Grease power

[preoccupied]

I cross crossed the pulley blocks so that the top right lever doesn't bend at all. There is very little force now on the top right lever and a lot of force on the top left lever. I could see how this could be a technical issue in the concept.

To evaluate the concept more, I want to say that the lever bends releasing string which changes the suspension of the weight. It moves the weight to the right and causes the wheel to be over balanced Clockwise. I remember thinking to myself on of my earliest ideas where when I was talking to Jim_Mich on the forum is asking if pulling on the swastika arm right angle down creates perpetual motion. Because I thought then that some kind of leverage was gained by pulling down on the swastika arm. Well here I am reverberating the concept in a different way. I don't not think that I discovered this when I was a kid but it sure looks like it a little because I started looking for Bessler wheel on the forum believing that pulling down on the lever of a right angle had some kind of mechanical advantage and here I am with this idea that does just that but in away that I don't think that I ever discovered before now. I believe that I was a fraud in my own mind and to everybody else to think that I created a perpetual motion machine when I was a kid. What I think that I discovered when I was a kid is a way to make gears stronger or produce more force with more gears. That is different than a gravity wheel, which this swastika thing might be if it works the way that I have designed it. I'm sorry for boasting so hard when I think of ideas. I don't think that I ever really believed that I had a working design when I thought that I had a working design. I just had a serious mental malfunction. I have been hit on the head a lot. But I was smart before being hit on the head, being hit on the head was to my detriment. This design might be good. I certainly think it's interesting! Thanks for letting me share. I'd appreciate your input.

[preoccupied]

I moved the inner pulley so that the angle wasn't as sharp so that it was more overbalanced. If the pulley is right against the center and too far to the edge it doesn't work right in the measurements. The bending arms or the green bending arms need to be able to straighten and bend with a slight bit of difference in force. So I need exactly enough weight to bend the arm on the top left and not a bit more so that the top right will straighten under the lesser force. I have to have exactly the amount of weight necessary to do this, it's a balancing act. If it's too heavy the both levers will bend and if it's not heavy enough no levers will bend, it needs to be exactly right so that the right lever straightens and the left lever bends. After a 45 degree turn the weight is near the center. Actually measuring a string and physically modeling the pulley would help me find the best place for the inner pulley. I know it's somewhere. So that's my next step. I will measure a string and connect it to the top right and bottom left and move the inner pulley around until I get a good position.

[preoccupied]

Has anyone ever tried just putting a weight at the end of the corners of a swastika and letting the arms bend slightly and snap back out into a right angle? I think this design of mine would be easy to build and if it works then it would be because possibly that the snapping force is better than the contraction force. It looks like something that would be more efficient if the wheel were moving a little bit too. Because the snapping force would have more leverage if it has some further in rotation position.

Another thing that might help, I don't know yet, is that you could limit the distance it can bend with a block so that it would snap back out at a further distance by not snapping back at partial rotation by the lever being more sensitive but not bending too far as to counter balance the wheel too much. If it starts to snap back at the top right corner that would allow the wheel to have most of the snapping force go into rotation.

[WaltzCee]

.
.
I can't find the graphic, yet last century, someone had a model they claimed worked, yet it didn't, that had 8 weights on the circumference at the ends of springs.

Maybe someone else can find a graphic. I tried.

[WaltzCee]

.
I was time traveling, I'll admit it. Nothing I'm proud of. We all have our weaknesses. So as I was gallivanting around the 1800's, . . .
.

.
. . .I found this!
.

[Fletcher]

.
.
I can't find the graphic, yet last century, someone had a model they claimed worked, yet it didn't, that had 8 weights on the circumference at the ends of springs.

Maybe someone else can find a graphic. I tried.

Mitch Robinson aka Techstuf

[preoccupied]

The heaviest possible thrust would come from a weight that can fully press down on the lever on the top left making to pull as far as it can push it but I only want it to be able to push it a little bit. I want a wedge and a clamp system. Imagine this the triangle pushing a wedge to one side and it falling flat faced against the lever holding it in place after it passes the clamp. Then on the other side of the wheel on the top right it will unclamp as the wheel rotates into a block that pulls the wedge out. Or another wedge pulling the wedge out. This could all be set up along a back board behind the swastika. If the lever splits 11.25 degrees from the 90 degree position it will at most be about 0.2 counterbalanced. It will have a full 0.8 force extra after the lever snaps back into place from that place of counterbalance. I'm not sure how time relates to it but the gradual path is less than 0.2 counterbalance as its moving into that top right position. So 0.8 extra force seems like a lot it's worth looking into. I don't think this is something that Fletcher can simulate because it has a 3d item, a clamp that catches and releases the flexible lever.

[JUBAT]

Jon - can you explain this picture any better? I totally don't get what is being shown. I've tried to make sense of what you're trying to show and I just don't get it.

[WaltzCee]

.
Wubbly SIM'ed this about 20 years ago.
.


something like Mitch Robinson's design

There is an orthoganal gradient in torques that maybe seperated between a rotor & a stator causing PM, yet Nikola thought better than to try & use the whole 90°.

He wasn't greedy.

This is not new, news worthy, information. Please don't stop the presses!

Thanks for the details, Fletcher.

[Fletcher]

Here's Wubbly's original sim .. animation below .. note I turn ON the motor drive after a while ..

...............



...............

[JUBAT]

.
Wubbly SIM'ed this about 20 years ago.
.


something like Mitch Robinson's design

There is an orthoganal gradient in torques that maybe seperated between a rotor & a stator causing PM, yet Nikola thought better than to try & use the whole 90°.

He wasn't greedy.

This is not new, news worthy, information. Please don't stop the presses!

Thanks for the details, Fletcher.

Could there be a catch and release mechanism where the weight is released, goes to the end of the spring, and bounces back? Each weight as it comes over the top is released, bounces, and then is caught again?

[preoccupied]

Sure JUBAT. When J. Lingaard posted his first design on his thread his youtube videos were about he used a lever to lift a weight upwards. The lever was located at the rim of the main wheel. This is like a gear on another gear hitting an outer rim. If you place the lever pointing straight out on that second axle it will turn 90 degrees on its axle facing that direction as the main axle turns 90 degrees also and this allows you to make the lever any length. The reason that gears facing levers in a single direction through the entire rotation looks overbalanced because of the location of the weights but is not because o the gears is because when you have gears on gears you deduct the main gears axle to the second axle as secondary resistance. This loop hole that I've shared with you guys with the infinite lever offers secondary resistance alleviation. You would think someone would have intelligently brought up why these gears on gears don't work the way they intend them to but they just quote oh it's the conservation of energybum and I have a stick in my energybum and I don't know why. Really you should be very specific and detail oriented rather than quoting the conservation of energy shit. I only studied medicine when I was in kindergarten and already I'm disgusted with how much the conservation of energy is quoted when explaining things without getting into the attention to detail about stuff. When you place a lever on a lever or a gear on a gear you deduct the distance to the main axle from the second axle as secondary resistance. The second axle's gear or levers do provide mechanical advantage but not as much right away, but this 90 degree maneuver that I've shared should allow you to extend that mechanical advantage to infinite length. Bazinga.

[WaltzCee]

Sure JUBAT. When J. Lingaard posted his first design on his thread his youtube videos

Dare you be mentioning the esteemed professor, Dr JL, who commandeered a US naval vessel, then ran over a Soviet sub? That was like staring down back to back banana clips!

What a hero.

Enjoy redesigning this 20 year old design. PM me with Dr JL's video of the working wheel. He did agree he'd either post that or get my client, Jubat, a check for $50K USD, before he'd post @ BW again.

I'm sure this hero is a man of his word.

ETA
Bazinga?
Dr Who is taken so I'm going to think of you as
Dr WTF.

ETA2
I think I'm going to consider the moniker Dr When equivalent to James-Alan from this moment forward, in perpetuity!

[JUBAT]

Jon - I sent you a private message which is a link to a video of a mechanism I built. Go have a look at that video and tell me if this is anything like what you're trying to explain to me because I still don't get it.

For what it's worth...the mechanism I thought up - I dreamed about it last night and if I put too many mechanisms in the wheel, it would stall so it's critical that it be asymmetrically symmetrical if that makes sense.

I think I might just blurt it out because the odds are really good that it won't work like everything else I've dreamed up. I'll share it in the JUBAT Research thread before long.

Then once Fletch sees it publicly, he might feel free to sim it. I can respect his views on sims.

Brings to mind the lyrics of a song I know that says, "If not now then when?" In light of the latest WC post, I guess I could say, "If not now, then Dr. When."

[preoccupied]

Bazinga is from the TV Show The Big Bang Theory.

The Sheldon Cooper's BAZINGAS
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nTzPHdoAjvw