Thursday, 6 March 2014

More on the dual-directional wheels and the single directional ones.

In my previous blog, I suggested that it made more sense to try to replicate Bessler's single-direction wheels than his later, admittedly more difficult to make, dual-direction ones, and I forgot to add that my comparison was to the Kassel wheel, which rotated at 26 RPM, unloaded.  The previous, Merseburg wheel, rotated much faster at 40 RPM, despite being dual-directional.

At first sight this may seem to damage my argument about two mirror image windmills rotating at half the speed of a single one, but I still think they would if their components were identical in all size respects, but what it does also do is back up Bessler's contention that he could design wheels which could revolve faster or slower and with more power or less as required.  He also suggested that a wheel of 20 ells could be built - more than 40 feet in diameter!  At that time, John Rowley, Master Model-maker and engineer to King George I, designed and built a tidal wheel for pumping water into the Royal Palace at Windsor measuring "twenty four foot diameter and twelve foot broad; for the new brass engine with brasses to the crank, forcing rods and a new crank."  So that kind of size was not inconceivable.

My point is that what ever size and speed and lifting power was possible, we cannot make any assumptions about the mechanism inside the wheels other than to reflect on Bessler's own words about the Merseburg wheel:-
"I constructed my great work, the 6-ell diameter wheel. It revolved in either direction, but caused me a few headaches before I got the mechanism properly adjusted. Why did I make this wheel, you may well ask, and so I will now give you my answer. During my stay in Obergreisslau my detractors put out the cunning falsehood (in order to deceive the world) that my device, like a clock, needed to be wound up. This caused me to make some changes to the mechanism so that all intelligent people would appreciate the falseness of such a proposition. People then began to believe - and they freely admitted it - that the wheel did not require winding up."
The dual-directional wheel was more difficult to make than the single-directional one so logic suggests that the first one would be the place to start.  However I know there are many people out there who are still convinced that there is more to making the wheel dual-directional than simply adding  mirror imaged mechanisms to the same axle, as I described in my previous blog.  In further defense of my belief in keeping it simple by concentrating on the first two wheels, I shall point to the fact that the first two wheels measured 4 inches and 6 inches in thickness, respectively; but the second two were nearly a foot thick, so twice that of the second wheel, and the last one was eighteen inches thick.  This implies the extra thickness was needed to accommodate two sets of mirrored mechanisms.

JC

 10a2c5d26e15f6g7h10ik12l3m6n14o14r5s17tu6v5w4y4-3,’.


16 comments:

  1. John,
    Just for the sake of argument : I propose a symmetrical design which could be drawn by cord or threads to one side of the housing or the other depending on the initial rotation of the running wheel .

    ReplyDelete
  2. "...my detractors put out the cunning falsehood (in order to deceive the world) that my device, like a clock, needed to be wound up..."

    In AP and DT, when Bessler mentions a clock he always follows up with a phrase similar to "like a clock, needed to be wound up". By this he means by external means such as a person. I'm not sure he is specifically saying his wheel does not need to be wound up, just not like a clock that requires a person to do it. I believe he also commented about a roasting spit that "wound itself". Just something to consider.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Hi John,

    I heartily agree with your comments about the one way wheel being the logical first objective for all the stated reasons. Been saying that since BORG.

    The real reason I am writing is that I was browsing MT for the millionth, or so, time and accidentally zoomed in on #73. There appears to be a faint key in dead center of the wheel. Tonight in reviewing the pic before writing I noticed a distinctive and inexplicable white 'slash' or a 'one' a short distance to the upper right that appears to be in line with the key edge.

    I may have a low enough quality pic to cause a false image and don't have access to a better image right at the moment. I was wondering, if you have time, could you give it a look and tell me if I am seeing things?

    I would also like to add that this is one of the drawings with a hand scribed NB so my interest in your observations and opinion as to what it might mean is highly anticipated.

    mIKEY

    ReplyDelete
  4. Hi Mikey

    I looked at m copy of MT 73 but I unable to see what you described. There is another version of the drawings, it used to be viewable from some website but I don't know if it's still there or if anyone else has a copy. I think Bill had a different copy to mine so it might be worth contacting him for further info?

    As for the NB. I have speculated so much on these additional features that in the end I gave up because I could not see anything that seemed useful. Sorry Mikey that I could not be more helpful.

    JC

    ReplyDelete
  5. I checked and am confident the copy I am looking at is from your online distribution source.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Hi Mikey,

    It is a microfilm anomaly in the image of 73 you have. Here is MT at the Kassel website which John referred to:

    http://orka.bibliothek.uni-kassel.de/viewer/image/1345798641226/54/

    You'll see it's not there in this image.

    Ed

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I would strongly beg to differ. At certain levels of magnification of the page you gave the key is clearly there.

      mIKEY

      Delete
    2. Dudes,
      you may have found a missing page!
      If you check the ink transfers and bleedthroughs,, you will see they align with the previous/next drawings, but in the centre of 73 there appears to be a faint part of a wheel arc that doesn't correspond to any of the drawings.
      Curiouser and curiouser.

      Delete
    3. Well the "white slash" was definitely a visual artifact and I wouldn't use the word "clearly" with anything you see in the middle of 73, even at full resolution, but there is a faint impression of another woodcut that must have been set down on 73 when the ink was still tacky. There are others like this as well, 86 being another.

      I don't think you will find the solution here, IMHO. :-)

      Delete
  7. Thanks from me too, Ed. I lost most of my old bookmarks recently and I wondered where the original was.

    JC

    ReplyDelete
  8. John,
    a simple solution to the bi-directional wheels would be to have the "mirror mechanisms" fixed to the axle by a ratchet hub, each one ratcheting in opposite directions.
    When the wheel turns one way, the mirror side would freewheel, and vice-versa.

    ReplyDelete
  9. Good idea Stevo, and the opposing mechanism would not have such a braking effect on the working one. In my Savonius test the opposing windmill slowed the working one by half.

    JC

    ReplyDelete
  10. A ratchet attachment would be in line with Besslers statement about the wheel being able to be repaired while running. Because you could enter the non working (not rotating) side and fix the fault, while the other side (and axle) is still running. This would be in line with the decoded solution I have documented and still are working on. (IMO it can not be running backwards with the documented characteristics) At the moment I am out for another month with health issues on doctors orders. But I will be back. While being sick I was almost tempted to pre-release an amusing teaser from my work, but I will wait to see how fast I recover. Small amusing pieces of discovery are still added weekly. Good luck with your quest guys.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Oystein,
      that never occurred to me at the time, thanks for pointing it out, also it gives a clue to the basic construction of a bi-directional wheel, because any spokes etc. on the outside of the mechanism would be an obstruction, so they must be sandwiched between the two mirror mechanisms.
      What I thought was a problem with my idea, may in fact answer another clue.
      If the outer wheel casing is fixed directly to the axle, pushing on it would cause the wrong ratchet to engage, but if the casing is free on the axle and the mechanism pushes on the rim, it will work fine.
      This gives credence to the statement that the weights could be heard striking the side.
      Since the axle and the casing turn at the same speed it wouldn't be noticed.

      Delete
  11. John,

    Putting two mechanisms back-to-back and expecting them to continue to turn after a push does not make sense. Without any other mechanism in place, like what Stevo mentioned about adding a ratchet etc., the whole thing should and does come to a stop after a push, similar to a flywheel.

    I did both tests. A real build and then a simulation that supported a true wind force with occlusions. Please read this thread for more details of the one-way wheel we had back in 2005.

    http://www.besslerwheel.com/forum/viewtopic.php?p=8617#8617

    Ed (aka ssmith)

    ReplyDelete
  12. Hi Ed,

    I can only tell you what I found. The two Savonius windmills were stationary when connected together until I gave them a gentle push in one direction, they then continued to turn in that direction but much slower, about half the speed when not connected to each other. You say it makes no sense but of course it does' the windmill turning backwards and against the wind, presents a curved convex surface to the wind whereas the one which is turning with the wind is presenting a concave surface so once they are moving in a particular direction then the advantage is with the one which is turning with the wind.

    JC

    ReplyDelete

Johann Bessler’s Legacies.

Bessler’s wheel is one obvious legacy and although there are some who believe that it’s potential power output is too limited to be of pract...