In chapter above Inertia and Gravity at Wheels basic facts were discussed. At last chapter Studies to Gravity-Motor step by step solutions were searched for. In principle, concepts there already should run, here however some more improvements will be discussed. In addition, once more shall be investigated, why which momentum might be for free use. Finally here some hints for further solutions will be mentioned.
Starting situation
At the very beginning, her forces of excentric masse points were investigated, later on a rotor ring with concentric masses was suggested. Then it was worked out, the rotor may not be supported by a central bearing. At that side of upward-movement, a support some lower than rotor axis should be, here called support wheel. This wheel might be beared at a pendulum around system axis or directly within the housing.
On that side of downward-motion, the rotor must be supported second time, at the inner side of a gear-rim. This support should be horicontal to system axis, thus a horicontal pressure resp. pulling force in radial direction should exist. At that support however, tangential components will exist too, which will be transfered to gear-rim as turning momentum.
Thereto a special kind of teeth would be fine. Instead of gear-rim and gear wheel, much easier should be to install running surfaces with good friction, analog to car tyres. Contact between ´gear-rim´ and rotor-ring thus should be made of rubber or plastic with good friction, might be even with some profile (practically flexibel ´teeths´).
Whell next wheel
In EVGIG 15 a most simple concept is shown schematically. Again there will be a supporting wheel (SR), which direct within the housing (GE) will be beared (SL). This supporting wheel will still be used as support for a ring-shaped rotor (RO). Masses (M) of rotor are still concentrically arranged around rotor axis (RA). The rotor doesn´t show a shaft nore central bearing.
Opposite to concepts above, here second support no longer will be at the inner side of an inner running surface, but outside of a wheel. This wheel here is called output wheel (AR, German Abtriebsrad), which is beared by a shaft (AL, German Abtriebslager) within the housing. Distance between output- and support-wheel and height of its bearings her is chosen that kind, the output wheel will still be in contact with the rotor in horicontal line. Rotor axis and output axis are installed at same height, thus again will exist this horicontal pressure in radial diretion of rotor axis.
In order to show this bearings schematically, here the housing is marked as an uneven rack. Radius of supporting wheel and output wheel may be different to these examples here shown. The output wheel should be but large enough, a sufficient contact surface will be given, in order to transfere tangential forces by friction.
By that kind of support, the rotor natually is not guided well. So additional rollers should be installed, both sides of rotor. On the other hand, stable construction would be achieded, when the rotor would be a cylinder rather wide. At third, there could be used two supports in axial direction, with some distance between. At picture EVGIG 05 below this is shown in a longitudinal section view schematically.
By simpelst means, this maschine could be constructed be spoke-wheels of bycicles. The rotor might be constructed by two wheels, between which - most outside - effective masse will be installed. This rotor wheel could roll with its tyres (at the picture marked by outward half circles) on the rims (at the picture marked by inward showing half circles) of output- and support-wheels. Thus also output- and support-wheel should be installed twice.
By simple models like this, demands above could be approved. Tests with concentric or with excentric masses should be done. A problem might be, the rotor will show much friction, as the rotor ring might be ´wedged in´ between output- and support-wheels. At any case, good running bearings will be neccessary.
Effective forces
By static view, also this concept will show no turning momentum. Weight of rotor will be based on supporting wheel, where pressure will show downward-right. On the other hand, the rotor will ´lean´ towards the output-wheel, where pressure will exist in horicontal direction.
If now the rotor will turn, inertia-power and -vectors will add to gravity-power and -vector with resulting forces discussed above. These forces are identical to forces at any normal wheel turning around its axis resp. central shaft. There, these forces will show different pressing or pulling at spokes, will say at wheel shaft with different weights at wheel bearing. As here no rotor shaft nore central wheel bearing exists, these forces may but have effect at both supports. Instead of addition of all forces at a wheels bearing resp. their compensation, here these forces show ´de-central´ effects, which won´t compensate each other totally.
As discussed at chapter above, these forces are asymmetrical. In principle, supporting wheel will take but small forces of rotor masse at upward-phase resp. here of that half right side between both supporting points. Forces at support wheel, in sum will nearby be null. At the contact surface of output-wheel however, the vertical showing components of left half of rotor will press tangentially downwards. These are components of inertia and gravity as well, forces of downward-phase vectorially added, thus strong downward showning forces.
Asymmetric weights
In EVGIG 16 resulting forces and vertical components are shown once more, analog to a picture of basic chapter. There, by example of beam-scale these different weights were demonstraded, showing ´weights´ of 1 to 0 at upward-phase, while weights of 1 to a maximum of 2 units are given at downward-phase.
Dowside in this picture once more a simplified cross sectional view is shown. Here, the output wheel is drawn with same radius and same height like supporting wheel. The output wheel thus won´t be able to take all tangential components. On the other hand, this symmetrical support of rotor would show better stability and less friction. Output- and support-wheel could also show other radius, could be positioned higher than at this example. Even by this arrangement of supports, different spreading of weights will still exist.
Maximum of turning speed and momentum
This drawing, now will show exactly situation of beam-scale above, where different weigts will exist in shape of tangential forces at output- and support-wheel. As discussed above, forces at support wheel nearby neutral will be and without importance. At output-wheel however, masse in downward-phase will seam much heavier, in average 1.5-fold at half radius of rotor (approximately). On the other hand, at upward-phase at half radius of rotor but 0.5-fold of normal weight will exist. Thus, approximately maximum of turning momentum might be half rotor masse by half rotor radius.
At low speed (e.g. when starting the system) but a small momentum will exist. As soon this momentum will be higher than friction, system will self-accelerate. Acceleration however will stop at a maximum speed and maximum momentum above. If speed would exceed this normal speed (resp. system would be accelerated stronger), at upward-phase inertia-power will still be reduced by same gravity. At downward-phase however, masse could be faster than free falling speed would be, thus masse would have to be pressed downward, thus gravity won´t contribute any more with full power. Difference between weights of both sides would be less, thus system wouldn´t accelerate any more.
On the other hand, maximum turning momentum might not be drawn off the system completely, otherwise the system would decelerate resp. lasty stop. Within the system a momentum must remain, in order to maintain self-acceleration up to normal speed, counter braking action of taking output. Thus, some half of maximum momentum above might be used for output, approximately 1/8 of rotor-masse by rotor-radius - minus normal friction losses.
That´s not much energy, but by gear reduction Bessler-Wheel well could have managed to pull up 35 kg by this technology. A maschine installed at the backside of a carport, some 30 cm broad, should be able to produce energy for families home.
Undiscovered
Concept of picture above looks very usual and it´s a question, why demanded effects shouldn´t have been discovered for long time. First, this rotor may not have a central shaft, so this effect just could have happened at pipes. These pipes should have to turn. But one wouldn´t start turning the pipe, but drive the output- or support-wheel. Then speed would be fix. Also at pipes, one wouldn´t use supports like here with most large distance between. Thus, vertical components would have effect at but small lever arms.
If pipes would turn slow, effective forces would rather compensate friction. If pipes would turn too fast, effective forces will decrease. Weights have effect but at half radius, thus effect might but occure at large diameters. Even this effect would have occured an any application, nobody would have used it, nobody would have tried to enforce this effect - cause by common physics no perpetuum mobile is allowed to exist.
Inexplicable
For many people these effects will still be inexplicited resp. question will still be, why this ´phenomena´ won´t occure at any normal wheel. Key-fact does show that example of beam-scale: a normal wheel also does have a turning point and also asymmetric forces, but diffenert weights there will show but different abrasion at bearing.
Even by de-centralization of supports these diffences of weights will occure at diffenet locations. At a normal wheel, pressure will walk around central shaft, like this also here party forces will walk around the shafts of output- and support-wheel. Support-wheel in sum, here will but give pressure towards downside-right, back upside-left as counter-pressure towards rotor axis. The output-wheel will give back a horicontal pressure towards rotor axis. Remaining components however will have effect vertical at the output-wheel, thus resulting a tangential momentum there.
Also this discription might explicite these effects: effective are but gravity-forces. By overlay of these forces by inertia-vectores, gravity no longer will be symmetrically spread. At upward-phase resulting forces show smaller amount, at downward-phase both forces will add to stronger resulting components. At the support-wheel, thus must be done but few work to lift masses, while at output-wheel the stronger, downward showing forces will exist. Difference of both weights, by parts will be usable energy.
Bauvarianten
By these principles, maschines of diverse kind might be realized. So it´s to check, whether concentric of excentric masses will show better results. Even the output-wheel could be driven with variing speed, by planet-gears nevertheless could be achieved constant speed at lastly output.
I also will check interpretations of crop-circle-pictures once more, might be these including excenetric rings and sickles will show same effect, probably clearer. Above this, solution of Bessler-Wheel could have been quit another technology.
Workouts to this subject will go on. Another possible solution - just for fun - will be presented at next chapter Polygon-Ring and -Wheel. To the end of 2000 further results will be shown. Nevertheless it would be fine, models of concepts here would be constructed, demanded effects would be approved.
Evert / 24.10.2000