This is my wheel concept 2017, not Bessler's 1717...

[ChrisHarper]

Raj,

Why don't you, as Fletcher has done on MT Drawings, start a fresh topic and move over your latest design.

This current protracted one will then naturally sink to the bottom but remain in archive.

So collect your thoughts and start again ?

Chris

[Georg Künstler]

Hello Raj,

as you described it, it is also swinging. It is the eccentric force on your small wheel.

Are you able to build it ?

If not I will replicate it with my modification and bring it with me to Bad Karlshafen end of May.

[raj]

Yes.
It's OK by me.
Just make me a proper proposal, by PM preferably.

Yes, the springs are swinging in a sort of way, but not like normal pendulums/bobs under solely gravitational force, to and fro, but to and fro and in one-way circular path.

Raj

[raj]

@ Chris.

Thank you for your suggestion.

Now, that I have given complete descriptions, and explanations with drawings, there is nothing more to add to start a new thread.

Raj

[ME]

The problem is that most base their designs on an incomplete classical Mechanics' Book.
There is undoubtedly a missing 4th Class of Lever, and at a stretch, a 5th one also.
It is not the fact that the answer is impossible to find, it's just that we're predisposed educationally to look the wrong way.
Maybe my wilful lack of Higher Education in the Sciences has saved me entrapment

Don't worry, it's entirely possible to feel entrapped without such Higher Education. It may also be possible you looked at the wrong book.

Besides the ever amazing traits of human opportunity everywhere, those Sciences isn't, or shouldn't be, so much about repeating what others thought was an OK idea and then drone alone as some zombie clone on those second-hand ideas. But science is (or should be) more about discovering useful patterns in our current diverse and ever changing environment.
Trying to predict future events--by filtering redundancies, finding similarities, estimate gains and losses, detect and collapse long winding nonsense into meaningful bites of knowledge ready for rearrangements into a new applications-- is basically the main reason we have a brain.
Toddlers, for example, may display perfectly fine science without even telling about it, write papers, or require grades. Yet repeatable, testable, reasoned and peer reviewed... no need for a university, but just a mother who applauds anyway.
It's only more efficient and faster (aka: lazy) to use previously acquired knowledge. When taught properly such should also train the brain to categorize the relevant stuff and gives a head start for all those undiscovered new'n-fresh discoveries.
Discovering flaws in those previous discoveries is (eventually !) welcomed too, but considered less exciting (and here we are: hi!).
(Rant: We so lucky "Big-Data" gets developed. Then we can finally outsource this tiring stuff in its entirety and then only need to corrupt the shit out of things /S)

But in the mean time, who actually distinguishes "three classes of levers"? Besides guessing games and those illustrators of Science books.
A lever collapses into just a single parameter called Couple or Moment. Balance is where many of them add up to zero. If not, then Torque happens.
There's actually no need for three classes when a single parameter perfectly defines what it is.

If you really want then maybe it could be split up into two: effort up vs. effort down or load-side vs opposite-side.
Maybe there're even six when we split the ranges properly; as somewhat suggested by that distinction between Classes 2 and 3.
But the usual three is a mathematically weird and arbitrary split and may only make sense for the illustrator.
I hypothesize that he, or the publisher, probably couldn't distinguish all the drawn variants when Effort gets applied on the opposite site.
Found three pictures redundant, and collapsed them all into Class 1...
Oh well, that's all within some kind of reason, logic. Applied critical thoughts about the teaching method, plus the issue was (also important) solvable: guess that's science too.

So well, there's a Fourth you say?
I bet it is a compound machine.
Is it a compound lever or a lever-gear variation?
What is it? We desperately need to know!
-T-E-L-L- -U-S- !!!
That ratio of 3:1 will suffice though.
Thanks.
:-)

[ME]

Raj, just don't delete your posts... now it just seems a good idea to delay any reply until it's set in stone (24hr curing time?).
But then it gets overwhelmed by other stuff of interest.
It would indeed be best if we introduced some sort of thee-room-topic with a coffee table for these sporadic chats... but somehow that never happens.

[ChrisHarper]

Me,

It is indeed a type of compound Lever, or force multiplier. I don't use a full gear-train, but you can pretty much swap out all mechanical linkages for a series of additional interconnected gears I suppose.

It was just easier to construct a PoP without a full gear train, that was all.

Chris

[rlortie]

Excerpt quote from Me to Chris:

So well, there's a Fourth you say?
I bet it is a compound machine.
Is it a compound lever or a lever-gear variation?
What is it? We desperately need to know!
-T-E-L-L- -U-S- !!!
That ratio of 3:1 will suffice though.
Thanks.

Which leads me to ponder! What kind of leverage or class of lever does one categorize a ramp? An inclined plane such as threads on bolt, or a asymmetrical cam lobe. Lopsided, unsymmetrical, uneven, unbalanced, crooked, awry, askew, skew, misaligned etc... What makes a lever compound if it is other than more than one section of various lengths?

Ralph

[ME]

As far as I understand the classification:

There six simple machines: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Simple_machine
and there are combinations of simple machines: "Compound" in the same article.
When a Fourth Class lever is a combination of simple machines, then it's not a fourth Class nor a simple lever, but a (compound) mechanism.

One could also say that there are only two simple machines: an incline plane and a lever.
Where the lever could be considered a rotational variant of the incline.

[Georg Künstler]

if you take ten levers in one line it that way one lever can press the other, then it is like a series of a movement. The force will be applied also on the last lever.
you can also use a pantograph frame. Bessler has also used such constructions. if you lay such a pantograph frame on a ramp then you can lift the weight at the end of the ramp when you press it on the bottem of the ramp.

Only my thoughts

[raj]

Simpler than simple concept?

Got ride of the inner rim.

Raj

[ChrisHarper]

Raj,

Now we're talking 👍🏼

Great setup. I'm excited for you.
-green dot-

Chris

[raj]

Thanks Chris.

Just a wheel, a disc and two elastic pendulums.

Raj

[ChrisHarper]

To create something that never physically existed before, no matter what it is, is the most thrilling experience experience.

A model such as yours won't lie to you, and will give you immediate unbiased feedback.

Chris