I wonder if Richard Trevithick (1771-1833) who built the first steam engine tramway locomotive, on February 22, 1804, thought that his engine was too big and unwieldy? It weighed five tons, its boiler was eight foot long and four foot in diameter. It could hit 4 miles an hour BUT it was able to haul a load of 10 tons of iron, 70 men and five extra wagons 9 miles.
In The Guardian Wednesday 26 August 2009
"A century old record has been broken after Inspiration, a twin-finned car that looks like a prop from Thunderbirds, achieved an average speed of 139.84mph on two runs over a measured mile, at Edwards Air Force Base, California. That may not sound fast when a car has already broken the sound barrier, but this was a steam car, and the record for this type of machine was set in 1906, at an average of 127.7mph.
The British car, with British born driver Charles Burnet III at the wheel, reached a maximum of 151.085mph, a speed greater than the 145.6mph recorded in 1985 by Steamin' Demon, a car designed by Jim Crank of California and driven by Richard Barber along the Bonneville Salt Flats."
Coincidentally there is a video of steam-driven vehicles at http://archive.org/details/BeslerCo1932 by the Besler Corporation Promo Film: Steam-Driven Vehicles] (ca. 1932-1933)!
After the 1973 global oil crisis, the Swedish automaker Saab developed an innovative nine-cylinder axial steam-car design that used electronic controls to improve efficiency and reduce the size and weight of the boiler, and added a compressed-air pump to speed up acceleration. The car used only miniscule amounts of fuel to heat the boiler and generated almost no greenhouse gas emissions. But after the oil market stabilized in the 1980s, the Saab steamer never got off the drawing board. In the 1990s, German researchers came up with a low-emissions engine design, the ZEE, that used ceramic cylinder linings instead of oil as a lubricant.
The point of the above being that even steam engines can be technologically advanced to compete with the modern petrol engine, so...
OK, I know a steam engine is a more reactive and portable kind of engine than a gravity powered engine seems to be, but don't be so keen to rule out technological advances. We don't even have a working model of a Besslerwheel yet, and we have no idea of its potential.
I envisage an Besslerwheel engine mounted on gimbals to allow it maintain its vertical axis, what ever direction it is heading and at what ever angle to the horizontal. Reduce its height and compensate by lengthening it. In a previous post, I suggested mounting several wheels on one axle, but in fact it might be possible to design it to have one of each weight, whose horizontal length is increased to the length of the wheel's width. So in effect you have squashed down wheel and made it much, much wider. There may be ways of shaping the weights or altering the levers to gain further mnechanical advantage.
And such an engine might be used to generate electricity to drive the vehicle.
Yes this is pure speculation, but don't dismiss it as a possibility; we won't know what it will be capable of until we have one to develop.
JC
10a2c5d26e15f6g7h10ik12l3m6n14o14r5s17tu6v5w4y4-3,’.
John,..I don't want to be contrary but I think at the most bessler wheels will only be feasable on ships and possibly trains.
ReplyDeleteFrom the way my wheel is progressing it looks like only 1/8 of the total weight will be available for turning effect by gravity.
This means that the E/W ratio is very low but on the other hand the E/out ratio to E/in will be close to infinity.
Therefore I think electrical generation and battery charging will have to fill the gap.
I foresee that we are even going to see electric aeroplanes in the not to distant future.
You're not being contrary Trevor. I wanted to put something else up and I couldn't think of anything quickly and this was something I had already written a few weeks ago and rejected. Normal service will be returned asap!
ReplyDeleteJC
Trevor, I think the weight of the batteries is far to great to ever work in an airplane. Still hoping to hear some or those verbal clues. ;) Thanks, Justsomeone
ReplyDeleteLithium batteries has made it all possible.If they can power a helicopter then they can certainly power a plane.
DeleteLook up Hexecopter dem on the net and you'll see how positive they are.
The "steam era" definitely HAD its day, but EXternal combustion engines are really a thing of the past. Yes, steam powered cars work, but they have their drawbacks. Today's driver is used to jumping in his "chariot", turning a key, and having near instant power for motion available. He would not be able to tolerate having to wait several minutes for steam pressure to build up inside of a boiler before he could take off.
ReplyDeleteYes, practically everything can be improved to SOME degree. When I was in high school automotive shop, we were SERIOUSLY discussing putting NUCLEAR reactors into AUTOMOBILES! When I mentioned the problem of the weight of the radiation shielding required and the potential radiological hazards associated with this type of propulsion system in the event of an accidental crash, many of my fellow students simply dismissed me as being "pessimistic" and claimed that all of these "minor" problems would SOON be solved. They were all "day dreaming" about a nuclear powered steam car that could hit speeds of hundreds of miles per hour and which would run for a lifetime without the need to refuel. One guy even wanted to give the car the ability to FLY! Well, we all know where THOSE day dreams ended up...LOL!
Yes, I DO think that Bessler's basic design CAN be improved. However, that does not necessarily mean that it will be improved enough to make it small and powerful enough for use inside of the cramped confines of an automobile's engine compartment so that it can be "onboard" at all times. At best, I suspect, a homeowner might be able to have such a wheel housed in a shed on his property that would continuously charge up banks of batteries which could then be used to power his home when it was not being powered by solar panels or his local electrical utility company's power lines. From those batteries, smaller batteries or capacitors within his all electric automobile would then be charged up to allow him to drive, say, for a range of about 100 miles before a recharge was needed which he could either get at home or from a remote "gasoline / recharging station".
I think we must be ever ON GUARD about the day dreaming that we do about the potential for Bessler's wheels and not allow our justified amazement with his accomplishment to cause us to automatically assume that virtually ANYTHING is possible for them. Remember what happened with the Crookes' "Radiometer". It, too, amazed the people of the late 1870's and there was much speculation that it would eventually be providing all of the electrical power the world needed. But, here we are over a century later and the only one I use is the small lightbulb sized one on a shelf that spins crazily whenever some sunlight from a nearby window lands on it.
To The Anon who posted this the other day
ReplyDeletehttp://blondesearch.ru/play/j6x_m6kXm-Q/Expanding_Circle.html
Thanks, that was interesting, let me return an interesting one to you
The expanding circle you showed us reminds me of the work done by one of my Bessler Wheel friends Glenn Rouse
He based his design on MT137
Simply Google "Radial-hinge mechanism" it’s all there top of page one!
JW
Glad you liked it. I will check out the link shortly.
DeleteOver the weekend I saw a movie called the "Rocky Mountain Express". It is a documentary about the history of the railroad thru the Canadian Rockies. Although the rail lines were put in about 50 years after Bessler, the power of the locomotives were just astonishing. Throughout the movie you could hear the rhythmic pounding of the engines and the release of steam. At times it was almost mesmerizing. I couldn't help but think of Bessler's little wheel (in comparison). If you were a business man and you needed an engine, would you chose a wheel that could pick up maybe a 100 lbs of brick, or a steam engine that could move the world. Labor to build the tracks was dirt cheap and plentiful. The same with fuel. Bessler lost out on pure power - no question about it.
Rick (zoelra)
Agreed! While Bessler's wheels were strong in the "Wow" department, they were VERY weak in the power department. This would have become obvious as prospective buyers had their engineers test the wheels. Hopefully, this situation can someday be improved.
DeleteYou might be interested to know that the radial hinge mechanism link to the patent on Google, was granted to my old friend Glenn Rouse, who was kind enought to supply me with the translations of the Wagner critiques and the MT translations and is also known as Al Bacon on the Besslerwheel writings page. We have corresponded for many years and he was the first person to obtain the copies of MT although I was close behind him. We also both managed to obtain original copies of Das Triumphirende. He is an acknowledged expert on Bessler and we were each able to aid the other in locating documents relevant to our research into the inventor. I have a model here of his radial hinge mechanism and even though I don't accept his argument that his derivation of MT 137 is the correct intended interpretation, it is nevertheless ingenious.
ReplyDeleteJC
I know that the Bessler wheel can be proven from the drawings and illustrations , i am not going to say which , but it can be proven .
DeleteIf anyone wants to go to court over it , i will bring them to court .
I am not looking for friends and i am not going to be nice to people trying to patent an invention that is open source to the world .
No need to go to court with any of us Ealadha
DeleteYou obviously never looked at even the first page of my website.
You should check-out what Glenn is actually about before you get too carried away.
I most certainly am looking to make friends
It may interest you to know that all three of us amigos John Collins, John Worton and Glenn Rouse are all agreed that Bessler' Wheel must never be patented, privately or corporately owned, that it should pass into common ownership. This is a cornerstone of our friendship, we have a common philosophy and goals.
Relax
JW
Yes John, I know all that, Glenn’s told me; Irv Thomas’s adventures etc etc
DeleteHe is good to talk to and is as you say “an acknowledged expert on Bessler”
You are right that “his derivation of MT 137 is (not) the correct intended interpretation, (but) it is nevertheless ingenious”
Deva Ramananda and I share other interests in addition to The Bessler Wheel
JW
I would never even think of trying to patent my current "right track" design should it work because I consider it to be Bessler's invention and NOT mine. However, IF I was working on some OTHER "wrong track" design (that is, one that is NOT THE same as the one Bessler found and used) that worked, then I might try to patent it. BUT, it would have to have a VERY impressive power output, not just a few tens of watts. I would have to be about 90+% certain, IN ADVANCE, that the invention would sell and help pay for the cost of the patent. Sadly, about 98% of all patents never make the inventor a dime and, in fact, can cost him plenty if he relies upon a patent attorney to file for him.
DeleteThe Fat Axle Clue
ReplyDelete(Or if you prefer, JW’s Fat Axle Theory)
Whilst studying Bessler’s MT Visual Clues over an extended period, it came to my attention that in nearly all of his renderings of wheels the axle seemed disproportionately/unnecessarily large.
By disproportionately/unnecessarily large I mean way beyond that thickness necessary to adequately support the structure and that it is therefore ‘large’ for another purpose, for another reason.
Linking my MT observation to Bessler’s written descriptions of the axle of his mechanism:
The one about it being eight inches thick passing through and beyond the wheel, yet it was only one inch thick at its ends, when in its bearings and on its stand
Also the passage describing the axle as having many compartments and holes in it (would seem to indicate the need for an axle of a fair diameter!)
And to that all-important clue MT137
I see a consistent theme, several indications for an axle of a particularly large diameter (for some reason?): for this being a feature of The Mechanism.
I wondered if anyone else had picked-up on this interesting clue as to the wheels structure?
JW
You're getting warm.
DeleteDoug
JW wrote:
Delete"Also the passage describing the axle as having many compartments and holes in it (would seem to indicate the need for an axle of a fair diameter!)"
You are MISinterpreting that passage. The axles Bessler used were made of SOLID wood with their steel end pivots embedded in them. Bessler tells us this in quotes such as:
"I'll tell you with great pride that my timbers are all solid." (AP, pg. 292)
J.W. just read your blog after posting mine under Bessler's wheel - before and after him.Check it out you might be interested. Stephen burke.
DeleteJ.W. made a mistake, I posted under Bessler's wheel and the Orffyreus code. Sorry. Steve.
DeleteWell if the wheel had spokes similar to a wagon wheel, you would need a large hub to accommodate the ends of the spokes.
ReplyDeleteCheck out this wheel.
http://www.hansenwheel.com/products/wheels/wooden_wheels.html
Rick
I did a Google search on "wagon wheel hub" and under Images, you can see many examples of hubs. Some without spokes. Maybe Bessler's wheels had specially designed hubs that did not use all the spoke holes and that could explain the extra compartments.
DeleteBelow is the search results. Look for the hubs with no spokes.
https://www.google.com/search?q=wagon+wheel+hub&hl=en&tbo=u&tbm=isch&source=univ&sa=X&ei=s7SqUL_XD4mC2AW4oIGICw&sqi=2&ved=0CCwQsAQ&biw=1280&bih=880
Rick
Wagon wheel hubs often had steel bands wrapped around them to provide additional strength. If one were feeling around inside one of Bessler's wheels, you would feel the cool steel and could conclude that the hubs were actually an enlarged axle.
DeleteJust a thought anyway.
It is quite obvious why Bessler use a fat axle.
DeleteHis training as a clock maker showed him that,because his wheel was so increbibly heavy,a fat hollow axle with small pinions was the lightest and strongest low friction format that would resist bending.
All clocks are designed the same.
"Fat" axles?! Fat compared to what? The drum diameter?
DeleteThe Merseburg wheel axle was about 6 inches or 0.5 feet in diameter and the drum was 12 feet in diameter. That makes the diameter of the axle only 1/24 that of the drum. This is supposed to be "fat"? To me it looks like Bessler used the MINIMUM axle diameter that would support a wheel in its middle that weighted maybe 50% more than it actually weighed. This would allow for a sudden spike in the force applied to the center of the axle as a translocated wheel's end pivots were dropped into their brass bearing plates in the upright supports.
It's true that the axle diameter to drum diameter ratios in MT exceed 1/24th, but I don't consider this significant. Bessler may have just exaggerated the ratios he drew in order to make the illustrations easier for the reader to see.
Trevor wrote:
"His training as a clock maker showed him that, because his wheel was so increbibly heavy, a fat hollow axle with small pinions was the lightest and strongest low friction format that would resist bending."
I estimate the Merseburg wheel (including the axle and its steel end pivots) to have weighted about 224 lbs. A 6 inch diameter axle that was 6 feet in length and solid would have been strong enough to hold that plus about 50% more.
What is your point TG?,..are you trying to support you theory that there was something inside that axle?..You ignored my important point about the design of clock wheeels and their properties.
DeleteHow do we know that the fat axle was'nt made of a hollowed out wooden pole,seeing that he had all those pegs jutting out of it.
These challenges of yours are getting quite tiresome.
One would think you were there with Bessler at the time!
Trevor wrote:
Delete"What is your point TG?,..are you trying to support you theory that there was something inside that axle?"
NO! My "point" WAS AND IS that the axle's Bessler used were made of SOLID wood!
"How do we know that the fat axle was'nt made of a hollowed out wooden pole,seeing that he had all those pegs jutting out of it."
We know it because BESSLER told us in AP that his "timbers are all solid" and that would certainly have included the axles!
"One would think you were there with Bessler at the time!"
How did you guess that I am the reincarntion of Count Karl and, under time regression hypnosis, have past life memories of discussing the operations of his wheels with Bessler himself?! You MUST be psychic!
Thanks everybody for the great links/discussions - I had been looking for that kind of information in vain so far.
ReplyDeleteIn the meantime, I myself have been looking into parametric oscillation, forced oscillation and dampened oscillations. I have come to realise that Besslers era was deeply into watchmaking and pendulums. Precise clocks being essential for marine navigation, a lot of research went into this. Galileo had started observing pendulums and Newton also put a lot of effort into them (even used a pendulum to calculate the weight of the ether!). It was a scientific boom with its own "rockstars", comparabile in our era to micro chips, Bill Gates etc. I was initially not too taken with the idea of pendulums in the Bessler wheel - and I still dislike that specific idea. On the other hand, a pendulum can do a full cycle, and a wheel can be likened to a massive physical pendulum, starting its "swinging" (which never returns but goes over the top) from a position where the centre of mass is shifted, maybe even given a push (as the Kassel wheel needed).
So the wheel itself can be mathematically modeled as a dampened forced oscillator. The "forcing" is the added velocity given on each turn. This velocity may have been supplied by the maid (I doubt it) or been a surplus gained by carefull selection of the right parameters of wheel diameter/wheel weight and positioning of moving weights (that is what I suspect).
An oscillator is able to store energy and go into resonance. You can find all of this on Wikipedia. Some interesting info: The weight of the wheel (or better: its inertial moment) has a big influence on the performance: the larger the inertial moment is, the smaller the angular velocity becomes, but also the smaller the damping will get (read: a heavy wheel is harder to brake/slow down but also slower than a lightweight wheel). A heavy wheel without load is almost undampened, angular velocity is practically equal to the natural frequency, which is sqare root of resetting force (=torque) divided by inertial moment (all of this on Wikipedia). On each turn some force is added. After roughly 3 turns the maximum speed is reached! Imagine my surprise when I read that! Just what the eyewitnesses described. By attaching a load (the basket of bricks), we greatly increase damping. Interestingly enough, it is the damping which can produce resonance. The resonance curve has its greatest width around dampened angular velocity multiplied by sqrt(2), which is roughly 1.4. The dampened velocity would have been the 20rpm (or 2 radians/sec), multiplied by 1.3 gives us 26rpm (or 2.6 radians/sec), which is the undampened velocity. In other words, very close to resonance.
I hope someone out there enjoys maths and is as excited about this as I am.
Yes Mimi ,..There had to be some sort of oscillating cycle.This is probably why the wheel had a fixed speed and indeed was governed so.
ReplyDelete@Mimi & Trevor,
DeleteI agree; oscillations. And maybe parametric/forced oscillations were somehow taking energy from the rotating Earth?
Some years ago I corresponded with R. A. (Richard) Ford. His book "Perpetual Motion Mystery" was where I first heard of Bessler. His view was that in Bessler's era human understanding of mechanical principles reached its highest level of development. There has of course been technological development since then, but some principles, like that behind Bessler's wheel, have been lost.
@TG
ReplyDeleteThe Axle Compartments Clue
“Ask any of those who have groped inside my Wheel and grasped its axle - and you will be assured, in no uncertain terms, that my axle is not like that. Rather, it has many compartments, and is pierced all over with various holes”
Yes TG, I am aware of your interpretation of this passage from our previous exchanges, however I do not agree with you.
To me the word compartments is crucial, it describes a particular kind of structure. I fail to see why anyone (including Bessler) would go to the trouble and expense of making compartments in an axle and then not use them for some purpose.
Furthermore, your non-use of the axle in your proposed design is an oversight in my opinion. It is the ideal (prime point) to lever things from and against and it is also the ideal place down through which to dump/earth any excess energy created. (This answers a good point/question raised by Doug a few threads back) (Mimi this might be one for you to consider now that you are dampening oscillators?)
TG because you don’t believe AP V55 contains any clues; you have missed the significance of its opening line “An anvil receives many blows”
It seems to me that you are not only dismissing the use of vital clues but the use of vital pieces of structure too!
JW
Our disagreement about the translation of the quote you provided stems from what the word "it" refers to in that passage (that is, what its "antecendent" is). You and others seem to belief that "it" refers to the wheel's AXLE and that structure must therefore have contained the "compartments" mentioned in the passage. I, however, believe that the word "it" refers to the DRUM and the word translated as "compartments" was Bessler's way of describing how the interior space of the DRUM and NOT of a hollow axle could be considered to be subdivided into sections by the drum's radial support members which were all attached to the axle. This appearance of compartmentalization would ONLY be noticeable BEFORE the cloth covering was applied to the drum's open side faces during the final phase of a two-directional wheel's construction. Unfortunately, you have not yet presented ANY evidence or logic which would move me away from my position with regard to this matter in the slightest.
DeleteTrue, axles are irrelevant in my "right track" computer model wheel and with good reason. As Bessler tells us in AP:
"In a true Perpetuum Mobile everything must, necessarily, go round together. There can be NOTHING involved in it which remains stationary ON THE AXLE." (AP, pg. 361)
Yet, despite this from Bessler, YOU are insisting that there are all sorts of structures attached to the axle! Well, if it comes to a choice between believing YOU or the Master, I will go with the MASTER!
It's not often that I agree with TG, but this time I do. I am sure that the 'it' refers to the drum and not the axle otherwise, to my mind it makes no sense.
DeleteJC
Here is another clue I have not so far seen anyone mention.
ReplyDeleteThe Paddles Clue
In the notes accompanying MT52 Bessler says
“Here I will say only this much: no wheel is moved by heavy blows, which are more likely to dash the paddles of the wheel into a 1000 pieces, as though with bullets. No further explanation is necessary”
So, The Wheel has Paddles, Bessler clearly says so right there;
“The Paddles of The Wheel”
In keeping with this statement, in his MT Visual Clues Bessler depicts paddles in MT46, MT55, MT90, MT96, MT98 & MT101.
The structure of the mechanism contains elements recognizably shaped like a paddle.
(We might also describe this element as approximately Spoon-shaped, or perhaps Pendula-shaped with a roughly half-round weight on the unattached end?)
JW
I'm still trying to figure out the twisted logic you must have used to go from Bessler's EXPLICIT statement that impacts on paddles within a wheel are UNworkable for achieving PM to YOUR conclusion that such a method is precisely what Bessler DID use in his wheels!
DeleteBessler's statement in MT52 begins with "... I found the present invention or speculation in the works of an eminent man ...".
ReplyDeleteHis paddles comment was directed to the invention shown in the drawing. I'm not sure you can jump to the conclusion that his wheel included paddles.
@Anon
DeleteNo, his comment was not directed at the invention shown in the drawing, that's the point!
There are no paddles in that drawing; in the invention so far as we can see in the picture.
Bessler made the jump as you put it, I simply followed him.
JW
The full notation to MT 52 is:
Delete"The present invention or speculation is to be found at the place of an eminent man. I was not a little surprised at the imagination involved in it. A is a balance wheel, and B is its axle. Clappers, or mallets, on B strike the wheel C, which should thereby move. At D are wheels which, by means of a cord, should move the upper axle B and set a perpendicular going at E. I will only say the following: no wheel is moved through strong blows, for paddles would sooner dash it into 1000 pieces, and it would be utterly destroyed with bullets, as is sufficiently known."
JW wrote: "There are no paddles in that drawing; in the invention so far as we can see in the picture."
I think you are wrong about this observation. The "paddles" are supposed to be represented by the short horizontal lines on the periphery of the large wheel "C" which are periodically being struck by the "clapper or mallet" [a sort of hammer] at "B" as it rotates around the axle it is attached to. So, in essence, "C" is just a large paddle wheel whose individual paddles are being impacted at the wheel's 12:00 position in order to drive it. This is yet another example of one of what I call a "Self-Kicking Wheel" in MT. They do NOT work.
I do agree with you, however, that Bessler goes from the particulars of the design in MT 52 to the general when he concludes that NO WHEEL can achieve PM by such means because "it would be utterly destroyed with bullets, as is sufficiently known." "Sufficiently known" here means this conclusion is what most people would reach. How then, do YOU conclude that he is suggesting that, indeed, he DID use paddles in his wheels???
To be clear, Bessler jumps from 'Mallets and flaps' striking in the invention depicted, to then make a general point about The Wheel not being moved by heavy blows, and then refers to the 'paddles of the wheel'as if we all know what he's talking about.
ReplyDeleteJW
The cross members (that I think are paddles) on the wheel in MT52 look just like those in the water wheels shown in MT76, MT78, MT81, and MT82. In fact the wheels all look basically the same.
DeleteWhen I was growing up, there used to be an old river boat in the middle of our town that was turned into a restaurant. We would climb up on one of the lower paddles and jump up and down on it to get it moving and then we would climb around the outside of the wheel to get higher and stand on the upper paddles to keep it moving. I see us being the "flaps or mallets" as shown in the picture.
We did this until someone came out and chased us away. The boat actually sat in water (or the boat sat on concrete and water surrounded the boat. Not sure now. I remember my neighbors dad used to get drunk and swing on a rope hanging from the upper deck. The police had to fish him out. This happened a few times. It was quit the scandal. Good times ...
DeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteBTW In real life as well as in Bessler’s MT Clue Images, paddles most often come as a pair.
ReplyDeleteJW
If one is attaching paddles to his wheel AND there are an even number of them then, yes, they will be arranged in opposed "pairs". However, Bessler did NOT use paddles in his wheels which were being impacted by hammers that then drove the entire wheel.
DeleteHowever, there WERE "rim stops" attached to the inside surface of a drum's outer periphery wall (identical to those depicted in MT 18) that served as a temporary resting place for a weighted lever's weight as it traveled between the 3:00 and 6:00 positions of a CW rotating drum. When weights came to temporarily rest on their rim stops, they actually landed on them rather gently. To suppress any sounds associated with the weights landing on their rim stops, Bessler went to the trouble of attaching pieces of felt to the one-directional Drashwitz wheel's rim stops to cushion the slight impacts further (these pieces of felt would have simply been glued on). Obviously, this was done to frustrate any reverse engineering mobilists at public demonstrations who were trying to determine exactly where, within the drum, the weights were coming to rest.
Bessler, apparently did not use this sound deadening method with his two-directional wheels and I think the reason was that, in order to add bi-directionality to their drums, he had to use a large number of gravity activated latches within them that were needed to disable the weighted levers from shifting about within whichever one of their two one-directional sub wheels was undergoing retrograde rotation at the time during drum rotation. Those latches (16 for the entire wheel) must have been so noisy that they easily masked the gentle sounds of the landings of the active driving sub wheel's weights on their rim stops on the descending side of the drum.
@TG
ReplyDelete"In a true Perpetuum Mobile everything must, necessarily, go round together. There can be NOTHING involved in it which remains stationary ON THE AXLE." (AP, pg. 361)
”Yet, despite this from Bessler, YOU are insisting that there are all sorts of structures attached to the axle! Well, if it comes to a choice between believing YOU or the Master, I will go with the MASTER!”
Well, I can’t follow your twisted logic either TG!
How have you extracted from the above Bessler quote the interpretation that it means there is nothing on the axle? It says there is nothing involved which is stationary on the axle, it does not say there IS nothing on the axle!
“All sorts of structures” is a bit of an exaggeration, I didn’t say that.
My position is that all the vital structures of the mechanism are attached to the axle and that they move together to propel it around entirely in keeping with the above quote. Remember, ‘attached’ does not necessarily mean glued, screwed or bolted.
This is not a case of you going with the master you have misinterpreted the words of the master.
JW
JW wrote: "My position is that all the vital structures of the mechanism are attached to the axle and that they move together to propel it around entirely in keeping with the above quote. Remember, ‘attached’ does not necessarily mean glued, screwed or bolted."
DeleteIf "all the vital structures of the mechanism" that YOU think were "attached to the axle" are not glued, screwed, or bolted to it, then HOW are they attached! Are the held on by magnets?
IF you have ANYTHING "attached" to the axle in ANY way, then that "anything" would have to be moving along with the rotating axle (as was the case for the radial drum supports attached to the axle) and, therefore, STATIONARY with respect to the axle. BUT, Bessler emphatically states:
"There can be NOTHING involved in it which remains stationary ON THE AXLE."
I don't think that it is I who has MISinterpreted Bessler' words, but, rather, YOU. You have misinterpreted his quote because it DIRECTLY refutes the design that you are working on, while it supports the "right track" design that I am working on!
@TG
ReplyDelete“Bessler did NOT use paddles in his wheels which were being impacted by hammers that then drove the entire wheel”
Absolutely right! He did not. That was the point of the MT52 accompanying notes I just highlighted, nothing hits something else with a ‘heavy blow’ in order to make The Wheel go around
Gentle blows of the type you describe with you ‘rim stops’ however are definitely allowed
JW
Well, I had hoped to have the M of T testing completed for my current "right track" computer model wheel design this afternoon, but this was not meant to be due a sudden and unexpected increase of other things I had to take care of first (like cleaning pounds of fallen leaves out of my rain gutters so they can drain properly and the water will not back up and damage the roof). Maybe in another day or so, the testing will be finally completed and, God willing, I'll have a VERY important announcement to make here!
ReplyDeleteMeanwhile, in thinking about the motions of the five weighted levers within my model wheel (hinted at by the pentagrams hidden in the DT portraits) whose pivots travel between the 9:00 and 4:30 drum positions during any 45 degree increment of CW drum rotation, I realized that, while their weights ALL move a bit closer to their rim stops, they do NOT all move through the same distances with the same closing velocities.
Of the five weights, the one attached to the end of the lever whose pivot travels from 9:00 to 10:30 travels the farthest and does so at the highest velocity. Indeed, this lever's weight travels from a location well below its lever's pivot when the pivot is at the drum's 9:00 position to a location somewhat above the pivot when it is at its 10:30 drum position (the alignment of the two levers suggesting the number "7" as I mentioned in the last blog entry's comments). I have NO doubt that it was this PARTICULAR weight's RAPID motion during a single 45 degree increment of drum rotation which Bessler was referring to when he wrote:
"Wagner describes how he thinks my machine is constructed; he babbles about “excess weights” being snatched along, by means of “internal motive power”, in a frequently-repeated cycle of up and down movements. According to him, Nature dictates that things gravitate downwards. But the weights, which rest below must, in a flash, be raised upwards, and it is this, that Wagner cannot force himself to accept. But, crazy Wagner, just note that that is indeed the case with my device." (AP, pg. 341)
If one viewed one of Bessler's wheels in rotation BEFORE the covering material had been applied to the sides of its drum (which Bessler certainly would have been able to do with his first one-directional Gera wheel), then the motion of this single weighted lever's weight would have been VERY noticeable and, in fact, far more noticeable than those of the other 4 weights leading it.
Achieving this sudden motion of this weight probably took Bessler MONTHS to achieve as he slaved away each night trying to get his 36 inch diameter table top prototype wheel operational. This single effect, the sudden rising of an ascending side weight, is what no other mobilist prior to Bessler had been able to achieve and which, so far, no one after him has been able to achieve (but, I think I am VERY close!).
To achieve it requires PRECISE counter balancing of the 9:00 weighted lever with a combination of cords connected to other weighted levers and with springs attached directly to the 9:00 lever. The result of this is that, as its pivot travels toward the drum's 10:30 position, the 9:00 weighted lever's weight actually remains WEIGHTLESS and can then be EASILY moved closer to its rim stop continuously THROUGHOUT the 45 degree increment of drum rotation by the forces applied to it by the weights that lead it (but, does not make final gentle contact with its rim stop until after its lever's pivot passes the drum's 3:00 position).
I've decided that, in honor of the Master, I shall, henceforth, be referring to this CRITICALLY necessary rising of the 9:00 going to 10:30 drum position weighted lever's weight (needed in order to maintain the OB of a wheel's weights' CoM) as "The Bessler Effect". It is probably the most important effect in the continuing evolution of the science of PM!
@TG
ReplyDelete“If "all the vital structures of the mechanism" that YOU think were "attached to the axle" are not glued, screwed, or bolted to it, then HOW are they attached! Are the held on by magnets?”
Are the two halves of a hinge attached to each other or are they separate entities?
And think about it, something has to be attached to the axle at some point, even in your drum and periphery mounted elements design proposal. If that is not the case then the working mechanism would revolve on an axle which would remain stationary!
JW
Not that this is the case, but the exterior drum could have had bearings in the sides of the drum that the axle passed through. All the internal components could have been connected to interior of the drum. The axle could remain stationary, but small amounts of friction in the drum bearings would have cause the axle to turn in the stand bearings.
DeleteJW wrote: "Are the two halves of a hinge attached to each other or are they separate entities?"
DeleteThey are ATTACHED to each other via a hinge pin. Otherwise, a door would fall out of its frame when one tried to open it! Once again, NOTHING was attached to the axle sections inside of Bessler's drums (the drum's radial support members which WERE attached no not count here because they were NOT part of the drum's "perpetual motion structures" or collection of weighted levers, interconnecting cords, and springs).
@JW
ReplyDeleteDo you envision these paddles like oars from a row boat or paddles like the cross members from an old paddle wheel steamboat?
Conceptually I see these paddles as something to strike or push, or possibly just weights on the ends of the spokes.
I see the paddles like oars from a row boat and not like the cross members from an old paddle wheel steamboat.
DeleteI see the paddles as a relatively long levers with a particular shaped weight on the ends of them, only resembling spokes in the way that MT137 appears to have spokes.
JW
@JW
DeleteThanks for the clarification.
Do you know if any detailed information exists regarding Bessler's horizontal windmill (schematics, drawings, verbal description, ...)?
One more thing, you have me thinking about MT137. I'm going back to the gift shop this weekend to purchase the expanding spherical toy I mentioned in an earlier post. You can take it apart so you only have a 2 dimensional component like in the video link. It shrinks down to about a 3" radius and expands to a 15" radius.
DeleteRick
TG, please shut up about " right track ". It makes you sound like an arrogant a--!!! Implying everyone else is on the wrong track. You DON'T have to say it EVERY POST! You don't need to say 99% every post either. Etcetera etcetera etcetera.
ReplyDeleteJust to, once again, clarify matters, Mr. Anonymous, I consider ANY design that is NOT similar to the "right track" one that I am currently working on (sorry to have to use that term again!) to be a "wrong track" design. I ONLY use this definition to state that I consider them "wrong" because their development will NOT, IMO, lead to the SAME design that Bessler found and used. HOWEVER, that does not mean that what I happen to consider "wrong track" will not be the "right track" (sorry about that again!) for some OTHER approach and will, in fact, eventually lead to a WORKING device of some type. Thus, the design that Asa Jackson used to achieve PM was "wrong track" because it was NOT the same as Bessler's design, but it certainly was "right track" (sorry) as far as being a UNIQUE working design.
DeleteActually, one should not really feel insulted if I happen to label his (or her) approach "wrong track". The reason is that, should my "right track" (sorry) design work and, hopefully, eventually be accepted by the majority of mobilists as, in fact, being THE one Bessler found and used, then I will certainly be happy. BUT, all I will have done is resurrected someone ELSE'S working design and NOT my OWN. I would not, therefore, by my accomplishment be joining that VERY exclusive club of mobilists who actually found UNIQUE working PM designs.
That club currently, IMO, only contains TWO individuals! OTOH, a person who is working on what I consider to be a "wrong track" design and who manages to make it work, just as long as it is NOT Asa Jackson's design, WILL be JOINING that VERY elite club of mobilists and, indeed, I will be envying him (or her) for their accomplishment which, come to think of it, will probably be FAR more difficult to achieve than my reverse engineering efforts with Bessler's wheels.
Fellows, try not to get upset about your differences. Either the current view of physics is correct, and Bessler was a fraud, or todays physics has overlooked something important, and then there is a principle to be exploited as Bessler did. Assuming the latter, there would be endless varieties of exploiting this principle. It's great that we are not all doing the same thing. We'll see who gets there first. No point in getting dogmatic - build! As someone who builds, trust me: levers and paddles really work, I have several physical prototypes using them, and I have simulations showing that they work. The drawback, of course, has been so far for me: they don't work well enough. But work they do. Try it. John Worton: I noticed your new logo - anything to do with your new build? I downloaded the picture, it is called "The+large+pendula+a", but it is too pixely to see clearly what it is.
ReplyDelete"Either the current view of physics is correct, and Bessler was a fraud, or todays physics has overlooked something important, and then there is a principle to be exploited as Bessler did."
DeleteThe current view of physics IS correct AND Bessler was NOT a fraud!
What the "no track" skeptics overlook (actually never even consider!) is that IF one can figure out a way to maintain the OB of the CoM of a wheel's set of weights during wheel rotation, then the wheel will continously output the innate energy / mass content of the weights for use in performing useful "outside" work. Of course, whatever method is used to maintain the OB of the CoM can not use ALL of the outputted energy / mass otherwise the design is only taking it back into the wheel again and then nothing is left over to either accelerate the wheel or perform outside work. I have seen several designs that did just this and they are easily recognizable because they actually are in balance REGARDLESS of what orientation they are placed into. In other words, NO orientation they can have produces a NET driving torque on their axles.
Bessler's one-directional design managed to output the innate energy / mass content of its weights WITHOUT having to use all of that energy / mass to reset the configuration of its weighted levers by the end of each of the drum's intervals of rotation (equal to 45 degrees of rotation). That means that the CoM of its weights was ALWAYS OB and, consequently, always applied a driving torque to its axle regardless of the wheel's orientation.
Knowing WHAT Bessler's wheels did eventually becomes obvious from a reading of the Bessler literature. Knowing the fine details of HOW he did it is FAR harder to determine. The DT portrait clues can lead one to an understanding of the HOW of Bessler's wheels, but they require an ENORMOUS amount of study and verification building / testing in order to extract the information that they contain.
@ Mimi,
DeleteAs someone who also builds, I know that “levers and paddles really work” and I also have “several physical prototypes using them” some with spectacularly encouraging results. My longest ‘runner’ ran for 5 minuets and it self-started which I was particularly pleased about.
I think they do “work well enough”; my problem at the moment is to get the scale and proportions of the levers and paddles elements of the construction to work well with the other elements. This year’s work has all been about the relative size and the coordination of the elements.
All my work is ‘hands-on’, ‘on the bench testing’, building real things and seeing what actually happens. Five years ago I came across the pairs of paddles and the wonderful things they can do, how to best employ them has been in my mind ever since. If I did not have real knowledge and experience of the paddles, I would not have come on this Blogg and presented The Paddles Clue so confidently.
Yes, I have been having a bit of fun with my logo (profile picture) No, that picture is not directly to do with my current work, it’s from a few years back. If you would like to download and print any of my designs/drawings (at a bigger size and without pixels showing) may I suggest you visit my website Factum Poetica, there are about 150 to choose from!
JW
@John Worton,
Deletecongratulations on your self-starting 5 minute wheel. That is an amazing achievement. I started the year with the first working levers, which I found quite exciting. However, no real runner yet, and I am also battling with size/weight ratios.
I will certainly have a look at your website, thanks.
Bad news to report.
ReplyDeleteI just completed the M of T testing of my current "right track" wheel design and...it FAILED!
I did see SOME of the "Bessler Effect" taking place, although it was not immediate, but rather only late in the 45 degree increment of wheel rotation and really not that "robust".
I think that the major problem is the primary springs I have attached to my model's weighted levers. They seem to have k values that are WAY too high. As a result the weights whose lever pivots travel between 6:00 and 7:30 do not even begin to part company with their rim stops until the wheel has rotated CW through about 22.5 degrees or until half of the 45 degree rotation interval is completed. Because of this the CoM of the design's 8 weights just slowly sinks to the punctum quietus and stays there.
I had previously decided to use k = 1.00000 lb/in in my 4:1 computer model of one of the Merseburg wheel's one-directional sub wheels which corresponds to a k value of 16 lb/in in the full scale version because that seemed to be the value (the 16 lb/in value) indicated by my previous interpretation of the "Screw Barrel Microscope Clue" in the 2nd DT portrait. Obviously, that was either another one of Bessler's false "decoy" clues or it is valid clue and I misinterpreted its real meaning.
The portrait k value of 16 lb/in does maintain the configurational stability of the weighted levers from 10:30 to 4:30, but the "price" one pays for this is weighted levers whose CCW swinging toward verticality as they approach the 7:30 drum position is excessively delayed. Solving the problem is not just a simple matter of reducing the k values because that will then cause the weighted levers leading the 9:00 one to simply fall over CCW when the simulation is run. It is truly a difficult mechanical dilemma to find one's design in!
In any event, since my preparatory work for the coming winter season is slowly being finished up, I intend to double the number of computer modeling / DT portrait analysis sessions per day that I am having in the hope of finally satisfactorily resolving these issues. When you only have 0.01% of the way to go you DON'T quit!
The truly paradoxical nature of the quest for PM is that the road to success is paved with FAILURES! My latest failed attempt is just another paving stone put in place, but represents one LESS paving stone I have to travel over to finally achieve the SAME design Bessler found and used!
Maybe things will be looking better for me by Christmas...
I apologise , i mis-understood the earlier post , The Bessler can be proven from the drawings , it was done that way in case the wheel was ever stolen , it could have been proven it is the bessler wheel from the drawings if anyone stole it back then .
ReplyDeleteAnd it can still be proven today because of what is shown in the drawings .
I meant "The bessler wheel can be proven from the drawings " .
Delete