Here is an update on the current build.
This model has presented some problems which I'm trying to sort out. It is a constant learning process and my latest revelation has explained another aspect of Bessler's clues which I had thought I'd already understood, more or less to my own satisfaction, previously. However I found that I could not make the mechanisms operate exactly as I needed to do, according to the principle I believe lies behind Bessler's wheel and I was tinkering with the various parts of the mechanisms and suddenly grasped why Bessler had done a certain thing and it was a real eureka moment!
I have had a number of these revelations over a period of time and some have turned into cul-de-sacs but others have proved invaluable. I know that I should not parade my hopes so publicly because if I'm wrong its a long way to fall and even further to climb back up - but (and as I heard it said on TV the other day - its a 'J.Lo but') I am so excited at the prospect of finally getting to the end of this life-long search that I cannot contain my exuberance!
I think that people will be surprised at how simple this machine really is. Even though I'm having problems building it, the basic idea is so simple that, as Karl commented, I cannot understand why it hasn't been discovered before. Bessler gives an amazing assortment of clues which all make sense once you have the whole picture but individually they seem to counter each other.
I still maintain my belief that five mechansisms are required and I'll try and explain why without giving too much away. If you assume that a piece of the mechanism has to fall at some point, then it is logical to think that the maximum benefit from that fall will be obtained from a right angled fall, i.e. 90 degrees. You could increase this up to 180 degrees, but half of that fall would be counter productive because .... think, which might be more effective? To start from twelve o'clock and fall to three, or start at three and fall to six o'clock. Any angle outside those two and you stray into the other angle's area of effectiveness.
So a 90 degree fall would fit with a four mechanism wheel. But a fall takes time to start and accomplish what ever it is designed to accomplish, so part of the fall will be ineffective because it is falling and not landing. If you also throw into the mix the fact that the fall cannot start early nor over-run, you can see that although it is designed to fall 90 degrees, in fact it is only going to be effective for slightly less than a full 90 degrees.
What is the next whole number after four that would fulfill the need to have a continuous input from falling weights? Five.
If that is a confusing explanation, I apologise. I thought I'd have a go at explaining my conviction that Bessler used five mechanisms without giving away the solution. Maybe I have?
JC
I have encountered the same phenomenon a number of times. The falling of the weight does not happen at the correct time for the work to be performed. Timing is everything here. The falling of the weight is the greatest capture of energy we can develop, and the transfer of that energy at the exact moment into the rotating mass must be just right. SOoooo..... I believe that a small gravity trigger is the timing device to solve this dilema. You must be able to capture and store the energy and then release it at just the right moment. The timing of the falling of the weights, and the input of that energy at the moment when work is required is the key. Your idea is a good one, there is also a more complicated way.... Yesterday I built a gravity trigger device that will accomplish just that task and am endeavoring to get it finished. GOOD LUCK JOHN We are oh so close
ReplyDeleteJohn, this is fascinating. I am very, very curious to your mechanism(s). Does it involve some kind of torque storage system, perhaps with an inverted pendulum? There are some interesting concept about the latter which I'm sure you are familiar with. Anyway - I can't wait to hear more. Any estimate how much time is involved still?
ReplyDeleteCan't say I understand - but good luck anyway.
ReplyDeleteI guess the falling levers/weights need to point inwards rather than outwards so you get a pendular cf effect as well as a gravity drop effect.
ReplyDeleteThen a secondary structure needs to modify and in a sense draw out and reverse the natural movement at the "lighter side of the wheel"
Hmmm... still thinking. And very curious!
How much time? Not long, but it depends on how difficult it is to fit the mechanisms in the space I've allocated. I should have started with a bigger wheel!
ReplyDeleteJC
It's convenient that your already follically challenged- Mr Collin's, because it appear's that this building (in)experinece would have you pulling your hair out!
ReplyDeleteHow true!
ReplyDeleteJC
MT48 and jack weights..
ReplyDeleteAnd LIB, in MT48, why is one of the weights on the outside of the wheel near the letter E? Another Bessler mistake, or on purpose?!
ReplyDeleteIMO, the answer lies in MT15.. The weights are OUTSIDE the wheel.. With the correct Jack application, you have, external jacks around the wheel.. Each weight holder is a "trigger" to the jack mech, the jack mech fires when a weight enters the pocket on the edge of the wheel.. The jacks stays out of the wheel for 1 pocket duration (the time it takes for another weight to enter a pocket).. The only missing element is the paternoster, is it able to lift enough weights on top ?!
ReplyDeleteBtw, I made reference to MT48 all along in the last description, the only interesting element of MT15, are the jacks and external weights.. Look the emphasis Bessler give to this design, counterclockwise and he states that it only needs the prime mover to make it work.. So basically, he tells us that external weights, or CROSSBARS are used.. a single crossbar is enough to make it work, as described in my last comment..
ReplyDeleteBtw, I say the jacks in MT48, in my head, the jacks are not drawn on MT48, but they are there, on each external crossbars around the wheel.. Are they (the crossbars) the prime movers?! .. I think so..
ReplyDelete