Friday, 19 May 2017

Vertical Axis Gravity-Enabled Wheel?

Johann Bessler's perpetual motion machine took the form of a wheel mounted on a horizontal axle, but it has thought it might be possible to achieve a gravity-enabled wheel mounted on a vertical axle. I'm thinking of windmills on vertical axles (like the one Bessler was building and from which he fell to his death), Savonius windmills, and water wheels where the head of water is low, etc.  

Often convertion from one form of energy will work for another type.  I have occasionally played with some designs but nothing has really hit the mark.  I suppose one could attach several Bessler horizontal-axle wheels to the rim of a vertical axle wheel but seems a little convoluted!

Here are some pics of standard and not so standard windmills in the UK.  This one below, is one type of the traditional design in the UK


This one (below) is near me and dates back to 1632 and is unique but still working (after major renovations!)


This one (below) is used as a water turbine
 This is the Savonius windmill plan and -
 below an actuall working one



These types of vertical axle waterhweels (see plan below) are extensivly used in India where the head of water is very low.
The oldest vertical axle winmills in the world and still working in Iran.

And finally a reconstruction of Hoopers vertical axis windmill 1891 -1828.  See his detailed drawings at  http://milldrawings.com/html/hoopers.html

Perhaps these pics might generate some thoughts on the possibility of designing a vertical axis gravity enabled wheel?  Interesting that Johann Bessler was building a vertical axis windmill when he fell to his death from it.  I imagine he had considered the possibility of a verical axis gravity wheel but had not had any success.  Against the idea is the fact that it would take up more space I suppose but it might be worth examining the possibility as such technology could be adapted for uses unthought of so far.

JC


24 comments:

  1. Come on John your losing focus now! it's gravity and gravity only, remember!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. No I'm not Trevor, just trying to keep my blog going. You should try writing something new every week since 2009.

      JC

      Delete
  2. The mass displacement driving a windmill is a horizontal flow of air, external the the machine itself.

    But in a gravity wheel (regardless of whether gravity was essential or incidental to Bessler's wheels' operation), the force vector's vertical, and furthermore the masses being displaced by the force need to remain internal to the system.

    So if gravity is indeed essential to their operation, a vertical axis Bessler wheel would need to be composed of horizontal axis wheels arranged as radial spokes, driving a central worm gear or similar gearing system to translate the vertical and horizontal axes - a bit like the configuration shown in MT 136.

    But there are yet further factors to take into consideration here - for instance the apparent requirement for the axle to turn as one with the wheel. Maintaining this 'peritrochium' form would present an additional complication in light of the horizontally-to-vertically translated rotating axes.. and then finally we have the sheer practical considerations of managing and servicing the mechanism - if it was even possible to construct, it'd be far more awkward to access the mechanism and change out parts etc. - which would presumably need to be done from above or below, in the plane of the wheel. Bessler took some pride in the accessibility of his mechanism, and in simplifying and reducing the operating concept to something so "beautifully arranged" it could be serviced while still running. As such, a vertical axis Bessler wheel would seem to be more of a contrivance than the kind of distilled operating principle embodied in a vertical axis windmill.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. For my part, my research of late has been focused on the balance of counterforces from applied torque (and so incurring equal opposite counter-torque) interacting with inertially-induced torque (from radial translations under CF / CP force, without counter-torques), from which i've concluded no asymmetry is possible. Therefore this result, in view of the hypothesis that an effective violation of Newton's 3rd law is the only means by which mechanical OU is mathematically viable, leads me to the proposition that the role of gravity in his wheels must've been concerned with harnessing this imbalance of counterforces.

      I've done some preliminary investigation of this hypothesis previously, with tentatively encouraging results, wherein i simply applied the "what goes up must come down" maxim to reaction mass - IE. gravity can reliably reverse the sign of reaction mass flung upwards, resulting in it sharing the same vector as the primary mass propelled off of it. A simple embodiment of this principle can be arranged with a wheel and pendulum having equal angular inertia about a shared axis - a torque applied between them will spin the wheel in one direction, while rotating the pendulum in the opposite direction, up to some apogee, whereupon in halts, reverses direction and falls back down, arriving at BDC with the same momentum, on the same vector, and in the same location as the wheel.. in apparent defiance of Newton's 3rd law. However this is only a transient violation for now, and as noted previously, the energy and momentum gains made possible by breaking N3 symmetry only materialise over the course of successive cycles, with rising system velocity, which this simple configuration cannot yet accomplish.

      Another consideration that might be significant here is that the energy and momentum gains evolving from successive reactionless torques only exist in relation to a static reference frame - the form of the gains is the divergence of the static vs accelerating reference frames, and so this is also a strong candidate for the potential role of gravity in Bessler's wheels - the fact that the gravity vector remains bound to Earth, and not rotating with the wheel, would be a necessary condition and causative principle for both generating the momentum asymmetry, and converting its returns into harnessed energy and momentum gains.

      So, while see no absolute fundamental reason precluding a vertical axis wheel, it would surely be a less than optimal design - limiting the amount of GPE available (or else greatly increasing the wheel's axial width, into more of a 'square' profile), while increasing the complexity of satisfying the requirement for "everything rotating together", as well as maintaining and servicing the mechanism.



      The key points in all this really just boil down to those made in the first paragraph - the wind vector's horizontal, and the mass displacement external to the system. Gravity is obviously not a moving body of mass, nor a viscous fluid, and wind is more than just a force vector, also comprising the mass propelled by it, which is external to the windmill. Gravity is just a force vector, and any mass propelled downwards by it subsequently needs re-lifting, an input workload equal to its output, hence our status quo in trying to generate an asymmetry of work from it..

      Delete
    2. I think taking account of interaction with Earth is essential. This can certainly give large increases in momentum, taken from Earth (but not yet of energy, for me so far).

      For straight-line elastic collision between two masses both energy and momentum must be conserved. So for example for m1 = 10kg at 1m/s colliding with m2 = 1kg at -20m/s we get final velocities of -2.8182 and 18.182m/s respectively. Initial momentums are 10 - 20 = -10kg.m/s and final momentums have the same total, -28.182 + 18.182 = -10kg.m/s.

      However the absolute value of momentum is greater after the collision than before, i.e. from 10 + 20 = 30kg.m/s to 28.182 + 18.182 = 46.364kg.m/s. But the kinetic energies are the same before and after, at 205 joules.

      It's very easy to change the direction of velocity and hence momentum to get these absolute values, just with an elastic collision against Earth.

      I found it useful to make a spreadsheet to quickly calculate elastic collision results (from equations which can be found e.g. at http://www.real-world-physics-problems.com/elastic-collision.html )

      Delete
    3. I enjoy your posts Vibe, but sometimes I disagree with you. I see that you have repeated some of my own comments in your own unique way, which is fine, but I dont rule out the design, repeated by you, as " a vertical axis Bessler wheel would need to be composed of horizontal axis wheels arranged as radial spokes, driving a central worm gear or similar gearing system to translate the vertical and horizontal axes", because I think an alternative, less cumbesome way may be found.

      Again I see no problem such as is identified by you, " Maintaining this 'peritrochium' form would present an additional complication in light of the horizontally-to-vertically translated rotating axes." In my opinion this is another aspect which can worked around, and seems to me to be a minor problem.

      And as you say servicing may be more difficult than that identified by Bessler, but in my opinion you seem to be looking for difficulties which can easily be overcome.

      JC

      Delete
  3. Here's a daft idea I had a while back.
    Imagine a large horizontal wheel, just like a pump action spinning top, and a large heavy ball that can spin around the rim of the top, as a roulette wheel does.
    Due to centrifugal force the ball is thrown onto a stationary spiral ramp, directed back to the top's handle, the ball drops from the end of the ramp, hits the handle, pushing it down, then falls back onto the rim, starting the cycle again.
    Like I said daft idea.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. P.S
      of course the top will have to be pumped up to speed first.

      Delete
  4. Hello again John. I'm now back from Germany after many family visits and some more own research. I was in the area around Nurnberg. At this time I'm researching just as much general practice of the 15-16-1700s, like font types, the use of Chronograms and especially Albrech Durer. As I have mentioned elsewhere, Bessler reveals and uses Albrecht Durers (Nurnberg) code, and reveals the secret Rosicrucian tradition (one and the same). The reason I think this is so important is Firstly that Albrecht Durers and later the Rosicrucians code is extremely exciting and important for our understanding of our intelectual and unwritten history (mostly math/science/art geniuses versus religion and the catholic church). Secondly and simply because it will make us able to separate what code was secret intellectual (masonic-like) tradition and what was spesific for Bessler and thus likely his machine. At the moment I am investing and saving money for future public approach. I hope to spend most of my later life doing this full time and also get to the bottom of Besslers machine-challenge. Please feel free to contact me for a chat. (e-mail etc.) I would also consider a friendly visit some day if you like. Best OR.

    ReplyDelete
  5. If we knew Bessler mounted his wheel on a horizontal axis to hide the fact that his wheel was driven by forces other than gravity, such as ersatz gravity, OR he wass able to adapt his prime mover mechanism to power a vertical axis wheel utilizing ersatz gravity, then this would go along way in helping us identify the operation of the prime mover. With John's release date slipping and 0ystein now looking to his later to try and reproduce the wheel, Trevor might beat them to the punch ... any year now...

    ReplyDelete
  6. Or.......

    Perpetualman might beat them to the punch.

    Just saying😃

    ReplyDelete
  7. Hello John- Your latest blog post caused me to remember an interesting story I was told awhile back. A man I met described a vertical axis gravity machine he helped build with his boss at the shop where he worked at the time. The way he described it, there were fly-weights mounted on the ends of arms which revolved around a very coarse threaded vertical shaft. After rotation was initiated the assembly began spiraling down the shaft towards the floor while gaining speed and inertia. The weighted arms were designed to fold inwards as the assembly spun towards the floor. The effect was similar to how figure skaters pull their arms inwards when performing a spin in order to increase their speed. Upon reaching near the end of the spiral threads near the floor the weight assembly compressed a very heavy spring. A mechanism released the assembly from the threads of the vertical shaft and sent the assembly flying upwards to start the process over again. Unfortunately during its first test, one of the weights came loose with incredible force and destroyed some items in the shop. Fortunately no one was injured however the owner was too shaken to repair the device and attempt the experiment again. Incidentally, thank you for all the resources you've made available to those of us whom such yourself believe Bessler's wheel was real.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Thanks for your interesting comment - and for your kind thoughts.

      JC

      Delete
  8. Bessler was an interesting craftsman who was involved in many interesting projects. Can you help us out with this list John? These may shed some light on the secret

    ReplyDelete
  9. Surely someone has the answer. I wonder who that could be.....😉

    ReplyDelete
  10. Sorry about the deletion John. I realized my question didn't make sense so heard the updated version:

    Can a spring or a combination of a lever and a spring be devised in such a way that it will store just enough energy to push the weight over the zenith part of the wheel, circle to the bottom, reset and start the cycle all over again?

    ReplyDelete
  11. That word is supposed to be "hears".

    ReplyDelete
  12. Good morning, John,
    We have just opened a site / forum, in French on the research gravity / magnetism ... we are at the beginning lol. "www.experimente.fr"
    I have allowed myself to quote you on the introductory page, if you wish that I delete this text, free to you.
    Very cordially.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Delighted you found my words worthy to quote. I'm very happy to know another forum is born that seeks solutions to this ancient enigma.

      JC

      Delete
  13. I've just finished my model of the latest idea I had, needless to say it didn't work!
    It is quite simple, a balanced arm, fixed weight on one end, moving weight on the other.
    The moving weight is fixed to the end of an upside down letter L crossbar, and the vertical rod passes through the balanced arm, a magnet is fitted to the bottom of the vertical.
    The idea was to use another magnet to turn the upside down L 90 deg. as it came close, everything worked well, the L turned, but as the arm began to rise, the magnets came to a point where instead of their initial repulsion, they began to attract, so the arm stayed put.
    Bother!

    ReplyDelete
  14. use multiple 1/2 inch by 1 inch magnets to separate the poles

    ReplyDelete

Why did Bessler Use Embedded Codes?

It seems clear enough that Bessler had always intended to insert coded information embedded within his publications, because by applying a s...