This is correct. The green masses act like a flywheel. You are swapping potential energy of the red mass for kinetic energy, swapping that for kinetic energy of the green masses (flywheel), swapping that for potential energy of the pentagon mass, then bleeding that off as potential energy of the red mass. The red mass won't get past the 10 o'clock position, no matter how many times you try to swap PE for KE and back again, or try to call it angular momentum.triplock wrote:The pendulum at 2am, we know, can only have enough energy, upon release, to reach just before 10.
Priority Claim
Moderator: scott
-
Wubbly
- Aficionado
- Posts: 727
- Joined: Sat Jun 06, 2009 2:15 am
- Location: A small corner of the Milky Way Galaxy
- Contact:
re: Priority Claim
re: Priority Claim
For the benefit of Taiwan lurkers, non-members and members who have forgotten to sign in, all those in other words who do not have access to my blog, I am going to post the relevant earlier versions of the Gravity Pulse Motor (GPM).
Below is the first version which as you will see is based on the Keenie Wheel.
In retrospect we can think of this as the Gravity Pulse Motor - Mark 1
**********************************************************************
Point of Principle design based the action of the Keenie.
Consider a Keenie with twelve weights distributed at 30° intervals around its circumference. This is the same distribution as the hours on a clock face and so it will be convenient to refer to the weights by the clock names of their initial start position. The weight initially at 3 o'clock will be the #3 weight, that at 4 o'clock the #4 weight, etc.
Initially all the radius arms are locked together and the weights are all gravitationally balanced by their opposite numbers. The #2 weight is balanced by the #8 weight, the #5 weight by the #11 weight, and so on.
Next the #3 weight, the active weight, is unlocked (see the image below) .....
...... and allowed to swing down clockwise under the action of gravity. The gravitational energy goes mainly into vertical acceleration (2nd derivative energy) but a small amount is transduced into rotation (3rd derivative energy).
The instant the #3 weight is released its opposite number, the #9 weight (the reactive weight) is no longer balanced. It begins to swing down counter-clockwise under the action of gravity.
However, because the #9 weight is locked to 5 pairs of balanced weights which it has to drag along in its fall the rate of vertical acceleration will be much less for the #9 weight than the rate of vertical acceleration for the #3 weight. Only a very small amount of the gravitational energy given to the #9 weight goes into vertical acceleration. Most of the energy is transduced into rotation.
The Yo-Yo is a familiar example of a 2nd order to 3rd order energy transducer.
********
Early on in tackling the problem of the Keenie wheel I thought the exchange of energy between the single weight and the compound weight would be sufficient to achieve PM. I soon realized that this was a closed system exchange of energy and some way had to be devised to open the system.
Simply allowing the #3 weight to impact on the #4 and recoil will not inject net energy into the wheel since the clockwise 3rd derivative energy gain of the eleven coupled weights is balanced by the counter clockwise 2nd derivative energy loss of the #3 weight.
Though the action of gravity is very different on the #9 and #3 weights, in total energy terms it is the same.
One needs to open the system and take preventative action to constrain gravity to act asymmetrically. This can be done by by introducing a one way clutch - or preferably something easier to understand, a column and flap valve as shown in the diagram below.
The action of gravity is being shunted off down the column and the only energy entering the system is the 2nd derivative energy of the falling weight. As the weight impacts the number four weight (or an associated spring) the 2nd derivative energy is transduced into 3rd derivative rotational energy which drives the wheel clockwise.
The impact/impulse has two other effects.
First, it gives recoil energy to the #3 weight (I call this the Maxim effect since it gives a wheel reset analogous the reset of a Maxim machine gun bolt).
Second, it closes the wheel system by taking the #9 weight out of contact with the support column. The energy put in by the falling #3 weight is now locked into the system and will manifest itself in system motion.
But what kind of motion?
If the recoil is 100% then the #3 weight will return to its original position relative to the other weights, the wheel will be perfectly balanced and will rotate indefinitely with the energy given it by the fall of #3.
If the recoil is less than 100% then the #3 will fall short of it original position, the wheel will be unbalanced and comprise a compound pendulum with a very long period of swing. Removal of the flap valve column will allow this pendulum to swing back and forth indefinitely.
If we introduce friction then the swing will die down until the compound pendulum eventually keels.
To get rotation which will allow the cycle to repeat one has to devise a method of feedback to make up for the inevitable recoil energy losses.
It took me a long time to see how to do this. In the event the answer it was very simple - as these things usually are.
Just as one takes preventative action to stop gravity from inputting counter clockwise energy into the 11 coupled weights so also one has to take preventative action by catching the #3 weight at the top of its recoil and holding it there until the rotating wheel brings up #3 weight's original position.
This is illustrated by the three diagrams below.
............
............
............
The above procedure gives a balanced wheel with 3rd derivative rotational energy nearly equal to the original 2nd derivative energy put in by the #3 weight.
We started with a wheel at rest and by opening and closing the system we now have the same wheel in motion. We have trapped gravitational energy within the system.
Next, consider how to repeat the cycle.
The rotation of the wheel eventually brings the #3 weight all the way round to the 3 o'clock position. It needs to be stationery at this position if the cycle is to be repeated exactly as before. To achieve this, energy has to be bled off the so that the wheel slows down and stops at the point the #3 weight reaches 3 o'clock.
This can be done by using the same device Bessler uses, a string wound around the axle lifting a weight. The amount of weight is adjusted till the wheel come to a stop at 3 o'clock.
The the fall of the #3 weight is then triggered and the cycle repeated.
Lifting the weight in the way described makes it easy to see that the system is delivering energy in a stream of individual pulses.
*******
The Gravity Pulse Motor can be made experimentally simpler by recognising that the eleven weights are a complicated compound pendulum which can be replaced by a see-saw pendulum with some fraction acting in the manner of the #3 weight.
I hope to suggest a design for this in a later post.
Below is the first version which as you will see is based on the Keenie Wheel.
In retrospect we can think of this as the Gravity Pulse Motor - Mark 1
**********************************************************************
Point of Principle design based the action of the Keenie.
Consider a Keenie with twelve weights distributed at 30° intervals around its circumference. This is the same distribution as the hours on a clock face and so it will be convenient to refer to the weights by the clock names of their initial start position. The weight initially at 3 o'clock will be the #3 weight, that at 4 o'clock the #4 weight, etc.
Initially all the radius arms are locked together and the weights are all gravitationally balanced by their opposite numbers. The #2 weight is balanced by the #8 weight, the #5 weight by the #11 weight, and so on.
Next the #3 weight, the active weight, is unlocked (see the image below) .....
...... and allowed to swing down clockwise under the action of gravity. The gravitational energy goes mainly into vertical acceleration (2nd derivative energy) but a small amount is transduced into rotation (3rd derivative energy).
The instant the #3 weight is released its opposite number, the #9 weight (the reactive weight) is no longer balanced. It begins to swing down counter-clockwise under the action of gravity.
However, because the #9 weight is locked to 5 pairs of balanced weights which it has to drag along in its fall the rate of vertical acceleration will be much less for the #9 weight than the rate of vertical acceleration for the #3 weight. Only a very small amount of the gravitational energy given to the #9 weight goes into vertical acceleration. Most of the energy is transduced into rotation.
The Yo-Yo is a familiar example of a 2nd order to 3rd order energy transducer.
********
Early on in tackling the problem of the Keenie wheel I thought the exchange of energy between the single weight and the compound weight would be sufficient to achieve PM. I soon realized that this was a closed system exchange of energy and some way had to be devised to open the system.
Simply allowing the #3 weight to impact on the #4 and recoil will not inject net energy into the wheel since the clockwise 3rd derivative energy gain of the eleven coupled weights is balanced by the counter clockwise 2nd derivative energy loss of the #3 weight.
Though the action of gravity is very different on the #9 and #3 weights, in total energy terms it is the same.
One needs to open the system and take preventative action to constrain gravity to act asymmetrically. This can be done by by introducing a one way clutch - or preferably something easier to understand, a column and flap valve as shown in the diagram below.
The action of gravity is being shunted off down the column and the only energy entering the system is the 2nd derivative energy of the falling weight. As the weight impacts the number four weight (or an associated spring) the 2nd derivative energy is transduced into 3rd derivative rotational energy which drives the wheel clockwise.
The impact/impulse has two other effects.
First, it gives recoil energy to the #3 weight (I call this the Maxim effect since it gives a wheel reset analogous the reset of a Maxim machine gun bolt).
Second, it closes the wheel system by taking the #9 weight out of contact with the support column. The energy put in by the falling #3 weight is now locked into the system and will manifest itself in system motion.
But what kind of motion?
If the recoil is 100% then the #3 weight will return to its original position relative to the other weights, the wheel will be perfectly balanced and will rotate indefinitely with the energy given it by the fall of #3.
If the recoil is less than 100% then the #3 will fall short of it original position, the wheel will be unbalanced and comprise a compound pendulum with a very long period of swing. Removal of the flap valve column will allow this pendulum to swing back and forth indefinitely.
If we introduce friction then the swing will die down until the compound pendulum eventually keels.
To get rotation which will allow the cycle to repeat one has to devise a method of feedback to make up for the inevitable recoil energy losses.
It took me a long time to see how to do this. In the event the answer it was very simple - as these things usually are.
Just as one takes preventative action to stop gravity from inputting counter clockwise energy into the 11 coupled weights so also one has to take preventative action by catching the #3 weight at the top of its recoil and holding it there until the rotating wheel brings up #3 weight's original position.
This is illustrated by the three diagrams below.
............
............
............
The above procedure gives a balanced wheel with 3rd derivative rotational energy nearly equal to the original 2nd derivative energy put in by the #3 weight.
We started with a wheel at rest and by opening and closing the system we now have the same wheel in motion. We have trapped gravitational energy within the system.
Next, consider how to repeat the cycle.
The rotation of the wheel eventually brings the #3 weight all the way round to the 3 o'clock position. It needs to be stationery at this position if the cycle is to be repeated exactly as before. To achieve this, energy has to be bled off the so that the wheel slows down and stops at the point the #3 weight reaches 3 o'clock.
This can be done by using the same device Bessler uses, a string wound around the axle lifting a weight. The amount of weight is adjusted till the wheel come to a stop at 3 o'clock.
The the fall of the #3 weight is then triggered and the cycle repeated.
Lifting the weight in the way described makes it easy to see that the system is delivering energy in a stream of individual pulses.
*******
The Gravity Pulse Motor can be made experimentally simpler by recognising that the eleven weights are a complicated compound pendulum which can be replaced by a see-saw pendulum with some fraction acting in the manner of the #3 weight.
I hope to suggest a design for this in a later post.
Who is she that cometh forth as the morning rising, fair as the moon, bright as the sun, terribilis ut castrorum acies ordinata?
-
triplock
re: Priority Claim
Grimer
Although my position in regards to your Gravity Impulse Motor stills stands, whatever variant you show, I have to say that your post above is an example to others in terms of layout, composition and associated diagrams .
For that clarity alone I would give you a green dot if I hadn't done so already previously.
Chris.
PS I still caution that your proposal is misguided, no matter the elaboration , as there simply is no driver.
Although my position in regards to your Gravity Impulse Motor stills stands, whatever variant you show, I have to say that your post above is an example to others in terms of layout, composition and associated diagrams .
For that clarity alone I would give you a green dot if I hadn't done so already previously.
Chris.
PS I still caution that your proposal is misguided, no matter the elaboration , as there simply is no driver.
Last edited by triplock on Mon Jul 28, 2014 10:16 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Grimer, might I suggest that you place these images in your BesslerWheel album? Else at some future date, if something should happen and you fail to maintain the web-site where they currently reside, then they will vanish from this forum thread.
By placing them in your album, they will remain as long as this web-site remains.
By placing them in your album, they will remain as long as this web-site remains.
-
preoccupied
- Devotee
- Posts: 1923
- Joined: Fri Apr 29, 2011 3:28 am
- Location: Michigan
re: Priority Claim
What is the forum album?
"It's not the size of the dog in the fight, it's the size of the fight in the dog." - Mark Twain
Whenever a member posts a picture then it gets added to the member's album. If you click the Albums button at the top of every forum page, then you can view all pictures posted by a members. But any images that are linked from some other website (such as Grimer's above pictures) location will not be in the album.
If you place a picture in your album, then it's possible to link to that picture same as any picture anywhere else on the internet.
If you place a picture in your album, then it's possible to link to that picture same as any picture anywhere else on the internet.
Quite right Jim. I'm afraid I've been a bit distracted and fallen into bad habits.jim_mich wrote:Grimer, might I suggest that you place these images in your BesslerWheel album? Else at some future date, if something should happen and you fail to maintain the web-site where they currently reside, then they will vanish from this forum thread.
By placing them in your album, they will remain as long as this web-site remains.
Thanks for the admonition.
I'll attach the four from the first page now and the others later today.
- Attachments
-
-
-
-
Who is she that cometh forth as the morning rising, fair as the moon, bright as the sun, terribilis ut castrorum acies ordinata?
re: Priority Claim
Uploading the page 3 images to the Forum Album.
- Attachments
-
-
-
-
-
Who is she that cometh forth as the morning rising, fair as the moon, bright as the sun, terribilis ut castrorum acies ordinata?
I'm looking at this, and I'm thinking, "No way can it be that simple. Something in the logic must be wrong."
And I'm thinking that its the impulse and recoil details. The red weight drops distance 'X', thus gaining KE and momentum. It impacts the yellow weights. So how fast and high does the red weight rebound? And how fast and how high does the green weight bounce upward. If there were no yellow weights then the red and green would bounce equally. But there needs to be at least one yellow weight for the red weight to impact against. And there needs to be a counter-balancing yellow weight. So minimum of four weights are needed. The rest of the yellow weights simply add inertial resistance to the acceleration of the wheel and add inertial momentum once rotating.
So the red weight will obtain some specific velocity as it free-falls. Its rebound distance will be determined by the resisting inertia of the wheel. Assuming all weights have a same mass, then the mass of the wheel (1 green & 2 yellow plus other wheel-mass) might be say 4 times the mass of the falling red weight. (This eliminates 8 yellow weights and assumes wheel mass is equal one yellow weight, just to keep the math simple.)
So at this point we need to determine how fast the wheel bounces away and how fast the red weight bounces away. I have some elastic rebound formulas stashed away in a file somewhere on my computer, which should give the answers. I just need to find them.
My gut feeling is that the red weight will rebound to a certain height and the wheel will rotate the green weight to a certain height at a fraction of the speed and height of the red weight, and the wheel will not rotate far enough before it starts reversing. The swing of the red weight and the rotation of the green weight on the wheel will NOT be far enough to cause the red weight to regain its original position on the wheel, let alone result in extra wheel rotation.
Just my thoughts. Doing the math should show what to expect. Actual building would prove or disprove the concept.
And I'm thinking that its the impulse and recoil details. The red weight drops distance 'X', thus gaining KE and momentum. It impacts the yellow weights. So how fast and high does the red weight rebound? And how fast and how high does the green weight bounce upward. If there were no yellow weights then the red and green would bounce equally. But there needs to be at least one yellow weight for the red weight to impact against. And there needs to be a counter-balancing yellow weight. So minimum of four weights are needed. The rest of the yellow weights simply add inertial resistance to the acceleration of the wheel and add inertial momentum once rotating.
So the red weight will obtain some specific velocity as it free-falls. Its rebound distance will be determined by the resisting inertia of the wheel. Assuming all weights have a same mass, then the mass of the wheel (1 green & 2 yellow plus other wheel-mass) might be say 4 times the mass of the falling red weight. (This eliminates 8 yellow weights and assumes wheel mass is equal one yellow weight, just to keep the math simple.)
So at this point we need to determine how fast the wheel bounces away and how fast the red weight bounces away. I have some elastic rebound formulas stashed away in a file somewhere on my computer, which should give the answers. I just need to find them.
My gut feeling is that the red weight will rebound to a certain height and the wheel will rotate the green weight to a certain height at a fraction of the speed and height of the red weight, and the wheel will not rotate far enough before it starts reversing. The swing of the red weight and the rotation of the green weight on the wheel will NOT be far enough to cause the red weight to regain its original position on the wheel, let alone result in extra wheel rotation.
Just my thoughts. Doing the math should show what to expect. Actual building would prove or disprove the concept.
Jim,
If you are going to put that much effort in thinking about it you would do best to concentrate on the simpler point of principle, Mark 2 which I will be posting tomorrow sometime.
Maths will prove the concept. Indeed, if one can rely Tarsier's WM2D second sim it already has.
Building it will prove the concept providing one overcomes the practical problems the building involves. Unsuccessful building will not disprove the concept since there are may ways that a build will not confirm to the required conditions.
If you are going to put that much effort in thinking about it you would do best to concentrate on the simpler point of principle, Mark 2 which I will be posting tomorrow sometime.
Maths will prove the concept. Indeed, if one can rely Tarsier's WM2D second sim it already has.
Building it will prove the concept providing one overcomes the practical problems the building involves. Unsuccessful building will not disprove the concept since there are may ways that a build will not confirm to the required conditions.
re: Priority Claim
And so a legend is born. ;-)Grimer wrote:Unsuccessful building will not disprove the concept since there are may ways that a build will not confirm to the required conditions.
Re: re: Priority Claim
Sorry to be so long in getting round to your post but I had to sort out some other stuff first.triplock wrote:Grimer
Although my position in regards to your Gravity Impulse Motor stills stands, whatever variant you show, I have to say that your post above is an example to others in terms of layout, composition and associated diagrams .
For that clarity alone I would give you a green dot if I hadn't done so already previously.
Chris.
PS I still caution that your proposal is misguided, no matter the elaboration , as there simply is no driver.
Thanks for the greenie. I think I must have given you mine when you made that gallant attempt at a wheel with those Algodoo diagrams. I admired your ability to get those nice drawings out of that program. I'm afraid the instructions just confuse me so I stick to the simpler Visio 3.
There is a driver but I'll leave that explanation until I've posted the GPM Mark 2 diagrams - the Point of Principle motor, the subject of Tarsier's two sims.
Who is she that cometh forth as the morning rising, fair as the moon, bright as the sun, terribilis ut castrorum acies ordinata?
Re: re: Priority Claim
You can't disprove logic with experiment.Ed wrote:And so a legend is born. ;-)Grimer wrote:Unsuccessful building will not disprove the concept since there are may ways that a build will not confirm to the required conditions.
You can't disprove Pythagoras by measuring right angled triangles.
Who is she that cometh forth as the morning rising, fair as the moon, bright as the sun, terribilis ut castrorum acies ordinata?
re: Priority Claim
That leaves you between Scylla and Charybdis.Hales wrote:If one's standards of certainty leads them to say "there is never 'proof' of non-existence", then they must also say that "there is never 'proof' of existence either".
Which is why most people think that Bessler was a fraud.
They argue that hundreds of attempts to achieve what Bessler claimed have failed so he must have been cheating.
People on this forum apart from those who have come to scoff or spread FUD believe that just because a hundred attempts have been unsuccessful doesn't mean that the hundred and first attempt will be unsuccessful.
They argue that hundreds of attempts to achieve what Bessler claimed have failed so he must have been cheating.
People on this forum apart from those who have come to scoff or spread FUD believe that just because a hundred attempts have been unsuccessful doesn't mean that the hundred and first attempt will be unsuccessful.