A Concept

[Da Ewe]

As with Aldo Coast's wheel https://www.youtube . com/watch?v=rsBplmMDcRQ , when one weight moves
towards the axle, another weight moves away from it.
Or is it something else? When the tail drops, can it lift two weights by using pulleys to hoist them up? Using
a 4 to 1 leverage, it can while still performing work.
The lines on the pulleys should not be centered on the pulley. The lever that the wheel pushes down
can be counterbalanced so once released by the wheel it can rotate so it can reset itself. And when wood hits
wood it usually makes a loud knocking sound.

Cleaned up the image then had to scale down to under 512kb. Why 2nd post. If tail drops 4 feet out of 12 feet,
two weights can be lifted one foot. 2 other weights will be rotating the wheel so more overbalance is possible.
And more weights simply means more overbalance. Enjoy!

[Da Ewe]

The external drum is shown both as a drum and as an outline of a drum.
Around the firmly placed horizontal axis is a rotating disc (low or narrow cylinder) which resembles a grindstone. This disc can be called the principle piece of my machine. Accordingly, this wheel consists of an external wheel (or drum) for raising weights which is covered with stretched linen.
https://besslerwheel.com/writings/das_triumphans.html

When "The upper weight is not attached to an external mechanism, nor does it rely on external moving bodies by means of whose weight revolutions continue as long as the cords or chains on which they hang permit.", the drum that raises the weights is is an external mechanism. He even said an external drums raises the weights. Once raised, the external drum will need to release the hoisting line so the wheel can continue rotating. And then a
latch will be needed to secure the weights in place.

I do have other projects I am working on.

[Tarsier79]

This system looks a lot like James Laangards design.

Is this you?

[Da Ewe]

With using a 12 foot American diameter wheel, 1 foot of overbalance will be realized having 2 weights lifted over
a 40º rotation of the wheel. This will mean that the overbalanced weight moving from above to below the axle will
generate about 1/2 American ft. lb. of torque. The other 2 weights will generate about 1.4 American ft. lbs. of torque
for a total of 1.9 American ft.lbs. of torque.
If 9 American lb. weights are used (4kg for the rest of the world) then 17.1 American ft. lbs. of torque would be generated.
While online calculators make easy work of the math, it does help to have taken the time to learn math. Why this matters
is what if the ratio used is 4:1.5?
Then overbalance becomes 1 1/2 American feet. Then the overbalanced weights would generate 1 1/2 feet of over balance.
Then the 1 ft. lb. of torque in the first paragraph becomes .75 ft.lbs. of torque. And the other 2 weights would generate
2.1 ft.lbs. of torque. Then if 9 American lb weights are used, then 2.85 x 9 = 25.65 ft. lbs. of torque.
Notice the increase realized by changing ratios and then doing the math? And since it is Bessler's Wheel, anyone who has
the desire can build it.


Merry Christmas

p.s., some assembly required.

p.s.s. How Germany felt about Norwegians; https://www.imdb.com/title/tt9737876/

[Tarsier79]

Why do you think this will work when your last one doesn't. They are built on the same principle.

[Da Ewe]

Why do you think this will work when your last one doesn't. They are built on the same principle.

I'm not going to build Bessler's Wheel. I'm "Norwegian" and not German. In the U.S. I am considered
a Norwegian because I'm not "pure". And Germans don't like me.
The principles between my previous build and Bessler's Wheel are different. With my previous
build, tapered roller bearings might allow it to work. I have a better project that I am working on
at the moment.
To state Bessler's Wheel in metric terms. A 4m diameter wheel with 45cm of overbalance. A weight dropping
from above to below the level of the axle a distance of 1.8m creates that overbalance. What is that weight
doing the other 3.1m (because it was lifted its radius went from 2m to 2.45m) when it is swinging downward?
Does it get its force from swinging?
You guys are Bessler Wheel and can build his wheel. I've given you the answer and the design while you never
had to work for it. It is as your friend desired. You have an invention with no work required (ok, so it's Bessler's
invention, it is still an invention). What you do with this invention is not up to me.

p.s., when the person is swinging downward, is the fulcrum of the swing like an axle? While he shows 2 things
are being leveraged, what are those 2 things? Maybe he means the top and bottom weights? Is that the same
as pumping water to the top of a water wheel without doing all that work?

[Tarsier79]

Your last design didn't work. This is no different. Tapered roller bearings aren't the problem. the problem is the same as it always is. Your design doesn't address any of the problems. Your math is a little naive, and doesn't account for the effort it takes to lift each weight into position. It is another zero sum game I am afraid.

[thx4]

Hello, Da Ewe, aka James Laangards 😊


You do well to look at MT85, it shows otherwise the solution that MT47 also describes, when you have synthesized the two (it may take some time), I have no doubt that you will produce the beast.
You are certainly one of the most skilled members, too bad for us to suffer the dark side of the character, I wonder when you will figure it out. It completely hinders and cancels out interesting exchanges. (I'm making an exception this morning) 😊

But keep going on this track it's the only viable one, it doesn't make anyone dream it's the funniest part of the topic, it's the reason why no one sees and that's good, it gives me a little more time to polish my version. But I know me I'll rock before I do 😊

I'm very lazy, too much passion, but I just acquired a new toy, a laser, which will allow me to combine wood and plastic in 3D, so no more limits, in proto making. Although the current one will be for me the last one concerning the impossible machine...

A++

[Da Ewe]

Hello, Da Ewe, aka James Laangards 😊


You do well to look at MT85, it shows otherwise the solution that MT47 also describes, when you have synthesized the two (it may take some time), I have no doubt that you will produce the beast.
You are certainly one of the most skilled members, too bad for us to suffer the dark side of the character, I wonder when you will figure it out. It completely hinders and cancels out interesting exchanges. (I'm making an exception this morning) 😊

But keep going on this track it's the only viable one, it doesn't make anyone dream it's the funniest part of the topic, it's the reason why no one sees and that's good, it gives me a little more time to polish my version. But I know me I'll rock before I do 😊

I'm very lazy, too much passion, but I just acquired a new toy, a laser, which will allow me to combine wood and plastic in 3D, so no more limits, in proto making. Although the current one will be for me the last one concerning the impossible machine...

A++

Thanks thx4. I wish the people in this forum would've allowed for a discussion. What I am currently building might be possible
of producing energy. Some people like living "off-grid" which simply means they are not connected to an electrical grid. I am careful
where I post that design because I am currently building it.
This is a different idea and is quite simple idea that uses buoyancy. When lead weights sink, air is pumped from the top bellow into
the bottom bellow. The buoyancy of a bellow and its lead weight have to do with the total volume of water they displace. Lead is
about 10 times denser than water. If the buoy attached to a lead weight has about 20 times the volume then it will lift that lead weight
with about the same force a lead weight has when it sinks. The issue with this design is the mass of the water in the tank. Then with
how expensive plexiglass is so the wheel can be seen working, it has its challenges.
With the attached design, a submarine sinks by filling its ballast tanks with water. When it "blows" or pumps the water out of its
ballast tanks, it surfaces. And when look at this design, when the bellows to the left and at bottom center are filled with air, what
will keep it from rotating in the clockwise direction? And as with any machine, its movements will need to be timed. This means
that the top and bottom bellows would have the same amount of air in their bellows. Then both weights could be allowed to drop
so it will have the balance shown. This means the bellow to the left would be rotating this wheel.
Then at 30º past bottom center, the bottom bellow would have 50% of its lift helping to rotate the wheel. At 15º past bottom center,
about 25% of its lift helping to rotate the wheel. With this, ships and submarines, Archimedes comes into play. When water is displaced,
the mass displaced needs to be greater than the mass displacing it. Then flotation is possible.
And with this design, if both weights are connected then they can shift the balance of the wheel allowing for buoyancy. Of course with
something like this a small scale build about 60cm in diameter would be possible. Then teachers could tell students this principle is
why Archimedes ran naked down the street naked shouting eureka (I've got it). He realized why ships could float.

[Tarsier79]

A weight is heavy enough to push the air down, or displacing the water back up to the top.. Now all of a sudden, the water displacement is now enough to lift the weight.

The idea is not new. It also doesn't work.

[Da Ewe]

A weight is heavy enough to push the air down, or displacing the water back up to the top.. Now all of a sudden, the water displacement is now enough to lift the weight.

The idea is not new. It also doesn't work.

And this is how your friend taught you to post. And this is why I can't build Bessler's Wheel. It ruined his life
because of the same things said in this forum. I have to believe you understand why people who fish attach
floats to their lines. It's so their sinkers will allow them to fish at a specific depth. The sinker which is a lead
weight floats in the water because of the float attached to the line.
A bellow attached to a lead weight is the same principle. How buoyant is the float? When a top bellow closes,
it can't be filled with anything, it's closed. And when both weights push open the bottom bellow, air is pumped
out of the top bellow and is sucked into the bottom bellow.
And all this requires is the air pressure inside the bellows/piping be greater than the water pressure in the water
tank. If the water pressure is greater then it won't let the bottom bellow expand. What I mean about discussions
are not allowed in this forum.
This video states the obvious, they used airbags to raise a sunken boat; https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZQaq5W1F_4g&t=88s
And Archimedes, using closed captioning (cc) is a thought; https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=05WkCPORlj4&t=1s

While some people are taught to say can't work, other people use those same principles to do meaningful work.
They're simply not interested in perpetual motion.

[JUBAT]

You know Da Ewe - it's just as simple as this: Build a working wheel then you won't have to fight so hard to defend your views.

[Da Ewe]

You know Da Ewe - it's just as simple as this: Build a working wheel then you won't have to fight so hard to defend your views.

I can't file a patent for my invention that I am building. However I did file it. I did not say it was perpetual motion but I did submit
this design. And if people don't get this, they really need to learn math. 3 weights that are "swinging downward" can rotate 1
weight upward. If you guys can't do the math, Nazis could do the math so you're Christians, right?
This is a perpetual motion forum. Supporting Bessler should have people asking the questions how did he do it and what do we
need to learn?

And maybe I need to consider that you guys don't know how to calculate torque? That is what allows for a wheel to rotate.

[Tarsier79]

JL.

Get yourself a piece of graph paper. Work out the weight movements and their forces. If you do the math right, you will get 0 as a best case scenario.

[JUBAT]

Agreed. Just because it works in your mind doesn't mean it works in real life.