Perpetual Motion Simplified - Asymmetrical Mechanical Machines

[Mad Scientist]

Hi Mad Scientist, mathematically can you show me one point of the rotation where the centre of mass is not on the right hand side of the spindle (fulcrum).

In the design that I’ve shown the center rotating arm could just as easily be a round disc, to it could be attached as may weighted arms as desired. However the end result would still be the same, the system is still in balance.

It is a wonderful illusion. Looking at the drawing clearly the weights are off set from the center rotating point. If the connecting drive chains were disconnected and the weights locked into any of their horizontal positions there is no question that you could measure torque on the center output shaft.

But something very magical happens with the drive chains connected and automatically forces the weights to remain in a horizontal position as the center arm is rotated.

Watching a real working model it is immediately apparent the two weights are 180 degrees opposed to each other and are rotating around an imaginary center point that is offset form the real center.

As I say I suspect that this is what you will find.



As far as measuring torque you can substitute any units you’re comfortable with.
The torque can be measured simply by coupling a torque wrench to the output and measuring it.

The next step up would be to measure the torque when the shaft is rotating.

To do this you will want the torque arm to be coupled to the output shaft with some form of suitable friction material. You will also need some means of clamping so that the amount of friction can be adjusted.

With the shaft running you can adjust the load on the device by increasing or decreasing the amount of friction applied. By watching the scale you can dial in as much torque as you want while at the same time if you measure the speed of the output. Then with the correct formula and the magic of arithmetic you can calculate horse power.

[shylo]

Gravity

Hi Folks, I like this thread ,just wish I could comprehend, gravity only exerts the amount of force it needs to.
When the weight is falling, gravity is weak, When the weight is rising ....
it's strong.
If you use magnetism and gravity against one another, it'll hurt you,..
Use them together , and they'll help.
artv

[soundiceuk]

In the design that I’ve shown the center rotating arm could just as easily be a round disc, to it could be attached as may weighted arms as desired. However the end result would still be the same, the system is still in balance.

It is a wonderful illusion. Looking at the drawing clearly the weights are off set from the center rotating point. If the connecting drive chains were disconnected and the weights locked into any of their horizontal positions there is no question that you could measure torque on the center output shaft.

But something very magical happens with the drive chains connected and automatically forces the weights to remain in a horizontal position as the center arm is rotated.

Watching a real working model it is immediately apparent the two weights are 180 degrees opposed to each other and are rotating around an imaginary center point that is offset form the real center.

As I say I suspect that this is what you will find.

I think the only way for me is to build something and feel it in my hands.

If it throws me on the floor or nearly breaks my arms, i'll know whether to spend any more.

I'm a proactive learner. I can do all the calculations I like, but the experiment is where I learn what really happens.

I sort of get what you are saying, but do not know how you know it if you haven't built it and felt it?


I'm also thinking that the prototype I have should be able to do something interesting, like make a pedal car that makes it extremely easy to go up hills carrying weight.

A push bike doesn't amplify torque does it? It loses it in the drivetrain.

Could be amazing for transporting water around less developed countries with pedal cars.

I wouldn't mind bolting a steering rack and some wheels to it to have a go.

If it has that much torque from a static point, what would it be like with a bicycle gearset and pedal crank!

Up hill carrying weight should be easy if it is a true mechanical amplifier.

Just a few thoughts.

As far as measuring torque you can substitute any units you’re comfortable with.
The torque can be measured simply by coupling a torque wrench to the output and measuring it.

The next step up would be to measure the torque when the shaft is rotating.

To do this you will want the torque arm to be coupled to the output shaft with some form of suitable friction material. You will also need some means of clamping so that the amount of friction can be adjusted.

With the shaft running you can adjust the load on the device by increasing or decreasing the amount of friction applied. By watching the scale you can dial in as much torque as you want while at the same time if you measure the speed of the output. Then with the correct formula and the magic of arithmetic you can calculate horse power.

I think an engine dyno is needed when / if it gets that far

Many thanks,

Paul

[soundiceuk]

Hi Folks, I like this thread ,just wish I could comprehend, gravity only exerts the amount of force it needs to.
When the weight is falling, gravity is weak, When the weight is rising ....
it's strong.
If you use magnetism and gravity against one another, it'll hurt you,..
Use them together , and they'll help.
artv

Hi Shylo, please can you give a real life example of what you mean by hurt you and using them together and helping.

Thanks,

Paul

[soundiceuk]

There is a thread titled Buzzsaw April 2009 and August 2010, along with other gravity machines. There are many articles about it on the internet. A few have tried to replicate it, unsuccessfully. From my perspective, I believe there are some parts missing, maybe intentionally. Once they were finished with it, they probably cannibalized some parts for other projects. I have done this many times myself. Mostly what I build is toy sized machines, mostly to prove the principles of their operation, then when I am satisfied with the conclusion, I sometimes cannibalize some of the parts for another build. I have built many gravity and magnetic motors over the years. I only have two complete, not cannibalized. These two I use for demonstrations to show other people who are like minded. One is the rolling ball wheel(gravity), the other is a TOMY(magnetic linear motor). My problem is the amount of time in which I have to work on these projects. I have many CAD designs but not the time to build them. Good Luck. stealth

Hi, the rolling ball is really old. For some reason I had the buzz saw down as the rolling ball when I looked at the diagram.

It was the rolling ball that I meant would be really noisy and would need urethane.

I think that would work, but need a lot of mass to give it inertia to keep the center of mass moved from the center of main shaft enough to overcome friction and produce torque.

Is the rolling ball Da Vinci? That was the drawing I meant looked really old.

Best regards,

Paul

[Mad Scientist]

Bessler Rad 2 YouTube - YouTube

Ah I love it that is a working model of my drawing. He is using three weights instead of two and his model is a bit "prettier" then mine but basically it is the same device. Also note it is not free running.

All the theory in the world doesn’t replace practical hands on experience.

Peddle cars have been around for sometime and as I understand if all passengers are peddling they can obtain some decent speed. However in new designs the seating position should be pattern after the recumbent bicycles.

[soundiceuk]

Also note it is not free running.

Check the dudes feet out under the table it is bolted too.

He needs to tip the table onto it's side.

The small weights used may not be enough to produce enough torque to overcome the friction of the chains though.

Thanks,

Paul

[Stealth]

No, actually the rolling ball motor was designed and developed by Leupold, of Leupold optics fame. Seems Mr. Leupold was involved in more than just designing and building scopes and binoculars. It was acquired by a college professor who kept it in his own personally collection, locked away in a cabinet in his office. One night while cleaning his office, a janitor saw it on his desk, where he had forgot to lock it back into the vault. I suppose he had been studying it and in a hurry had forgot to lock it up. Anyway, the janitor was intrigued with it and made a drawing of it. Shortly thereafter, he made a few copies for his friends, and as they say, the rest is history. I think it was purposely supposed to be withheld for the public. I haven't checked to see if it was patented or not, but I doubt it was. I cant remember the Mr. Leupold's first name but I would thinki that the family probably still has the original records of it. Good Luck. rockhound

[soundiceuk]

Hi, I've been pondering advice that has been given to me by a number of people concerning my latest design and I'm spending some time thinking about the two torques Jim Murray talks about in the Tesla's Hidden Discoveries video.

Tesla's Hidden Discoveries - Aug 22, 2013 Jim Murray Interviewed by Peter Lindemann - YouTube

I've seen the torque flip in the simulator phun or algadoo as it is now called.

This must mean the 2nd torque is flipping.

Is this 2nd torque to do with "every action has a reaction" ?

Thus, for a perpetual motion machine to work it needs more of the positive than the negative. And it needs to be a certain frequency of events to pull this achievement off.

I'm actually thinking of beefing up the prototype I have already.

I feel doing this will provide more answers about the direction to move in.

Bessler's overbalanced wheel used shifting weights. We all know pendulums have some special characteristics.

I read that a witness of Bessler's wheel saw 8 cylinder weights, swinging too.

I found this very interesting.

Johann Bessler - Orffyreus - Clues to the Wheel's Design

Clues to Bessler wheel design:


Machine was set in motion by weights.
- Bessler

Weights acted in pairs
- Bessler

Weights gained force from their own swinging.
- Bessler

Weights came to be placed together, arranged one against another.
- Bessler

Weights applied force at right angles to the axis.
- Bessler

Springs were employed, but not as detractors suggested.
- Bessler

The machine's power was directly proportional to its diameter.
- Bessler

Weights may have been pierced in the middle and attached by connecting springs.
- Acta Eridutorum, An Account of the Perpetuum Mobile of J. E. E. Orffyreus, 1715



Weights were heard hitting the side of the wheel going down.
- eyewitness accounts

Machine made scratching noises, as if parts or poles moved over one another.
- eyewitness accounts

Weights may have been attached to movable or elastic arms on the periphery of the wheel.
- Johann Christian Wolff, eyewitness account

Weights may have landed on slightly warped boards.
- Johann Christian Wolff, eyewitness account

Weights were cylindrical.
- Johann Christian Wolff, eyewitness account

About 8 weights fell during each revolution of the wheel, which took about 3 seconds. (wheel diameter ~ 12 feet)
- Joseph Fischer, eyewitness account

So I'll upgrade what I have and go from there I think.

Mass is so important to obtain the inertia properties.

Coincidence that Tesla was into inertial and mass properties of electricity.

There is some sort of tie here. I just cannot put my finger on it.

[Stealth]

I have read Bessler's clues many times before. I have tried to understand how he fashioned all these parts together to make it a self running overbalanced wheel. I have tried CAD designs and drawings made from the clues. But I suspect some of the clues may be wrong altogether to intentionally throw us off the correct arrangement. Most of the methods he claims are tried and true operating systems or parts thereof. If all these clues are correct, then he somehow tied several different systems into one to make it self running, in which case it would be a complicated arrangement of falling, swinging and moving weights and levers. If I remember correctly, it took him a couple months to build one, so every part must have been tediously hand made. Someone will stumble upon the principle of how his machine works some day. Until then, all we can do is guess at what he did. Good Luck. stealth
P.S. Your design looks good.

[boguslaw]

I have read Bessler's clues many times before. I have tried to understand how he fashioned all these parts together to make it a self running overbalanced wheel. I have tried CAD designs and drawings made from the clues. But I suspect some of the clues may be wrong altogether to intentionally throw us off the correct arrangement. Most of the methods he claims are tried and true operating systems or parts thereof. If all these clues are correct, then he somehow tied several different systems into one to make it self running, in which case it would be a complicated arrangement of falling, swinging and moving weights and levers. If I remember correctly, it took him a couple months to build one, so every part must have been tediously hand made. Someone will stumble upon the principle of how his machine works some day. Until then, all we can do is guess at what he did. Good Luck. stealth
P.S. Your design looks good.

add permanent magnets.....

[Stealth]

I do have a design that uses permanent magnets, but it is not anything like Bessler's, or any one else's for that matter. It is a rotating verticle wheel attached to a horizontal wheel. Each wheel performs a different function to enhance the other. Working in unison, theoretically they should self run, but I haven't had the time to build a prototype yet. Timing would not be as critical as most other magnetic machines because of the wheels working together. Friction should be of little concern as would heat. One day I plan to build a prototype, but not in the near future. Good Luck. stealth

[soundiceuk]

Someone will stumble upon the principle of how his machine works some day. Until then, all we can do is guess at what he did.

Overbalanced wheel with shifting weights and pendulums. Sounds familiar.

One way bearings with zero backlash were not around back then though.

I think this removes a lot of the complications of Bessler's build.

P.S. Your design looks good.

Thanks Stealth, now that I understand why the box cam version will not work, it brings me back to playing with the variables of the previous design.

I should have some spare money in March to explore heavier wheels, steel frame and higher frequency of weights.

I just want to bash the variables out using two weights first.

It's easy to see if it performs better from the number of rotations.

The bench mark is 15 3/4 turns.

I already have the new main bearings.

My current thoughts are that currently it is a two stage oscillator.

Mikhail Dmitriyev's design is a 32 stage oscillator.

I just feel that mass is key to getting the inertia to overrule the negative torques.

add permanent magnets.....

I do have a design that uses permanent magnets, but it is not anything like Bessler's, or any one else's for that matter. It is a rotating verticle wheel attached to a horizontal wheel. Each wheel performs a different function to enhance the other. Working in unison, theoretically they should self run, but I haven't had the time to build a prototype yet. Timing would not be as critical as most other magnetic machines because of the wheels working together. Friction should be of little concern as would heat. One day I plan to build a prototype, but not in the near future. Good Luck. stealth

I do have another idea for a magnet engine using diametrically magnetized cylinder magnets.

Here is a video of my very crude first prototype featuring diametrically magnetized neo magnets inside the copper pipes:

https://www.dropbox.com/s/h815s1dk8m...20Part%201.MOV

My idea is two use two wheels connected by chain and sprockets 1:1.

I believe there needs to be a gear in the middle so the main wheels turn opposite ways.

Both wheels will be located on shafts fitted with one way bearings and also 4 hole flanged bearings.

One of the wheels will be much heavier, lets say 30kg and the other driven wheel lets say 10kg.

My plan is to use 4, 2 or 1 magnets per wheel. That part is symmetrical. The wheels being different weights is the asymmetrical part.

From this crude experiment I visualize a compression and power stroke for every time the magnets almost meet.

As you will see in the crude video I made, timing is critical. There is no way I could have gone much faster.

If it did work, it would need to be driving a load or the device would cascade.

It is an open source idea, so if anyone thinks it has any merit please contribute your ideas, knowledge and skills. If you think it won't work, please volunteer why not.

If it does work, I'm certain it would be able to reach a speed whereby the flywheels explode due to centrifugal force. Therefore a alternator / generator plus a load is a prerequisite.

Thanks for listening.

Best regards,

Paul

[Turion]

Link failure

Paul,
The link doesn't work

[soundiceuk]

Hi David, cheers for the heads up.

Sorry here is a working link:

https://www.dropbox.com/s/h815s1dk8m...20Part%201.MOV

Folks will have to use their imagination until I draw something up.

All I know is neodymium is said to lose 1% of its power every 100 years unless the maximum or minimum temperatures are exceeded.

I think it was 50 degree celcius for these N42 magnets with 10kg pull.

If it is 10kg pull then two in repulsion should be somewhere around 10 - 20kg depending on the gap.

As most of you know the magnetic force decreases exponentially with distance.

Here is a basic rig to show the behavior of cylinder diametrically magnetized magnets.

Please observe the distance between the magnets and imagine the force increasing exponentially as the gap is decreased.

Best regards,

Paul