PopularFX
Home Help Search Login Register
Welcome,Guest. Please login or register.
2017-03-24, 20:04:27
News: Forum TIP:
The SHOUT BOX deletes messages after 3 hours. It is NOT meant to have lengthy conversations in. Use the Chat feature instead.

Pages: 1 [2]
Author Topic: Bhaskara's Wheel  (Read 514 times)
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 2326
Well
I suspect , since this one [mercury] is my particular madness.
that the volume in relation to Position of wheel will be slapping about ...thick and thin as the wheel turns .

not to imply that Mercury will "magically" Grow or shrink


all attempts will be posted
win or loose.

   

Hero Member
*****

Posts: 512
Take a look at this and let it sink in for a while. (Sorry about the pixellation, I just used the simplest BWheel drawing I could find and enlarged it.)  Every Bhaskara wheel design, including Abeling, has these characteristics.

First, do a calculation of the actual turning moments given by the weights and their positions wrt the vertical centerline of the wheel. The horizontal distance (green) from centerline to the center of gravity of the water or mercury in each chamber, times the weight, gives you the turning moment of each chamber. Add them all up for the left side and the right side, and you will find that the turning moments are equal, hence there is no reason for the wheel to turn.

Next, look at the weights relative to the horizontal centerline (blue). There is always more weight on the _bottom_ half than on the top half. That is, the center of gravity of the wheel is always _below_ the center of the wheel. Again, there is no reason for the wheel to turn.


---------------------------
"The easiest person to fool is yourself" -- Richard Feynman
   

Hero Member
*****

Posts: 512
Next, consider what happens when the wheel is turning. Centrifugal force effects will cause the liquid to shift outwards in each chamber. This tends to equalize the distances of the centers of mass of each chamber. Go fast enough and all the liquid in all the chambers will be flung to the outermost ends of the chambers and it is simple to see by inspection that this results in a perfectly balanced wheel. Again, there is no reason for it to turn.

Not only that, but Stevin's Principle is violated, since after one cycle (or even a partial cycle bringing the next bottle to the top)  there is no difference in the state of the parts of the wheel.

Please review Simanek's pages in the Museum of Unworkable Devices which deal with gravity wheels of various types.


---------------------------
"The easiest person to fool is yourself" -- Richard Feynman
   
Group: Elite
Hero Member
******

Posts: 2830
It's turtles all the way down
About 20 years ago, I built one of those using Mercury in test tubes, and also did a Mathcad analysis.

It did not work and the Mathcad analysis showed no net unbalance.

I also tried it with steel balls in the tubes, still no net unbalance.

If one were ever to get a Bessler wheel to work, you have to come up with something truly ingenious as the path is well beaten on those elementary devices.

Ingenious and ingeniously simple.


---------------------------
Just because it has a patent application or is patented does not always mean it really works.
   
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 2326
Gents
Thanks for the input , especially on the mercury !!  O0

below are a few images I took to explain my thoughts on Abeling ,..while understanding he has additional design claims [some type of "launch" and capture mechanism.

I thought the basic weight path holds interest [emphasis My interest
so I am attempting a mockup .
obviously I am missing something profoundly obvious [being quite serious
it would seem a tremendous "overbalance" is staring me in the face

I use examples of ten pound weights [for dramatic effect]
so I have 50lbs going up and 90lbs going down [yes I see all 9 are not Strait down...

seems like it has potential ,but first I'm doing another experiment , a satellite lollypop experiment [will post a pic when I finish.. another hour or so

meantime pics of Abeling layout below
image 0229 is thye wheel laid over the drive orientation
image 0231 is wheel removed to show weight travel on wheel

all comments appreciated


   

Hero Member
*****

Posts: 512
Well, look at your picture. How many weights are below the axle, and how many are above it?  So, with more weight always below the axle, how is it supposed to turn?

https://www.lhup.edu/~dsimanek/museum/themes/centgrav.htm

https://www.lhup.edu/~dsimanek/museum/overbal.htm



https://www.lhup.edu/~dsimanek/museum/unwork.htm#stevinprob


---------------------------
"The easiest person to fool is yourself" -- Richard Feynman
   
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 2326
well how come I can't count the weights at 1-2-3 oclock ? if I have a ten pound weight at one o'clock it is definitely turning the wheel.[even 12:01 is turning ] and every weight right up to 6 will provide some drive towards lifting  the 5 weights on the opposite side..

However,  I know I must be missing something here ....
« Last Edit: 2017-03-09, 02:55:18 by Chet K »
   

Hero Member
*****

Posts: 512
I know, it _looks_ like it should work, even though the details of the mechanism to transfer weights from the wheel to the central lift, and lift the weights, are kind of murky and non-specified.

Well, did you read through the links I posted above, especially the Stevin's Principle? You do see how Stevin's ramp drawing I posted is equivalent to your Abeling wheel chain of weights, I hope.
Here's a partial quote:

Quote
The principle of virtual work can be extended to torques, and in modern form is:

    If the virtual work done by all external forces acting on a particle, a rigid body, or a system of connected rigid bodies with ideal (frictionless) connections and supports, is zero for all virtual displacements of the system, then the system is in equilibrium.

Let's not dismiss that lower loop so casually, for it is doing something very important here. During any virtual (imagined) motion, it is supplying new mass to the portion of chain lying on one side of the ramp exactly as fast as the portion of chain on the other side of the ramp loses mass. It is supplying momentum to one segment of chain at the same rate as momentum is lost from the other segment. This, however, does nothing to improve the PM machine's chances of working. It is a mechanism that keeps the ramp portion of the system unchanged over time, even during virtual motion. We will see this process at work (virtual work, of course) in many other perpetual machine proposals.

We may restate Stevin's principle in a form more directly applicable to devices claimed to be perpetual motion machines:

    If an assumed (virtual) motion of the machine results in a final state of the system (the machine and its interactive environment) indistinguishable from its initial state, and zero net work is done on the system during this motion (no work in; no work out) then that assumed motion will not occur.

Stevin's principle is a particularly appropriate first step in analyzing cyclic and wheel-type machines where a finite rotation of the wheel changes nothing but its position. It is particularly useful when analyzing those machines for which the inventor's initial casual analysis (usually containing a flaw of physics or reasoning) leads us to think "That machine will surely turn." It immediately discredits the Honnecort wheel and also Stevin's original problem of the ball-chain on ramps. Most of the textbook examples of Stevin's principle show only cases where the initial and final states of the system are very obviously different (things are in different places). But the real power of the principle is that it can also be applied to cases where the final state "looks just like" the initial state.

For machines that have a "cyclic" behavior (most do) the analysis must be carried out over a complete cycle, for energy may be stored during part of a cycle and released during another part.

Refer back to the double ramp picture. If the chain is imagined to undergo a virtual motion carrying each ball to the position occupied by the next one, then the initial and final states are identical. Stevin's principle then says that the chain will not of itself undergo this motion.

But by all means, keep experimenting. I am interested in seeing how you are going to move the weights from the wheel edge to the straight-line lift part.


---------------------------
"The easiest person to fool is yourself" -- Richard Feynman
   

Hero Member
*****

Posts: 1329
Please explain how "the volume of the Mercury changes constantly".

Dear TK.

Thank you for pointing out I had missed a word....

My statement should have read.  " The distribution of the volume of Mercury changes constantly "

Cheers Graham.


---------------------------
Nanny state ? Left at the gate !! :)
   
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 2326
Yes I see the similarities ,I feel the Abeling has more defined potential ,?



last night a very recent William Skinner build was brought to my attention ,I have been speaking with the replicator
he is open sourcing .

to be clear, this is Not a person I have ever seen work on a Skinner or the as yet none running John Drive.

Much more to come..

@ Grum
I see your up ,posted same time

will ring


   

Hero Member
*****

Posts: 1329
Hi Chet.

With regards to this mornings telephone conversation....   ;)

Start simple !!   O0

Cheers Graham.
« Last Edit: 2017-03-09, 17:07:14 by Grumage »


---------------------------
Nanny state ? Left at the gate !! :)
   
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 2326
Grum
should be an easy one to do ,where do the Pegs go ?
   

Hero Member
*****

Posts: 1329
Square or round ?  :)

Anywhere..... the idea is to keep the pendulum between 11 & 1 o'clock.

Just a simple " observable " tool... As we already know the ( fixed ) weight can, and does carry between 11 & 1.

Cheers Graham. 


---------------------------
Nanny state ? Left at the gate !! :)
   

Hero Member
*****

Posts: 1329
Dear All.

From my post here.

http://www.overunityresearch.com/index.php?topic=3426.msg60140#msg60140

I hurriedly rebuilt the test rig yesterday.....

https://youtu.be/X4ppw8N0gfE

Not quite the desired outcome as my granddaughter couldn't get the rhythm right but it showed the effect.

Cheers Graham.


---------------------------
Nanny state ? Left at the gate !! :)
   
Pages: 1 [2]
« previous next »


 

Home Help Search Login Register
Theme © PopularFX | Based on PFX Ideas! | Scripts from iScript4u 2017-03-24, 20:04:27