It is a curious fact that many people seem bent on designing and building their Bessler-wheels whilst labouring under the misapprehension that picking weights and measures relating to any one or more of the wheels, from a variety of sources without applying simple logic to the process, is sure to result in success.
Some insist that there were eight weights or eight mechanisms. This figure arose from the report by Fischer von Erlac to J.T. Desaguliers, Sir isaac Newton's curator of experiments. Doubtless the writer recorded accurately what he thought he heard and perhaps he was correct, but these figures applied to the mighty Kassel wheel, one that was able to turn in either direction. The problem as I see it is that this was a far more complicated wheel to build, as Bessler himself admitted.
Why would anyone hoping to repeat Bessler's success begin with the most complex wheel ever built? The logical starting point would be to try to copy his first wheel, or even the second one. Each of these started spontaneously and only turned one way.
A lot of people have suggested that perhaps Bessler preloaded the wheel to make it start spontaneously as soon as the brake was released. This is an example of picking and choosing what to believe and what to discard when considering Bessler's claims or the reports about his wheel and its performance. If you believe Bessler's wheels were genuine, and you accept many of the things he said or were reported about the wheel, why would you then reject other parts of the record, simply because you don't believe it or you think it was a trick designed to impress a gullible audience.
Take his first wheel for example. 4.6 feet in diameter; thickness about 4 inches, speed unloaded 50 RPM. Always began to rotate as soon as its brake was released.
Second wheel; 9.3 feet in diameter. thickness 6 inches; speed umloaded more than 50 RPM. This one was mounted on a six inch axle.
Utterly different sizes yet output speed about the same. The same speed might indicate a more powerful lift in the second one, but we don't know. What we do know is that the third and fourth wheels were bi-directional and needed a gentle push to get them rotating, from which start they steadily accelerated.
It seems obvious to me at least that there must have been major differences between the two versions. Not in the basic concept that enabled them to take advantage of gravity, but in their individual configurations, in which case it simply does not make sense to use the information about second type of wheel to make the earlier version.
I have suggested that the first thing that might have occurred to Bessler to prove that his wheels weren't clockwork driven, was to make them able to turn in either direction. To me the logical first step would be to see what would happen if he mounted two wheels on the same axle, each designed to turn the opposite way. I'm sure this is what he did. I carried out a similar experiement myself but with two Savonius windmills mounted on the same vertical axle and the result was exactly similar to Bessler's experience. The Savonius windmills spun im different directions when detached from each other, beginning to spin as soon as the wind from the fan hit them. But when they were linked, they remained stationary; they needed a slight push and then they began to spin in which ever direction the push came from, but they were unable to achieve much more than half the speed they spun when separated.
So why try to build a dual direction wheel within one wheel when two opposing ones were used by Bessler. Obviously this is just my opinion but I believe that this is correct. The Kassel wheel rotated at 26 RPM, less than half the speed of the first two wheels, just as my Savonius windmills did. But there is a fly in the ointment; the Merseberg wheel, his third one, was also dual directional but it achieved a speed of 40 RPM. This demonstrates again that you cannot make any assumptions about the size and number of weights, even though we have Christian Wolff's estimate of four pounds for one weight, we have no idea how many there were. We simply do know what differences formed part of each wheel.
So keep it simple, try to build a one way wheel capable of turning up to 50 RPM, which starts to turn spontaneously as soon as it's brake is released. Forget the number of weights which Fischer von Erlach is supposed to have heard, that was a different wheel with potentially a reversing set of weights making additional sounds. Recently I have seen ideas suggested which involved using eight weights to represent the eight planets supposed to have been known about in Bessler's time; it doesn't matter how many planets there are or were; it has nothing to do with Bessler's wheel.
We know that cross-bars, weights and pulleys were used in the wheels, because Bessler said so. The presence of pulleys suggests rope or some other flexible material was present too. He implied that there were springs although he didn't say so definitely, which to me says that some kind of spring was present but there are several different ways of using springs as well as many different kinds.
Finally, my own research suggests that Karl, the Landgrave who examined the interior of the Kassel wheel, was overly optimistic when he said that the interior was so simple a carpenter's boy could copy it if allowed a short time to study it.
JC
Finally, my own research suggests that Karl, the Landgrave who examined the interior of the Kassel wheel, was overly optimistic when he said that the interior was so simple a carpenter's boy could copy it if allowed a short time to study it.
JC
