The Mechanical Engine

[Inquorate]

Did you know?

Ever swung a bucket of water on a rope? Y'know; swing it all the way over your head and the water stays in the bucket and doesn't fall out...

How about swinging the bucket of water, pulling back on the length of rope when the bucket passes your feet, so that when the rope is at 45 degrees to the ground, the bucket hangs upside down in the air for a moment..

Then you have to press one palm on the midway point of the rope and pull the end back and up; otherwise the rope goes slack and the water comes out to see what all the fuss is about..

That moment of weightlessness is not what we want. We want the water pressing firmly on the bottom of the bucket, for sure, but we want it pulling us off our feet..

Have you ever swung a bucket of water (or a rock on a rope) over your head, around and around - while standing on the crest of a steep hill - and tried to underarm catapult said rock as far as possible?

the technique is different from when you are standing on flat ground.

When on flat ground, you want a mix of up and out...

But that same angle when catapulting the rock downhill will spend too much time going up, and then fall very steeply without much horizontal travel time.

Throwing a more shallow trajectory will mean the rock's kinetic energy will spend itself in more horizontal movement, and will not be fighting gravity, but instead using it...

If we hold onto the rope instead of letting it go:
while throwing the rock up and away - we will be pulled up off our feet. We don't want this, it is expending energy fighting gravity.
While throwing the rock out and away - we will be pulled down the hill, and jill comes tumbling after.

In short, we're all thinking of maximizing the centrifugal force at the bottom of the pendulum's swing by possibly using a spring to make the pendulum spend more time underneath the pivot point.

Why are we doing that? Try swinging a bag of tennis balls behind you then bring if forward from behind your back, past your feet and bang! Into a brick wall so the bag of balls goes back behind your feet.

It doesn't make sense if what you're trying to do is lose your balance.

Instead, swing the bag of tennis balls from out behind your feet, past your feet, and whoosh! Out away from your chest.

You'll be pulled away from your centre of balance, and then very easily follow the bag forward. Now, if you're on the crest of a hill, the bag will end up back at your feet, and you'll be tumbling after.

The best research for centrifugal force is a bag of weights, a rope, and a hill.

Love and light

[Inquorate]

Latched pendulum design in wm2d sim

I rigged up a rough version of the latched pendulum wheel on the sim software, and had to simplify it so it would run on my old laptop - only 4 pendulums..

the program seems to think the spring return is not necessary, so long as the pendulum is thrown out like in my previous post.

Some things I noticed that are pertinent;

the heavier the pendulum, the less it will return to the latch, eg longer latch.

The latch only needs two hooks, one for the release point and one for the return point

The position of the trigger point for the latches on the eccentric wheel will determine the required length of the latch.

- at 1o'clock trigger, the pendulum will return further back to starting position

- at 3 o'clock trigger, the latch will need to be much longer.

The program gave best results at around 1.30 to 2 o'clock latch release.

Love and light

[marxist]

only one latch per pendulum, not two

Hi Inquorate,
I think it was a great feature of your first sim that you used the eccentric circle to release the pendulum so that you did no need a latch for release.

Maybe you will achieve a simpler build if you stick to the original idea with the eccentric circle i.e the bump at 12 o' clock to time the release.

You would then only need one latching mechanism to catch the pendulum when it is swinging back (instead of two).

[CloudSeeder]

@Michael Nunnerley:

after so much brain drain I am tired again, off for a siesta

be advised Michael that when building new brain cells it takes more than just a siesta to replenish yourself. You need to ramp up the quality of nutrition and extra oxygen. Think of it as lifting weights. Take care.

[Inquorate]

Here's the sim of latched pendulum design

YouTube - latched pendulum design in wm2d sim

[Inquorate]

Original Inquorate design

@ marxist - I'll be experimenting with my original design too, making my wheel so it'll be easy to convert between the two :-)

[Ted Ewert]

I'm thinking that the general configuration for the "orbit" of the weights should look something like this:



This shape also takes into account non pendulum type weight shifting mechanisms.
The key part of this orbit being the slopes. No slope should work against gravity.
This works with a single swing of the pendulum. The pendulum is released and then latched somewhere after 12 and before the weight drops below it's latched position. The pendulum weight is traveling in a net out / downward direction and only goes up when latched. All weights travel up at the same minimal velocity.
I'm trying to figure out a new cam for my centrifugal motor, and I'm thinking this type might work. It's a little counterintuitive at first, but I have to go with what works.

Cheers,

Ted

[Peter Lindemann]

Ted,

I totally agree. Any method that allows the weights to travel along this trajectory should drive the wheel by the action of gravity. This is the exact solution all of my experiments pointed toward. The single "out and back" excursion of the pendulum in the 3 o'clock zone should lead to a working model. In addition to this, there should also be multiple alternate solutions that move the weights by means other than a pendulum swing that also work. As long as gravity can produce a larger mechanical advantage (move on a larger radius) on the down stroke than on the up stroke, it should work.

Thanks for posting that diagram. It really makes the goal clear.

Peter

[sucahyo]

Still catching up reading the thread, maybe this is usefull, book that display some configuration:
Triumphans Perpetuum Mobile Orffyreanum - Johann Bessler
Perpetual Motion - History
Perpetuum Mobile Or A History of the Search for Self-Motive Power [Perpetual Motion]

The second one explain why the design failed. Here some picture from that document:



About peter design, anyone build it in wm2d yet?

[Inquorate]

Lindemann design in wm2d

@ Sucahyo - yep, post 295 this page.

Love and light

[CloudSeeder]

@Inquorate: Very much thanks for extensive work in #295 link => http://www.energeticforum.com/50925-post295.html <> so the pendulum bar being an even-weight rectangle shape is just easier to draw, right? You would have more weight near the latch, stiff but lightweight further up, plus more narrow for less wind resistance?

So what do you think might happen if your latch system was combined with Michael's reverse centrifugal, both systems in one? They could share the same pivot point on the arm, just one on one side and the other on the opposite side. Or, you could double the # of arms and use one yours one his.

A his peanut butter and your chocolate bar deal but, having a combined system might deliver a variable range of speed choices.

[Inquorate]

Reading

Been reading accounts of bessler's wheel on this site:

PERSONALITY OF ORFFYREUS

Appears that the eight weights were about 2 kg, and when they were removed, his 2 meter diameter wheel could be lifted by one person, so not much flywheel effect. Also, the weights hit on the downward falling side.

@ cloudseeder - anything is possible if this machine works :-)

[Peter Lindemann]

Nope!

@ Sucahyo - yep, post 295 this page.

Love and light

Sucahyo and Inquorate,

In my opinion, Inquorate's Post 295 is not a simulation of my design. Although it has many of its features, it does not represent enough of them to be considered a full simulation.

Inquorate, the films of your experiments and this simulation are definitely showing ALL of the forces necessary to produce a working model. One thing I have learned from your work is the power of the "hammer blow" when the pendulum hits the bumper. In your earlier film, even with your light weight pendulums, the hammer blow produced the LARGEST force on the arm!

Since the design requires a smaller, reverse hammer blow on the gravity reset at about 7 o'clock, eliminating the main hammer blow at 3 o'clock produces a huge disadvantage.

You can also see that the multiple position ratchet catch mechanism is necessary to catch the pendulum at the highest possible return position so the machine can adjust to different speeds of operation.

Attached is an up-dated drawing of my idea. This drawing only represents a single mechanism and a 1/8th wheel section.

The main change is that I have moved the spring return much closer in and shortened the swing of the pendulum. Thanks to YOU, Inquorate, we can now identify THREE forces that conspire to drive the wheel.

The first is the HAMMER BLOW against the spring, which reflects a reaction force on a vector ABOVE THE AXIS, and therefore promotes clockwise rotation. The position of the spring return is critical to aiming this reaction torque vector! Your film proved that!

The second is the centrifugal force, which reflects a downward force through its entire swing, (as Ted has correctly stated) both out and back. This force appears on the right side of the axis, and therefore also promotes clockwise rotation.

The third is the center of mass imbalance which is easiest to see at the moment the pendulum is stopped against the spring return. (not shown in drawing) This mass distribution at the extreme end of the "transient excursion" of the pendulum allows GRAVITY to also assist in the promotion of clockwise rotation.

These three forces in the clockwise direction should be enough to overcome the two smaller forces that promote counter-clockwise motion. These two forces are produced by the smaller hammer blow that resets the pendulum in the 7 o'clock position, and the slight disadvantage in mass distribution because the pendulum does not reset all the way by itself.

The wheel NEEDS a fair amount of dead mass as a flywheel action to moderate the motion and store momentum, and the pendulums NEED a certain amount of mass to increase the impact of the hammer blows and the centrifugal force components. 8 pendulums should work better than 4.

When ALL of these features are built into the simulation, it should show a good result.

Peter

[CloudSeeder]

I agree with everything Dr.Lindemann just wrote in Post #303 including where he points out these three Bold-highlighted points =>

These three forces in the clockwise direction should be enough to overcome the two smaller forces that promote counter-clockwise motion. These two forces are produced by the smaller hammer blow that resets the pendulum in the 7 o'clock position, and the slight disadvantage in mass distribution because the pendulum does not reset all the way by itself.

The wheel NEEDS a fair amount of dead mass as a flywheel action to moderate the motion and store momentum, and the pendulums NEED a certain amount of mass to increase the impact of the hammer blows and the centrifugal force components.

Michael Nunnerley's system for increasing centripetal force solves both those remaining problems by #1 adding MASS and #2 giving the pendulum a Push back to a higher notch on the latch (since it has to overcome the spring)... unless you guys just have some objection to adding his system I don't know about.

[Inquorate]

Peter's update

Thanks for sharing your update Dr Lindemann :-) much appreciated. I hadn't put the springs in the last sim because of reeealy slow computer.

Love and light