Hello everybody!
I just found my wheel.
Raj
Mayday! Mayday!!!
Moderator: scott
re: Mayday! Mayday!!!
Keep learning till the end.
re: Mayday! Mayday!!!
I didn't know you lost it. Where was it?
"I have done so much, for so long, with so little... I can do anything with nothing." -USNMCB-4
re: Mayday! Mayday!!!
Hi Tom!
It's my new wheel. I just found it buried in the midst of my mind.
Raj
It's my new wheel. I just found it buried in the midst of my mind.
Raj
Keep learning till the end.
re: Mayday! Mayday!!!
I, sincerely, hope that you will all agree that it is going to be a 'runner' when I disclose its complete design in here soon.
Raj
Raj
Keep learning till the end.
re: Mayday! Mayday!!!
Hello friends!
Here is my drawing of my runner/contender.
1 is my drum wheel of six units radius. (expected to turn counter-clockwise)
2 are pairs of diametrically opposite, specially designed oval channels/compartments between hub and rim of drum wheel, made up of three curves: one curve of six units radius, one curve of four units radius and one curve of threeunits radius at 45 degrees intervals, in separate vertical planes.
3 are tethered cylindical weights swinging/rolling inside separate channel/compartment.
4 are cords of four and half units length connecting the weights to the central hub.
The best part of this design is that there is only one wheel on its axle involved with weights acting directly on this wheel.
Torque calculation then involves only the position of the weights in the drum wheel.
The weights will continuously move and change their position inside the drum wheel as it rotates.
There will be continuous net torque on the desending counter-clockwise side.
I am inviting you to analyse this design with an open mind, and draw the design with the given units of length above, for yourself before disproving me.
Thank you.
Here is my drawing of my runner/contender.
1 is my drum wheel of six units radius. (expected to turn counter-clockwise)
2 are pairs of diametrically opposite, specially designed oval channels/compartments between hub and rim of drum wheel, made up of three curves: one curve of six units radius, one curve of four units radius and one curve of threeunits radius at 45 degrees intervals, in separate vertical planes.
3 are tethered cylindical weights swinging/rolling inside separate channel/compartment.
4 are cords of four and half units length connecting the weights to the central hub.
The best part of this design is that there is only one wheel on its axle involved with weights acting directly on this wheel.
Torque calculation then involves only the position of the weights in the drum wheel.
The weights will continuously move and change their position inside the drum wheel as it rotates.
There will be continuous net torque on the desending counter-clockwise side.
I am inviting you to analyse this design with an open mind, and draw the design with the given units of length above, for yourself before disproving me.
Thank you.
- Attachments
-
Keep learning till the end.
-
triplock
re: Mayday! Mayday!!!
Raj
Your latest design is just a re-hash of numerous ball race concept published since the printing press was invented.
Although you have added a tether to each roller to alternately suspend weights off the axle, to nulify their effect, it makes no odds.
Your wheel , as shown , will rotate 10 degrees clockwise and then stop.
If I may speak frankly, and I will, the quality of your designs has diminished . I think this , in part, is a desperation to find a solution at all cost . You have, no doubt, become addicted from the sense of euphoria you get when you think you have found the answer.
Everything you have shown to date are classic height for width fails. This should tell you that you are on the wrong path. No matter the novelty, or ingenuity of design in this area, the results will always be the same .
Take a break from wheel design, look out of the window and enjoy the view . Then choose another design path as the one you're on is leading no where
Chris x
Your latest design is just a re-hash of numerous ball race concept published since the printing press was invented.
Although you have added a tether to each roller to alternately suspend weights off the axle, to nulify their effect, it makes no odds.
Your wheel , as shown , will rotate 10 degrees clockwise and then stop.
If I may speak frankly, and I will, the quality of your designs has diminished . I think this , in part, is a desperation to find a solution at all cost . You have, no doubt, become addicted from the sense of euphoria you get when you think you have found the answer.
Everything you have shown to date are classic height for width fails. This should tell you that you are on the wrong path. No matter the novelty, or ingenuity of design in this area, the results will always be the same .
Take a break from wheel design, look out of the window and enjoy the view . Then choose another design path as the one you're on is leading no where
Chris x
re: Mayday! Mayday!!!
Hi Raj,
In my opinion, the weights down the center of the wheel basically cancel each other out. So what you have is three weights on the left side and two on the right. Although it may appear that always having more weights on one side will allow the wheel to continuously turn, the two weights on the right side will prevent it from doing so. These two weights are further out from the center of the wheel and thus the extra leverage will offset the weight advantage on the left side. In addition, the majority of the weights are below the center of the wheel, which will cause it to come to rest when the center of mass is at the lowest point.
Tom
In my opinion, the weights down the center of the wheel basically cancel each other out. So what you have is three weights on the left side and two on the right. Although it may appear that always having more weights on one side will allow the wheel to continuously turn, the two weights on the right side will prevent it from doing so. These two weights are further out from the center of the wheel and thus the extra leverage will offset the weight advantage on the left side. In addition, the majority of the weights are below the center of the wheel, which will cause it to come to rest when the center of mass is at the lowest point.
Tom
"I have done so much, for so long, with so little... I can do anything with nothing." -USNMCB-4
re: Mayday! Mayday!!!
Chris and Tom, thank you both.
All my attempts at searching for a wheel design have been centered in finding a TORQUE driven wheel.
At my personal level, this is the only type of design that is possible.
I don't particularly mind where in/on the wheel the weights are, above or below the axle, provided one side of the wheel is heavier than the other side to produce overbalance to make it turn, (just like the old hand-held weighing devices.)
It does not matter if more or less weights are on one side or above or below the axle. What matters to me, are the clockwise and counter-clockwise torque provided by the weights in/on the wheel, that would make the wheel turn.
The drawing above is my BEST torque driven design. Whether it will work or not, remains to be seen.
Raj
All my attempts at searching for a wheel design have been centered in finding a TORQUE driven wheel.
At my personal level, this is the only type of design that is possible.
I don't particularly mind where in/on the wheel the weights are, above or below the axle, provided one side of the wheel is heavier than the other side to produce overbalance to make it turn, (just like the old hand-held weighing devices.)
It does not matter if more or less weights are on one side or above or below the axle. What matters to me, are the clockwise and counter-clockwise torque provided by the weights in/on the wheel, that would make the wheel turn.
The drawing above is my BEST torque driven design. Whether it will work or not, remains to be seen.
Raj
Keep learning till the end.
-
triplock
re: Mayday! Mayday!!!
Raj,
It doesn't remain to be seen. It won't work. Just learn to step back from your designs and be more self-critical of them.
At this stage o your 'design' career you should be able to see instantly that it wont work tbh.
As always, just harsh but kind advice.
Chris
It doesn't remain to be seen. It won't work. Just learn to step back from your designs and be more self-critical of them.
At this stage o your 'design' career you should be able to see instantly that it wont work tbh.
As always, just harsh but kind advice.
Chris
re: Mayday! Mayday!!!
How many of you have noticed the orbiting path of the weights in my drawing above.
Bessler is quoted as saying' the weight crawls to the centre on the ascending side and moves away from the centre on the descending side'.
That's exactly what the weights do in my design here.
Bessler is quoted as saying that the weights move in compartments pairs and change orbit (when one moves closer to the axle the other moves further away)' or something similar.
That's exactly what the weights do in my design.
Don't you find anything interesting in the shape of channels/compartmenrs in my drawing?
These channels/compartments make it easy for the weights to change their orbits at the 12 o'clock and 6 O'clock positions, to/from the three units radius circular path on the descending side to/from the four units circular path on the ascending side.
The shape of the channels/compartments in my design is my greatest novelty, and this is exactly what is making me so optimistic.
I am proud of my design, for I have presented something NEW.
Raj
Bessler is quoted as saying' the weight crawls to the centre on the ascending side and moves away from the centre on the descending side'.
That's exactly what the weights do in my design here.
Bessler is quoted as saying that the weights move in compartments pairs and change orbit (when one moves closer to the axle the other moves further away)' or something similar.
That's exactly what the weights do in my design.
Don't you find anything interesting in the shape of channels/compartmenrs in my drawing?
These channels/compartments make it easy for the weights to change their orbits at the 12 o'clock and 6 O'clock positions, to/from the three units radius circular path on the descending side to/from the four units circular path on the ascending side.
The shape of the channels/compartments in my design is my greatest novelty, and this is exactly what is making me so optimistic.
I am proud of my design, for I have presented something NEW.
Raj
Keep learning till the end.
re: Mayday! Mayday!!!
Dear Chris,
For CHRIST sake, just SHOW me one that WILL WORK.
Raj.
For CHRIST sake, just SHOW me one that WILL WORK.
Raj.
Keep learning till the end.
re: Mayday! Mayday!!!
Hello Jim!
And so say, all of US.
But the search goes on regardless!
Go where no man has gone before???
Raj
And so say, all of US.
But the search goes on regardless!
Go where no man has gone before???
Raj
Keep learning till the end.
http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=W78L1wUm3RIjim_mich wrote:Ha, ha.
Out-of-balance gravity-wheels are impossible.
Seek the answer to a perpetual motion wheel somewhere other than by gravity.
re: Mayday! Mayday!!!
This is for those who want to believe:
Drawing BAW1 shows the position of the weights in my design at the start position. The net torqure can be easily seen/calculated from the drawing. My figures are at the bottom of the drawing. This will show a net positive counter-clockwise torque, which means that the wheel will turn counter-clockwise.
Drawing BAW2 shows the positions of the weights after 11.25 degrees turn counter-clockwise. This shows again a net positive counter-clockwise torque, which means the wheel will still turn.
Drawing BAW3 shows the positions of the weights after 22.5 degrees turn counter-clockwise. This shows continued net positive torque counter-clockwise, for wheel to continue turning.
Drawing BAW4 shows the positions of the weights after 33.75 degrees turn counter-clockwise. Again this shows a continued net positive torque counter-clockwise for continued rotation of wheel leading to resetting of weights to BAW1 positions after 45 degrees turn.
To note that weights are moving and acting directly on the wheel, therefore torque calculations must be correct.
So if we have continued net positive torque through to next resetting of weights positions after 45 degrees, WHY SHOULDN'T the wheel turn continuously???
Raj
Drawing BAW1 shows the position of the weights in my design at the start position. The net torqure can be easily seen/calculated from the drawing. My figures are at the bottom of the drawing. This will show a net positive counter-clockwise torque, which means that the wheel will turn counter-clockwise.
Drawing BAW2 shows the positions of the weights after 11.25 degrees turn counter-clockwise. This shows again a net positive counter-clockwise torque, which means the wheel will still turn.
Drawing BAW3 shows the positions of the weights after 22.5 degrees turn counter-clockwise. This shows continued net positive torque counter-clockwise, for wheel to continue turning.
Drawing BAW4 shows the positions of the weights after 33.75 degrees turn counter-clockwise. Again this shows a continued net positive torque counter-clockwise for continued rotation of wheel leading to resetting of weights to BAW1 positions after 45 degrees turn.
To note that weights are moving and acting directly on the wheel, therefore torque calculations must be correct.
So if we have continued net positive torque through to next resetting of weights positions after 45 degrees, WHY SHOULDN'T the wheel turn continuously???
Raj
- Attachments
-
-
-
-
Keep learning till the end.