The Mechanical Engine

[Michael John Nunnerley]

what I have also found

@all
Over the last week or so I have been quiet on this thread, d'nt worry I have been busy and I came to more or less the same conclusions on the point of working on only the first 90 degree quadrent, all the work has to be done here from 12 to 3. I am at the moment trying to adapt this type of principle to what I was doing before and it is looking very, very promising. Will let alll know when I am a little more advanced

Mike

[CloudSeeder]

couldn't get the timing of the counterbalance to work

@john_g:

... couldn't get the timing of the counterbalance to work

It'll come to ya. Don't forget to breathe.

@Michael: 12 to 3? I wish. Bessler's wheel was turning very fast so he must have been concerned with 9 to 12 too. His action was starting early. Although I will say this, that if it was starting that early it was likely starting in smaller increments. So it should actually be easier to figure out than 12 to 3 condensed. Just stare at it and ask yourself what does it need to be doing HERE in order for this to happen OVER THERE. Thinking more in terms of half circles than quarters might help us all.

[Stealth]

Need more ideas? I have been following this thread with interest. I have built several gravity wheels myself, over the years. None worked. I think what you all are doing is great. The only way to know what works is to eliminate what doesn't. www.geocities.com/RainForest/5832/Index.html I hope this will inspire you to keep trying. Stealth

[Mark]

Hey Stealth the link doesn't work.

[CloudSeeder]

Corrected Link => http://www.geocities.com/rainforest/5832/index.html

Thanks Stealth. The link you gave, turned out it is Caps-specific. I played around with it til I got it to open up => Open Mind Homepage

Thanks for the help and encouragement.

#11 will work if it's reduced to having 3 arms => Perpetuum mobile device no.11 because with 3 arms you would always have one ball falling, one ball ahead of it already fallen, and only one ball being lifted at a time. The device gains a time advantage by the ball rolling backwards allowing the other two balls to do their Work first... so it stays ahead of itself always.

IMHO #11 should definitely work. Eight arms exceeded the design's capability. I believe I would change the shape of the arms though... and maybe not have them come all the way in to the hub => the balls merely fall from the hub at zero speed whereas they are speed-launched from a higher position (greater radius from the hub). Plus if the weight of the 3 balls was increased, yep, I believe this one would really put the ball over the goal line.

Someone else will have to work it up. I'm working on 3 designs of my own now. Free ball.

[CloudSeeder]

#1 on the page looks right good also => perpetum mobile I wouldn't be able to build a full-sized one here. The new owners decided no waterbeds except on the first floor apartments. A toy-size one running on the table would be cool.

[Michael John Nunnerley]

#1 on the page looks right good also => perpetum mobile I wouldn't be able to build a full-sized one here. The new owners decided no waterbeds except on the first floor apartments. A toy-size one running on the table would be cool.

Won't work, the volume of air is the same on both sides, the only difference is the compression on one side and not on the other, but the volume of air is the same compressed or not in ratio to the weight of the iron plungers. A sub is another thing,. it uses compressed air to remove the water in the ballast tanks.

Mike

[Peter Lindemann]

#11 will work if it's reduced to having 3 arms => Perpetuum mobile device no.11 because with 3 arms you would always have one ball falling, one ball ahead of it already fallen, and only one ball being lifted at a time. The device gains a time advantage by the ball rolling backwards allowing the other two balls to do their Work first... so it stays ahead of itself always.

IMHO #11 should definitely work. Eight arms exceeded the design's capability. I believe I would change the shape of the arms though... and maybe not have them come all the way in to the hub => the balls merely fall from the hub at zero speed whereas they are speed-launched from a higher position (greater radius from the hub). Plus if the weight of the 3 balls was increased, yep, I believe this one would really put the ball over the goal line.

Someone else will have to work it up. I'm working on 3 designs of my own now. Free ball.

Cloudseeder,

I have my doubts about design #11 here. I have built models like this and they did not work. I will say, that you are an endless fountain of original thought on these designs.

Thanks for keeping this thread alive!

Peter

[Mark]

Hi Guys

I have an idea that I would like some comments on. I dont know how to draw it and post it so I'll try to explain it. Take a circle and draw a verticle and horizontal line thru it and then split those pieces in half. Basically making 8 pieces of a pie. Draw a capital G in the piece on the left side just below the horizontal line. Make it as big as will fit inside the pie piece and against the outer edge of the circle. All 8 pieces will have this G shape in it but will need to be alighned the same way as the first one. Inside of each G will be a ball weight that will fall when it gets to the 3:00 position. Then it just rolls around the inside of the G as the wheel turns till its loaded again and ready to drop at 3:00. Both sides of the wheel would be covered toward the outside rim to keep the balls from falling out.

Well what do you think?

[CloudSeeder]

Thanks Peter. Sometimes I tend to post too fast but thank goodness Michael's there to correct my idea. He doesn't let a mouse get by. I'll see about making an animation for #11. This is a good thread Peter. It's a good day you started it.

@Mark! Visions of Paradise and conch shells, that sounds like the Golden Ratio. From what you wrote there would be too much overall weight. I think, unless you draw it and it sells.

[CloudSeeder]

Slovenia Wheel with Added Return Ramp

This wasn't what I was thinking of but it'll do.
The ball(s) needed a way to get off the left wheel rim.
Keep the rim weight low I think it might work
plus if the weight of the ball is increased.



Improved version from this website => Perpetuum mobile device no.11

I think perhaps it should be remembered too that the ball begins pushing
the wheel as it passes 12 o'clock even when the weight is still close to the hub...

The sloping of the arms is providing more of Pendulum-type impact.
You could straighten the arms out and add a smack plate, giving
the wheel more of a direct impact =>



I didn't put the springs on the back side of the smack plates.
So you have increasing force down on the right side from 12:30
to 4 pm then a gradual decrease as it follows through to about 5 pm.

Is everybody confused up pretty good for the day?
.

[CloudSeeder]

Ball Pattern follows the ancient Greek's "Golden Ratio" rather closely

It's hard not to notice that the path of the balls in Post 526 is tracing out the shape of the ancient Greek's "Golden Ratio" fairly closely. I hope close enough...

[CloudSeeder]

Contraction-Expansion Gravity Wheel Design?

When you look at the balls hunched together at the Top then spread out on the bottom side
it kind of looks like a Contraction-Expansion engine, a kind of controlled explosion repeating itself.

[CloudSeeder]

Will it work? A good case can be made short of building it:

We've been concentrating so much on what happens in the upper right quadrant or the upper half... but there is a different angle to this one. Divide it down the middle. All the action is to the right of center. It's doing a Potential-to-Kinetic on the right side that starts already in motion at the very top and throws a force past 6 o'clock.

It's compacting 2 Potentials to every Kinetic, constantly being in a reloading condition.

The left side is passive-moving-toward-the-hub, just as we had all agreed many times needed to happen. The force tossed past 6 o'clock begins to wane BUT THAT'S OKAY because the balls are losing any negative energy to the forward movement of the wheel by rolling back & then inward toward the hub the higher they get.

I don't know how to write it in Calculus. I bet it makes a dandy equation though. I think you could write one equation for the left side = the equation for the right side, and it shouldn't compute. The right side should always be larger positive than the left side is negative, an equation we want to always be wrong.
....

[Peter Lindemann]

Center of Mass Analysis

Hi Guys,

There is a simple and relatively accurate way to determine if this type of design works. In my original article, I mentioned this technique, but did not describe it. So, here it is.

In any of these drawings, where you have eight weights showing in the various sections, the simplest way to determine the Center of Mass, and therefore the predominant center of gravity action, is to do the following to the drawing.

Draw a dot in the center of each weight. If we assume they all have the same weight and mass, then the analysis of their positions is all that is required to understand gravity's action on the wheel.

Next, draw a line between the dots of OPPOSITE weights. This produces four lines across the drawing. Next, find the center position between the weights for each line, and draw a new dot there. These dots represent the "center of mass" between the two weights connected by that line. This produces four new dots on the drawing.

Next, progress the drawing, by rotating the frame by 15 degrees, and re-setting the position of the weights where they would be for that position, and then repeat the "Center of Mass" measurement. This will generate four more dots. Repeat one more time with the drawing progressed by another 15 degrees and you get four more dots.

When these 12 "Center of Mass" dots are superimposed on each other, what emerges is an OVAL SHAPED area that is centered directly UNDER the AXIS. If this is the result, then it is safe to assume that the action of the weights is BALANCED and that there is no opportunity for gravity to drive the wheel.

I found this method always gave the right answer, and it saved me from building a whole lot of designs that looked good at first, but in the end, would not work.

This method is what finally convinced me that "weight shifting" designs, as a class, can't be where the solution is.

Peter