Re-Inventing Bessler’s wheel Part Three

 

I mentioned previously that we should concentrate on the WA (work-around) proposal and deal with the result of that before we try to design a method of incorporating it in a working wheel.

Returning to my previous post, the point I’ve tried to explain, so far unsuccessfully is this.   In the image below, repeated from my previous blog, the two blue levers show the start and end positions as if they were scissor mechanisms with a weight on the end if each.  

Sorry I omitted the weights, but compare the blue levers with the red ones and it seems obvious to me that the blue ones with a weight  on the end, finish in a more favourable position.  With each weight further back from their starting position causing the wheel to turn forward a lot more than with the red ones.

In the image below, also copied from my previous post, the pink scissor mechanisms expand to put the weight near the outer edge of the wheel and the following radius with its own scissor mechanism ready to fall.  The falling mechanism will naturally expand under the influence of gravity.  The cost is continuous and  the same as if it fell straight down.  But in this case the weight moves sideways and downwards.  So at no cost in gravitational energy, the design has increased the amount of torque available for lifting the fallen weight.

I wrote “no cost”, but there is small and acceptable cost; the falling weight falls more slowly, as Fischer von Erlach stated that 'the sound of about eight weights may be heard landing gently on the side toward which the wheel turned'. So the scissor mechanism does slow the fall down a little, but achieves the desired end result, more torque.

So when people ask, “where does the extra energy to lift the fallen weight come from?” The answer is there, thanks to the scissor mechanism falling further back against the wheel’s forward rotation and of course the fallen weight’s  roll back from its landing position, towards its next fall..

Remember each mechanism is linked to another one, so as one weight falls, another weight is lifted, moving the centre of gravity backwards, over and over again.

This repeated falling and lifting results in an incredibly smooth rotation, as noted several times in the witnesses recordings of the tests. Because a weight falls, generating rotation, at the same time lifting another weight which removes any braking or balancing effect, the wheel is continuously out of balance and hunting for equilibrium.  

The initiator of rotation seems to be the falling of the first weight, that is arguably not necessarily true.  If the weight has not fallen yet, then the previous one must have fallen, therefore the wheel is still out off balance, hence the need to apply a brake to stop its continuous turning.

In my next post I’m going to show you how I found the design other mechanisms superimposed Bessler’s images.

JC

JC