At previous chapter ´Original Bessler-Wheel´ principle of operation of that historic Perpetuum Mobile was described - by my considerations and understanding. So there was no need for further ´self-running wheels´ and I had finished this subject. Meanwhile however I often was asked about these problems, so I will add one more version. Effects of this new machine are quite easy to understand and this motor is simple to construct. Decisive hints e.g. were statements of Bessler himself respective from eye-witnesses like these:
´weights are arranged that kind, they never achieve balanced status ...
weights work by pairs ...
weights gained force by their own swinging ...
springs were employed, but not as decisive elements ...
within wheel is simple arrangement of weights and lever arms ...
weights were heard hitting at side of wheel going down ...
machine made scratching noises ...
weights landed at slightly warped boards ...
weights were attached to moveable or elastic arms ...
eight weights fall down during each revolution, which took about three seconds at wheel of nearby 3.6 m diameter ...´.
This animation schematic shows result of my new considerations. By naked eyes one hardly can recognize why this wheel should steady turn around. However, arguments are clear, this wheel is pure mechanical motor, driven only by gravity. At the following, elements and effects are described step by step.
At following drawings generally is implied, system axis is beard horizontally within housing. All revolutions are implied to be left-turning, thus counter clock-wise. It´s also implied, turning of system shaft and thus ´rotorarm´ is constant, while turning of ´rotor´ occurs by varying speeds.
Labile Suspension
If weights can not find stabile positions, but fall from one labile situation into next, suspension or guiding of these weights should be rather ´wobbly´. At picture EV GM 61 schematic is shown an example of labile support, left side by cross-sectional view through system axis, right side by cross-sectional view longitudinal to system axis.
Fix connected with system axis (SA) is rotorarm (RT, German Rotorträger), which at picture left upside is drawn as grey beam in horizontal position. Effective mass (previous ´weights´) here at first is drawn as ring-shaped rotor (RO, green). Rotor is connected movably with rotorarm (RT) by crank-shaft gear (KW, red, German Kurbelgetriebe).
Crank-shaft is beard turnably within rotorarm (RT). Crank is also turnably beard within rotor, in addition there however linear shiftable within slot-shaped bearing (SL, German schlitzförmiges Lager).
Centre of gravity (SP, German Schwerpunkt) of effective mass thus is positioned some downside of system axis. Central hole of rotor is dimensioned that kind, rotor never can come in direct contact with system shaft.
At situation drawn here, system is in balanced position, nevertheless most labile. Smallest turning or shifting results imbalance, so system starts moving (probably swinging rather confused).
At this picture downside, rotorarm is drawn by vertical position. Rotor hangs at downside crank, where upper end of slot-bearing sits on crank (supporting point AP (German Auflagepunkt) is marked black). Distance between crank-gears respective between both slots is chosen that kind, upper bearing takes no weights at this situation.
So upper crank is free to turn, i.e. also at this position, system would be in rather labile state. Rotor can tilt to left or right side by smallest impulse, i.e. whole system will come into turning respective swinging motions like a multiple pendulum. System would move from one labile situation into next, while cranks alternately hit in both slots.
Double Joints
Previous slot bearing could also be arranged within rotorarm, e.g. also in shape of a sledge. Hard hits could be avoided by two-arm lever-joints, like at picture EV GM 62 schematical shown by side view as an example.
Within housing (GE, dark grey, German Gehäuse) system axis (SA, grey) is beard turnably. At this shaft is fix mounted rotorarm (RT, grey). Within this rotorarm (at foreground), by first bearing (L1, German Lager) a first lever (H1, red, German Hebelarm) is mounted turnably. At its other end is second bearing (L2), within which second lever (H2, blue) is mounted turnably. At its other end is third bearing (L3), within which rotor (RO, green) is mounted also turnably.
Double joints like these are connection rather flexible. Lever arms can be stretched into vertical direction (like schematic drawn at A) or into horizontal direction (like at B) or can build any angles (like at C and D).
If both lever arms are of same length, two bearings (L1 and L3) can even take same place. Bearing of rotor (L3) thus is free movable within circle surface around L1, by diameter of four times length of lever arms.
By these joints no hard hits of linear motion occur. Joints come into stretched position only via turning motions of lever arms. Maximum distance (between L1 and L3) is limited strongly, however lever arms will go on swinging, so motion is cushioned likely to springs.
Halfmoon-Bearing
This conception however is disadvantageous, as constructional elements demand many levels in axial direction (here e.g. nine in total). In addition, some bearings are weighted only one side respective lever arms are not mounted symmetric. These disadvantages are to avoid by ´halfmoon-bearings´.
At early inventions concerning combustion engines, I already made some proposals of alternative crank-shafts. Some years ago, ´halfmoons´ were dominating motive of crop circle pictures. By analysing these appearances I designed some likely gears and applications and one version of these concepts well could be used here.
At picture EV GM 63 schematic are shown previous bearings (L1, L2 and L3) and both lever arms (H1 and H2). Now at ´halfmoon-bearings´ that first bearing (L1, red) is dimensioned thus large, second bearing (L2, blue) eccentric is included. Within this surface again third bearing (L3, grün) eccentric is included.
At many crop circle pictures, circles are arranged each direct to next, so halfmoon-sickles result. Here at narrow sides, still some stabilizing material is drawn, so there result circled surfaces with asymmetric round holes.
If both lever arms (respective eccentricity) are of same length, room to move results like at upside double-joints. So red circle surface can move within rotorarm, within this can move blue circle surface as we like it, so green bearing of rotor can take most different positions. Rotor bearing can also take same place as rotorarm bearing, like shown at this picture downside as an example.
This ´crank-disk-bearing´ as a whole takes only one axial level (e.g. that of rotorarm), so rotor is to arrange directly aside (at bearing L3 practically is to mount only bolt of rotor). If for example one lever arm is 2 cm long, maximum stretching allows 4 cm into both directions, thus room to move is circle surface of 8 cm diameter. That´s to achieve e.g. if ball-bearing of some 10 cm diameter eccentric is arranged within ball-bearing of some 16 cm diameter (however demanded room to move is much smaller, as discussed below, so whole bearing will take only few centimetres).
Tilting Positions
At picture EV GM 64 now rotorarm (RT) again is drawn by vertical position. Rotor (RO) with its effective mass (WM, German wirksame Masse) once more is drawn ring shaped. It weights only at downside bearing: green bolt of rotor hangs downside within blue ball-bearing, this hangs downside within red ball-bearing, this is turnable within grey rotorarm (RT).
Distance between downside and upper crank-disk-bearing (KS) is that kind, extreme stretching within one bearing (here downside) results central position within opposite bearing (here upside), thus here e.g. upper bearings L1 and L3 are at same place.
At this picture at A, rotorarm is positioned vertical at system axis (SA) and also just vertical below is centre of gravity (SP) of rotor. So rotor also stands central at this position, however rather labile because by smallest impulse can and will fall aside.
This situation is shown at B: rotor bolt did tilt to left side within upper crank-disk-bearing, so centre of gravity of rotor is shifted to left side, whole rotor now hangs left side (to see by different distances to right-angled frame). As mentioned above, also this system will fall from one labile state into next, i.e. will move and swing. These motions however will become steady only by proper arrangement of effective masses, as discussed below.
Principles of Construction
At first however general shapes of design are to discuss. At picture EV GM 65 at A once more is shown rotorarm (RT) by vertical position as grey beam inclusive its crank-disk-bearings (KS). Rotor (RO) now also is drawn as green beam, also by vertical position. Effective mass (WM, dark-green) is installed at each end of rotor, thus is located here quite upside and quite downside.
At this picture at B schematic is shown corresponding cross-sectional view longitudinal to system axis. Within housing (GE) is mounted turnably system shaft (SA), at which are fix installed rotorarm (RT) respective symmetric two rotorarms. Within rotorarms are installed crank-disks (KS), within which previous bolt of rotor is mounted. Rotor hangs at downside crank-disks, while rotor upside could tilt aside.
At this picture at C, alternative design is shown. Here, crank-disks are installed within rotor, so within rotorarms are mounted only previous bolts. Both versions work same kind. All bearings here are symmetric, demanding much less constructional elements than previous double-joints with diverse lever arms (here e.g. demanding only five levels in axial direction).
This construction thus must guarantee room to move for rotor relative to rotorarm (RT), into radial like into tangential directions. Besides these constructional examples, many other constructional designs could achieve these demanded functions.
Bessler´s Conception
Bessler probably did use real simple system of lever arms, taking in account noises of hard hits of constructional elements. At picture EV GM 66 his principle of construction (by previous and following considerations) schematic is shown, left side again by cross-sectional view through system shaft, right side by view alongside system shaft.
Around system axis (SA) turnable is system shaft and thus also rotorarm (RT), which he did build as large round cylinder with nearby 360 cm diameter and nearby 35 cm width. Both disks of rotorarm were connected by rods (with round or some profiled cross-sections). Four of these ´Swing-Limitators´ (SB, German ´Schwingbegrenzer´) are marked here.
Rotor (RO) was a beam (or grid assembled by diverse sticks), which does not touch system shaft. At both ends of rotor were installed effective masses (WM). Bessler did use eight weights, thus internal of wheel were used four of these rotor-beams respective rotor-stick-grids, one aside the other (while here is drawn only one rotor schematic).
Each rotor is ´tied up´ to system axis, allowing limited room to move into radial direction. This possibility respective limitation of radial motions (RB, German radiale Begrenzung) here e.g. is shown by ropes (grey), which are attached to system shaft and at bolts of rotor. At this picture for example, rotor hangs at downside ropes, while upper ropes are slacked.
Instead of ropes, also springs could be used or radial motion could be controlled by sledges (like e.g. Remote Viewer clear saw ´shiny elements, 5 to 6 cm long, moving radial to and fro´, see Remote Viewing and Visiting Bessler). Attachment must not be at system shaft, but also could be at rotorarm (with better effect if wheel should not work into both turning directions).
Decisive only is room to move for rotor, at the one hand into radial direction (e.g. by previous ropes) and at the other hand into tangential directions (e.g. like rotor can swing respective fall to and fro within previous cross-rods SB). So this simple construction will function likely to previous crank-disk-bearings. Many other constructional variations also could control this motion´s process wanted.
Motion´s Processes of Ether
Before describing motion´s process of wheel it will make sense to look at effecting forces of turning movements in general. Common known formula are sufficient for calculating processes. Real essence of mass, inertia and gravity however are quite other than common understanding assumes.
There is no ´mass´, everything exists only of ether. Ether is single real existing substance - and this is not dividable but is gapless matter. All occurrences are only motions of ether within itself. However, ether does not move wide-ranged, for example at previous wheels ether is not turning around at large circles - only structures of movement´s pattern of vortices-systems - commonly called materia - wander around at that circle.
These ether movements can do nothing else than steady go on moving same kind, as these motions within itself are really without any friction. If one disturbs this steady process, ether movements resist versus this restructuring - then ´inertia´ appears. So if one wants to change pattern of ether motions, e.g. slowing down or accelerating its wandering through space, resistance as force comes up respective force is demanded to overcome resistance.
All Ether of universe moves by quant-small dimensions (commonly called background-radiation or zeropointenergy or likely terms) at most complex spiral tracks. Nearby celestial bodies, symmetry of that basic motion pattern is disturbed respective is overlaid that kind, ether seemingly would flow e.g. towards earth. ´Pressure´ of this apparently flux commonly is called ´gravity´.
Details are described at my Ether-Physics respective further aspects there are added subsequently. For understanding of actual subject, this idea will do (even only valid as rather simplified picture):
There is no mass, e.g. effective mass here could be represented by a ball. If that ball is moving, it produces respective is accompanied by flow. If that ball e.g. moves at circled track, same time exists circled flow, e.g. like water whirl, i.e. same time exists its inertia of ´want-to-go-on-circling´. Same time, this ball is located within waterfall, thus exposed to gravity force. Turning flow and falling flow overlay, i.e. ball will ´drift´ into each resulting directions (as long as this track is not disturbed by affects of other forces).
Ball and water lastly are of same materia, by unique existing ether, by same density everywhere, however everywhere moving most different kind by multiple overlays. This ´materia-ball´ lastly is only some special kind of motion´s pattern within ´water-flows´ which again are local and rather coarse motion´s pattern within very fine motion´s pattern of universal ether movement. Mass, inertia, gravity and forces only come up appearing, if motions of diverse pattern are changed.
Forces of rotating Masses
At picture EV GM 67 turning of rotorarm around system axis (SA) is marked by blue round surface. Rotor prevailingly will hang down, so its centre of gravity (SP) is located some below. Effective mass (green points) in principle move at some larger circled track (marked by green surface).
If mass for example is positioned at 2-o´clock (M2), gravity force (SK, German Schwerkraft) affects vertically downwards and same time, centrifugal force (FK, German Fliehkraft) affects into radial direction. Gravity forces (blue) and centrifugal forces (red) are marked by lines at twelve positions (here for example both forces of same amount, marked by lines of same length).
At this picture at B each resulting force (RK, German resultierende Kraft) is drawn. So mass quite upside is ´force-less´ while mass quite downside ´weights double´. To both sides, arrows of resulting forces show symmetrical outwards. However, this drawing is wrong respective not useful, because there are no ´centrifugal forces´ really existing (so it´s correct to call centrifugal force ´apparent´ force).
Real forces - by sense of previous flows - are drawn at this picture at C: permanent ´waterfall´ (SK, blue) affecting vertically downward, and inertia of previous ´water whirl´ (TK, red, German Trägheitskraft) affecting all times into tangential directions. Both flows overlay and at D is marked each resulting flow (SK) by direction and value (represented by lengths of lines).
These resulting flows now are symmetric not at all: at upward-phase (right side) flows are weak (here at 3-o´clock-position even null) respective show towards outside or inside relative weak. At downward-phase (left side) these flows are much stronger (at 9-o´clock-position maximum and showing straight downwards).
So change of these flows at different positions will affect most different resistances respective most different forces are demanded for achieving changes of flows. Deceleration of falling motion left side, thus will demand respective result much stronger forces than correspondingly intensifying motions right side (where by this example, previous ´ball´ is exposed or has to produce changes, i.e. forces will affect onto ball or ball must produce forces).
As mentioned upside, same results are to achieve by known physical formula, however not when using secondary centrifugal forces but calculating with primary inertia forces and its vectors.
Swinging and Rotating
Common understanding also are facts schematic shown at picture EV GM 68. At A, around system axis is turning rotor arm (RT) and at its ends are installed effective masses (here e.g. marked by M11 respective M5). All weights are balanced no matter which position rotorarm takes. Lifting and lowering of weights naturally is ´null-sum-game´.
At this picture at B an other null-sum-game is shown: falling and lifting of mass at free swinging pendulum respective rotor (RO). Different distances between marked positions (green points) represent differing speeds. There is steady exchange between potential energy of level and kinetic energy of mass, while its motion is accelerated and decelerated. In total however, energies keep constant.
Conceivable is also combination of both motion´s processes, like schematic shown at C: mass falls down at rotor (RO) like at any free swinging pendulum (within red sector left side). Afterwards, speed is decelerated to average turning speed, by which mass now is guided down and up again (within blue sector) by steady turning rotorarm (RT). Afterwards, mass again is pushed up (red sector right side) like at upward-directed (falling-) motion.
Also by this process, all forces in total would be balanced. However, restructuring of motions releases / demands additional forces (theoretically of same amount). This additional throughput of forces is most interesting.
Beam Scales
At picture EV GM 69 some more known facts are shown, e.g. beam scales schematic are drawn at upper row.
At A two weights (green) of same value are positioned at lever arms (red) of same length, so beam scales are balanced. Via supporting point (SP) total weight is transmitted onto foundations (black), so there exists pressure of two weight-units (beam scale by itself ignored).
At B, lengths of lever arms are arranged in relation of one to two. System is balanced, if at shorter lever arm two weights are positioned. Whole pressure weights at left supporting point (SL), while at (possibly existing) supporting point right side (SR) no pressure would weight. In total, at foundations exists pressure of three weight-units.
Now at C, these ´beam scales´ schematic are transferred at previous construction. Now rotorarm (RT) serves as ´foundation´, which is turnable around system axis (SA). At rotorarm (RT) is fix installed supporting point (SP). Beam of scales now is represented by rotor (RO), which is mounted at supporting point (SP).
Now effective mass shall fall down left side. Increased kinetic energy here symbolically is represented by three green weight-units. Hitting mass left side will affect pushing-upward of mass right side. At supporting point thus pressure exists of four weight-units. System now no longer is balanced, so rotorarm (RT) will turn around system axis.
Hitting or Rolling
This general principle once more is demonstrated at this picture. At D is drawn a beam (red) standing vertically at foundations (black). At E is marked, this beam falling towards left side. At F its falling down has finished by hitting on foundations. It´s clear, that hit results impact onto ground, where constant of impulse is valid (and speed is calculated only linear). At this example, all affecting forces lastly ´got lost´ in shape of heat.
If now supporting point (SP) would exist at foundation (like schematic drawn at G), forces would affect other kind. At H is shown, beam hitting onto supporting point, so again impulse is transferred onto foundation. If this foundation would be turnable around system axis (SA), corresponding forces would affect turning momentum via asymmetric supporting point.
At I of picture now is shown, how beam could go on rolling at profiled supporting point, so beam right side would swing upwards. This means, total weight of beam now affects pressure at left side. So not only impulse (calculating speed linear) affects at this system, but also kinetic energy (calculating speed by square) is transferred, at least by parts, depending on process of motions at deceleration-phase (e.g. on construction of supporting point, e.g. that hill not arranged upside of horizontal line etc.).
Transferred at previous example of ball within water-flows (as very simplified idea of motion´s processes within ether), following picture results: by immediate hitting of mass on ground (like e.g. at F), this ball immediately would be fixed, flows will separate and break off, so flows partly evaporate without effect (corresponding to linear factor of speed by transmission of impulses). If ball however is slowed down slowly and soft (like e.g. at H and I), that ball still drifts within flows, affects resistance respective affects transport of complete kinetic energy (with speed as factor by square).
So decisive principle of that conception is, kinetic energy of free falling mass is transferred - primary onto corresponding mass (swinging up of previous beam right side) and secondary to use forces lasting at supporting point as turning momentum at rotorarm. Transfer of forces will be complete (opposite to previous example of falling beam), because at the one hand rotoram already is in turning motion and at the other hand, also corresponding mass already is in upward showing motion.
Speed of Falling
Before describing motion´s processes of gravity motor is to remember at some data of free fall, which already were mentioned at previous chapter Fall-Curves. Analogue to pictures there, here picture EV GM 70 shows relevant data.
Left side at column T are marked ´tenth-seconds´ (respective each tenth of a second) from start of fall (0) down to sixth tenth-second. After each tenth-second speed increases up to nearby 1 to 6 m/s (marked by arrows at column V). Mass falls down to 5, 20, 44, 78, 122 and 176 cm (marked at column S, German Strecke).
Right side is drawn part of wheel with radius of 78 cm. There are marked sectors of each 22.5 degrees, each is done at one tenth-second. So one rotation takes 1.6 seconds respective wheel turns by 37.5 rpm.
Mass (M, black points) outside at this wheel is marked by positions after each tenth-second. Alongside circumference of ca. 4.90 m mass moves with ca. 3 m/s. Mass thereby is guided from upside to levels of 6, 23, 48, 78, 108, 133, 150 and 156 cm downward (marked in column H).
Free falling mass at the beginning of its falling curve (FK, German Fallkurve) stays behind mass guided by wheel, by 1 and 2 and once more by 1 cm, thus difference (column D) of -4 comes up after three tenth-seconds.
This delay is made up within forth tenth-second (where both masses did fall / were guided downward 78 cm). There, free falling mass got speed of 4 m/s (while mass at wheel moves steady by 3 m/s). Within fifth tenth-second mass falls down deeper than wheel turns (122 cm versus 108 cm, so mass falls deeper by 14 cm) and faster (now by 5 m/s).
Demanded Room to Move
Free fall should last so long, until mass did fall sufficiently deeper and faster than wheel did move same time. This will take four tenth-seconds at this wheel of 156 cm diameter. So short time behind 9-o´clock-position free fall should be braked down. If mass quite upside would show ´delay´ of -2 cm, it could fall further back by -4 to -6 cm and later on could fall ahead by 12 cm. So demanded room to move would be rather small, within scale of -/+ 6 cm.
At Bessler´s wheel with larger diameter of 360 cm, weights could be guided at radius of some 160 cm. Falling could take maximum 6 tenth-seconds. One rotation thus would take some 2.4 seconds, thus wheel would run by 25 rpm. Maximum 16 cm deeper mass could fall than wheel turns (176 versus 160 cm at 9-o´clock-position), so room to move would be sufficient with some -/+ 8 cm.
This room to move is demanded by effective mass installed at ends of rotors. Supporting points are positioned further inside, so demanded distances there are much shorter (like discussed below).
Basic Conception
As these general considerations concerning forces, lever arms, radius, fall-depth and speeds are done, now principles of movement´s process of that wheel is to discuss. Picture EV GM 71 shows still frame of animation at the very beginning of this chapter.
Around system axis (SA) turnably is mounted system shaft within a housing (which here is represented only by large black circle). At system shaft is fix installed rotorarm (RT), here drawn in shape of one blue disk (while rotorarm of real machines should be installed twice for reasons of symmetry and stability).
Concentric within rotorarm (RT) are installed crank-disk-bearings (KS), e.g. by principle shown at picture EV GM 63. Yellow circled surfaces here mark each room to move.
Four rotor beams (RO) here are drawn schematic as red lines. At ends of each rotor are fix installed effective masses (WM). Each rotor is flexible mounted by two bolts (RB, marked black) within two opposite crank-disk-bearings (KS). So in principle this construction corresponds to version shown at previous picture EV GM 65 at B.
Movement´s Process
If rotor is positioned vertical, mass hangs quite downside, i.e. at 6-o´clock-position rotor bolt is at downside border of its room to move. By this position mass goes on swinging towards right side (until maximum 4-o´clock-position).
From 5- to 3-o´clock, mass is strongly accelerated upwards at its circled track. Mass here however will stay some behind within its flexible bearing, so rotor bolt at 3-o´clock will be positioned downside-outward within crank-disk.
Short time upside of 3-o´clock, mass is accelerated upwards (reason see below), so rotor bolt no longer weights on border of its upper bearing. Up until 12-o´clock, rotor bolt will be positioned somewhere central within its crank-disk-area (thus at this phase weighting only at bearing downside-left).
Nearby 12-o´clock, upper mass starts phase of free falling. However, mass falls relative slowly at the beginning, so rotor bolt even might move backward within its given room to move.
Finally some later, mass takes up this delay, i.e. now rotor bolt ´falls´ through area of crank-disk downward. At 9-o´clock-position, mass catches up turning of rotorarm, while mass here falls essentially faster down than rotorarm moves downward.
Short time after 9-o´clock-position, rotor bolt comes to downside-left border of room to move, i.e. here occurs impact previous mentioned. Mass however is not stopped down immediately (respective its speed is not abruptly reduced to constant turning speed of rotorarm), mass however goes on swinging around this new supporting point - and correspondingly opposite mass is pushed upwards, leaving its supporting point (like discussed upside).
So decisive principle of that operation is, kinetic energy of free falling mass can not ´got lost respective won´t disperse´ by hard impact, but this kinetic energy is transferred onto opposite mass, i.e. kinetic energy is only exchanged between both effective masses alternately.
Only as ´side-effect´, thereby results relative heavy weights at each supporting point, here onto crank-disk-bearings of rotorarm. As here supporting points are outside of system axis, this pressure results turning momentum onto rotorarm. So this wheel turns as a whole - based on total weights which ´asymmetric beam-scales affects at its foundations´.
This animation visualizes previous described processes of motions. This animation shows 24 pictures each after one tenth-second, i.e. one revolution takes 2.4 seconds - likely fast as Bessler´s wheel did turn (while previous discussed smaller wheel of 78 cm radius will do one revolution within 1.6 seconds).
Relations of Lengths
At picture EV GM 73 are shown dimensions of diverse constructional elements, at A at first data of Bessler-Wheel. Diameter of wheel in total (RD, German Rad-Durchmesser) was some 360 cm. Each two weights (WM) could be mounted at rotor (RO) of some 320 cm length.
Members of Remote Viewing sessions reported, at centre would be control-unit with many parts, ´large as TV-set´. So I assume, supporting points (here left and right side marked by SL and SR) would show some 32 cm distance to system axis (SA), thus rotorarm (RT) would show 64 cm diameter (at rough estimate).
Falling weight right side thus would work at short lever arm (KH, German Kurzer Hebelarm) of some 128 cm, while opposite weight is pushed upward by that ´seesaw´ at long lever arm (LH, German Langer Hebelarm) of some 192 cm, so rotor is divided by relation of two to three.
Upside was stated, Bessler-Wheel demanded room to move for weights (BA, German Bewegungsspielraum außen) of some 8 cm. Fulcrum of these motions is each opposite supporting point (here right side), like marked by red sector. Radius of room to move at other supporting point (BI, German Bewegungsspielraum innen) thus should be third of 8 cm, so some 2.7 cm.
I would prefer machines to build at backside of each carport or each cellar. Scales of these smaller machines are drawn at this picture at B and C. Height of housing (GE, German Gehäuse) should maximum be 220 cm, so rotor could be 156 cm long.
At previous drawings to this small wheel, supporting points were arranged at each third of rotor length, so short lever arm (SH) would be 52 cm and long lever arm (LH) would be 104 cm (thus rotor is divided in relation of one to two). Rotorarm (RT) would also show diameter of 52 cm (or little bit more, by coarse estimate).
Demanded room to move for effective weights of this smaller wheel were calculated by some 6 cm, so at inner supporting point radius of room to move e.g. at crank-disk-bearing would be some 3 cm.
At this picture at C, relation of lever arms of large Bessler-Wheel are transferred at that smaller wheel. Distance between supporting points are only 31.2 cm (and also diameter of rotorarm by coarse estimate). Lever arms would be 62.4 respective 93.6 cm long, if rotor is divided by that relation of 2:3 (like probably Bessler used). Room to move inside at supporting points (BI) thus would show radius of only 2 cm, thus eccentricity of only 1 cm each crank-disk would do.
Optimum Relations
Relation of lever arms probably are best within that frame of 1:2 up to 2:3, while demanded room to move within supporting points are rather small. Optimum of relations could well be found by theoretic calculations (by corresponding resources), because only simple and well known formula are necessary. However also by models with adjustable lever arms, optimum of relations are practically to find soon.
At the beginning, this wheel must be started turning. Afterwards wheel will turn faster by itself, however only up to maximum. If wheel turns too fast, weights (left side) fall too far down, so impulse affects only at short lever arm respective other weight (right side) is lifted too high by its supporting point.
Only if free fall is decelerated short time after 9-o´clock-position, optimum turning speed is given. Mass (of previous small wheel) there falls e.g. by 4.2 m/s and lastly is decelerated to average turning speed of 3 m/s. Opposite mass at its upward-phase stays behind and short time upside of 3-o´clock-position e.g. moves only by 2.7 m/s. If by that ´seesaw´ this mass (right side) is accelerated upward e.g. by 0.6 m/s to now 3.3 m/s, that´s absolutely sufficient (for swinging respective falling free through its crank-disk-area nearby 180 degrees turning).
Decisive is, mass at upward-phase does not weight at rotorarm, but ´flies´ free within its room to move. Then that mass weights at downside supporting point and that point ´under-runs´ mass. Downside mass still shows forces into direction right-downwards, much stronger than ´force-less´ mass upside. So downside mass still pulls at its lever arm, ´balancing´ upper mass at downside supporting point and slinging upper mass towards left-upwards.
Like at simple beam-scales, total weights (inclusive kinetic energy of free fall) pressures at foundation of that seesaw, i.e. at left supporting point of rotor arm, thus weights eccentric to system axis. This ´surplus´ side-effect is available as turning momentum and is usable respective must be used. System will keep steady optimum turning speed only if this surplus is drawn off system, so wheel should all times be weighted with workload.
Already for tuning of prototypes, system should be weighted with workload, otherwise could come up negative impulses right side, which could build up and lastly stop system´s turning. For tuning system, e.g. drive shaft (where later electric generator is mounted) should be turned by constant speed, so lever arm lengths are to adjust that kind, mass upside will ´fly free´ like discussed before.
Given forces and resulting effects probably are to understand by any person, are easy to approve theoretical - so it´s simply question of proper tuning until this machine will really work.
Simple Designs
At picture EV GM 74 schematic is shown rather simple constructional design, left side by cross-sectional view through system axis, right side by longitudinal view to system axis. Around system axis (SA) turnable is mounted system shaft (grey) within housing (GE, dark-grey, here only marked by parts). At system shaft is fix installed rotorarm (RT) in shape of two disks (blue). Both disks are connected by fix installed cross-rods (QT, dark-blue, German Querträger).
Rotor (RO) is drawn in vertical position, at both ends of rotor are fix installed effective masses (WM). Rotor is drawn as beam with three round holes. At position shown, rotor weights by its downside hole at downside cross-rod (QT). Upper cross-rod (QT) is positioned middle within upper hole, so rotor can stay behind or fall ahead within given room to move. Central hole of rotor is dimensioned that kind, rotor-beam never comes in direct contact with system shaft. As mentioned upside, these round holes could also show some stretched shape.
Here are drawn eight cross-rods (QT), so four rotor-beams (RO) could be used (aside each other in axial direction, while here is drawn only one rotor). One after the other, each mass left side will fall down and rotor-beam (RO) will hit onto cross-rod (QT) with effects discussed upside.
At Bessler´s wheel, noises of impacts and scratching of rotors versus each other were heard. However, Bessler probably did use some other variation. Remote Viewer reported of shiny sticks some fife/six cm long. Probably these ´sledges´ allowed limited motions into radial directions. Motions into tangential directions could be done by cranks, beard within previous sledges.
Nevertheless, hitting of sledges at their borders would be heard, however noises could be diminished by springs, rubber-buffers, shock-absorber etc. Nevertheless, that simple shape of design in principle could already work and well demonstrate possibility of simple self-running machines. ´Soft´ suspension of deceleration of free fall is to achieved by diverse other constructional elements, so technical engineers will easily find optimum solution.
Designs more complex
My proposal for optimum supporting points however is that crank-disk-bearing mentioned above. Surface of previous round holes, by this gear-unit practically is filled up with ´halfmoon-sickles´. Cross-rod can move free within circled area, as sickles (also contrary turning) move aside. Nevertheless, there steady exists contact, so no timeless hitting at borders occurs.
At picture EV GM 75 is shown previous small wheel, now with lever arms arranged by relation of 2:3. In principle, this design is analogue to previous version, however supporting points respective gears and also construction of rotor are different.
Instead of previous round holes, now cross-rot (QT) of rotorarm (RT) is beard within crank-disks (KS) of rotor. At this conception, room to move inside demands only some 2 cm (see upside picture EV GM 73 at C). Eccentricity of both ´halfmoons´ of gear thus demands each only some 1 cm. These disks must glide one within other by most less friction, i.e. must show most good gliding-surfaces (optimum e.g. build by ceramic materials). However also common ball-bearings could be used, e.g. building square constructional element (dark-red) of only 13 cm length.
Instead of previous rotor in shape of thick beam, here rotor is build only by two sticks rather thin, which are connected inside by previous crank-disk-elements and outside by effective masses. Sticks should be some elastic, e.g. be build off spring-steel, offering only few distance to move at its length of nearby 160 cm. So connection of these elements should also be little bit elastic, e.g. screws embedded within rubber-sleeves etc.
Mass can be effective only if achieving falling-speeds mentioned above within available time, thus mass is to guide at corresponding long radius, thus effective mass is to installed quite outside of rotors. Rotor-grid by itself however should be most light.
At the other hand it´s decisive, no kinetic energy is lost by timeless fast impact. For this reason, supporting points are installed rather inside. Advantageous are also properties of these crank-disk-gears (or comparable constructions). In addition however, elastic grid of rotor-sticks once more would support most ´soft´ deceleration of free-falling-speed to average turning speed of wheel.
This ´spring-construction´ is tensioned by ´impact´ and releases intermediately stored energy some later, so opposite mass is slinged upward some longer moments and also pressure onto rotorarm affects some longer times (resulting turning momentum more constant).
At this picture are marked six cross-rods (QT) at disk of rotorarm (RT), so in addition to one rotor drawn here, two more rotors could be installed, one aside the other in axial direction (at this picture marked only partly by R2 and R3). Naturally further modules of that kind could be arranged at same axis.
Optimum Designs
That crank-disk-gear was suggested because it´s to construct by only one axial level. Like mentioned above, gears can be installed within rotorarm or within rotor. Even more compact constructional design is to achieve, if this gear is build by two levels, so one part is installed within rotorarm and other part within rotor. Both parts advantageously are of same shape.
At picture EV GM 76 this concept is shown schematic. At A is drawn round disk (K1) of e.g. 5 cm diameter. Within this disk is a hole of 2 cm diameter, 1 cm eccentric to centre. Second crank-disk (K2) is drawn in front of, some shifted, however of same shape. Within both holes turnably is beard rotor bolt (RB). Both disks here are shown by stretched position.
At C both disks are located at identical positions, while rotor bolt could be positioned anywhere. Disk K2 thus can turn by radius of 2 cm around disk K1. Disk K2 can also take any position within that circle surface. By holes of only 5 cm diameter thus wanted radius of 2 cm room to move is realized (while bolt of 2 cm diameter is dimensioned rather strong).
In order to get stabile bearings, upside were used two rotorarms parallel, between which rotors are guided. Analogue are drawn two rotorarms (RT, only by parts) by cross-sectional view at this picture at B. Within each rotorarm turnably is installed disk K1. At rotor (RO, also drawn only by parts) between, disk K2 is installed turnably. At A and B is shown stretched position, like disks at downside supporting points are positioned. At this picture at D is drawn view top down onto supporting point upside of wheel, where both disks are (nearby) at same locations (like at C by side view).
Space between rotorarms can also be arranged wide enough for several rotors between. At picture EV GM 77 at A schematic is shown corresponding longitudinal cross-sectional view and at B cross-sectional view through rotor bolt (RB), analogue to previous picture left side.
Within both rotorarms (RT) again disks K1 are installed turnably and rotor bolt (RB) is mounted turnably within their holes. Now here also two disks K2 are drawn symmetrical, and also through their holes turnably is mounted rotor bolt.
Both disks K2 are connected by a constructional element, e.g. in shape of short pipe. At this rotorpipes (RR, German Rotorrohr) lastly are fix installed sticks of rotor (RO). Here for example one rotor is arranged at second position. If five rotors are arranged e.g. in sequence 1,3,5,2 and 4 at axial direction, sufficient space is available for attaching. Rotorpipe e.g. could show diameter of 8 cm without coming in touch with next pipes.
So at rotorarms of some 35 to 40 cm diameter, five rotors can be installed. If for example, each rotor is 4 cm wide, system shaft would be some 35 cm long (inclusive its bearings, exclusive additional fly wheel, which same time could serve for taking off energy e.g. via V-belt). So this wheel can be constructed rather compact and stabile, while lot of space is available for effective masses.
At picture EV GM 78 are shown these five rotors (RO) with ten effective masses (WM). Grid of rotor is fix (however some elastic) attached at previous rotorpipes (red). Within pipes turnably are mounted previous disks K2 (light-grey). Second part of crank-disk-gear (KS) are previous disks K1, mounted turnably at rotorarms (RT, blue circles surface). Here disks K1 are marked green, however are visible only by parts depending on each position of disks. Here third part of gear, rotor bolt is not drawn, so this picture is only schematic side view. Movement´s processes are analogue to previous descriptions.
Permanent turning Water Wheel
Bessler war clockmaker, however clocks of his time did run only by energy of springs or gravity (each to reactivate by tensioning springs or lifting weights occasionally). That times motors were only know as wind- or water-wheels. Bessler stated, he all times wanted to build a water wheel working autonomously.
Bessler´s wheel did work - however nobody got knowledge of his ´trick´. Hundreds of rebuilds were designed and constructed, nearby all trying to lift water respective weights at short lever arm and to use energies of falling down at longer lever arms. No running system of that conception is known. Concept offered here however works just contrary:
Kinetic energy of falling motion well is build up at large lever arm (turning point (SR) is supporting point right side), however this energy is not used at long lever arm and not direct kind transferred into turning momentum at system. Speed of effective mass, at first is merely decelerated. Short time after 9-o´clock-position, left supporting point (SL) becomes new turning point, i.e. lever arm becomes shorter by 1/3 to 1/2 (so by constant of turning momentum even speed should increase correspondingly).
Mass left side slings around that new turning point (SL) and thus lifts mass right side little bit, so this mass no longer is in direct contact with borders of its room to move, thus no longer weights at supporting point right side (SR). Weights of both masses and forces (first of redirection, later of deceleration) of falling motion of left mass and resistance forces versus upward-acceleration of mass right side, in total now weight only at supporting point left side. Only that´s source of usable turning momentum of that system (while further motions downwards and upwards of remaining phases in principle and practically are neutral).
Bessler´s mechanics probably was some other version than constructions suggested here. Previous discussed arrangement of elements in principle and motion´s processes in principle and affecting forces in principle however well correspond to ´Bessler´s secret´. He found that trick probably by experiments of many years and his wheel did show performance rather astonishing that times. This motor, bases on improved theoretical calculations, much better facilities of production engineering, usage of materials of any wanted quality, also for modern times will show sufficient performance.
Realization
With these hints however I end workouts concerning this subject. There are lots of well educated and experienced technical engineers, to whom I want to leave further jobs completely.
My job was to point out concept in general, to demonstrate process of movements in principle, to discuss effects of forces for using gravity by pure mechanical machines. I think, this chapter is sufficiently good description of mechanism Bessler probably used hundreds years ago.
Wheel must be relative large, so sufficient falling depth is given and resulting momentum is available at most long lever arm. At the other hand I did show, also within box of some 220 * 220 * 50 cm (so at backside of carport respective cellar) energy-stations of sufficient performance are to realize. That motor should drive electric generator, charging some accumulators, supplying lighting, heating, warm-water etc. of houses or flats.
This would be great success for environment and far above. I do hope, handcrafts like small or medium-sized businesses take challenge of practical realization of this idea. Based on its simple construction, it would make sense to develop modular assembly systems for do-it-yourselves. Just for relative small and simple power-units exist large demands whole over the world.
I want to point out: I won´t go on working at this subject (but only at subject of ether). I offer these ideas and considerations for free and anyone is free to use as he likes it. Nevertheless I hope soon to report at this website about positive results of (hobby-) craftsmen and which companies offer running systems.
Evert / 15.09.2004
| Gravity-Machines | Perpetuum Mobile | Index / Sitemap |