows what appears to be two blocks that come into blunt contact essentially smacking the shaft off the 5:00 position and then lifting it towards the center where centrifugal force carries it to 12:00. This is what set Bessler's wheel apart from all other overbalanced wheels. He was only lifting one weight at a time and he began the initial and most difficult portion of the lift (the first several inches) with an impact.

Though it flies in the face of what has been said about the gentle starting of Bessler's wheel, it occurs to me that the rope around the axel going out the window to the palat of bricks was not a demonstration of potential work either but rather the only means Bessler had of getting his wheel up to sufficient speed to have adequate centrifugal force to carry the shaft from where it was thrown to just past neutral to where it could be flung to it's outer stops on the opposing side. In short it is possible that the rope was a starter cord. I'm sticking to the stamp mill mechanism but I'm not married to the starting cord.

My hypothesis is further based on Bessler's four and six rod drawings in which two opposing weights were placed on the ends of push rods or shafts that went through or just beside the axis. I believe Bessler's shafts were square though the weights may have been cylendrical.

Bessler undoubtedly utilized some manner of shock absorbing spring to cushion the rods furthest throw as Bob has done. I do not believe that a catch mechanism was necessary and I do not believe Bob said that he used one

Does anyone else see this as a possibility. I am convinced of it.

[Jon J Hutton]

I always wondered why the rope was wrapped around the axle going in the wrong direction for the heavy stamps to drop.

JJH

[FreeEnergy]

I am new here but I feel as though I know many of you well, having read till my eyes blurred. Bessler said something to the effect; "...taking various illustrations together and combining them with a discerning mind, it will be possible to find a valid description of motion." but motion may not be the best translation, perhaps movement as in the movement of a clock.

I believe that Bessler's movement has been right in front of our eyes for 300 years and no one until perhaps me, saw it for what it was. What I have to say will give credence to Bob's design and lend a great deal of insight into what I preceive to be the most logical explanation. I like the idea of open source but remember where this comes from... Bessler himself.

In the following illustration of Bessler's, note the stampmill on the extreme left. This was not placed in this illustration to denote that his wheel was capable of doing work. This is the internal mechanism of the machine. A close examination will show that the lifters on the shaft of the stampmill are not the cam shaped lifters and shaft collars of a traditional stampmill. Bessler's illustration shows what appears to be two blocks that come into blunt contact essentially smacking the shaft off the 5:00 position and then lifting it towards the center where centrifugal force carries it to 12:00. This is what set Bessler's wheel apart from all other overbalanced wheels. He was only lifting one weight at a time and he began the initial and most difficult portion of the lift (the first several inches) with an impact.

Though it flies in the face of what has been said about the gentle starting of Bessler's wheel, it occurs to me that the rope around the axel going out the window to the palat of bricks was not a demonstration of potential work either but rather the only means Bessler had of getting his wheel up to sufficient speed to have adequate centrifugal force to carry the shaft from where it was thrown to just past neutral to where it could be flung to it's outer stops on the opposing side. In short it is possible that the rope was a starter cord. I'm sticking to the stamp mill mechanism but I'm not married to the starting cord.

My hypothesis is further based on Bessler's four and six rod drawings in which two opposing weights were placed on the ends of push rods or shafts that went through or just beside the axis. I believe Bessler's shafts were square though the weights may have been cylendrical.

Bessler undoubtedly utilized some manner of shock absorbing spring to cushion the rods furthest throw as Bob has done. I do not believe that a catch mechanism was necessary and I do not believe Bob said that he used one

Does anyone else see this as a possibility. I am convinced of it.

ok cool, welcome to overunity.com

now lets build this thing and see if it actually works?

[unbalanced]

Hello to Everyone, I would like to be the first to admit that a portion of what I had written in my previous post is untrue or rather unworkable. I stick to my conviction that the rods were moved from 5:00 to 12:00 by means of the workings of a stamp mill but cams and collars were used. The cams in Bessler's wheel were connected to an inner shaft that was independant of the wheel but connected to the pendulum. In this manner the pendulum not only regulated the the speed of the wheel by determining at what angle or time each rod would be lifted (if the wheel is going too fast the rod would meet the cam at 4:00 instead of 5:00 etc) but I surmise that the pendulum initially added the extra power needed to lift a rod ( at lower rpm) by turning the cam in the opposite direction of the on-coming rod. This again lends more credence to Bob's design which uses a lifting cam. In Bessler's wheel the collar on the lifting rod rode up the cam as the wheel turned but at the same time the cam was being turned or forced under the collar by the pendulum. Once the wheel had gained inertia the pendulum could be haulted in the virtical.

When Bessler wanted to slow or stop his wheel he needed only to rotate this cam so that the weights began ascending while outboard. Bob's device would benefit by this moving cam arrangement rather than using a disk brake to regulate speed.

If nothing else this theory of mine would add the additional inertia (that of the independant pendulum helping to lift the rods) which is wanting to bring Bessler's wheel into line with the laws of physics.

In the following illustration it seems clear that these push rods or shafts went through drum/axel. I feel certain that the cam shaft that was connected to the pendulum went through all of the rods that were cut out (with long ovals) so as to move around the shaft and still be able to travel up and down.

[unbalanced]

Sorry about the newby move of posting too large of a picture. I'll try again