1. Skip to navigation
  2. Skip to content
  3. Skip to sidebar




Propulsion Engine Intended to be Run By People

Home Forums Research Engineering Propulsion Engine Intended to be Run By People

This topic contains 14 replies, has 8 voices, and was last updated by Profile photo of  Anonymous 3 years, 4 months ago.

Viewing 15 posts - 1 through 15 (of 15 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • #1494
    Profile photo of
    Anonymous

    This is a VERY ROUGH and probably not new idea for a gravity drive for 2 people or 2 engines for Sea Steading (in windless conditions replace edge of sphere with boat/raft) or Space Steading.

    B pulls A to itself

    [edge A———————-pull————————-B[edge
    of sphere] of sphere]

    When A reaches B, B pushes off A and A hits the edge of the craft which moves in the direction. A then reloads by crawling crawls the edge of the craft in a form of reloading and process begins again. This drive could be replicated at a macroscale and with engines or geared into ever larger amounts through a system of gears.

    [edge] A-push-B[edge]
    of sphere] of sphere]

    Advantages, entirely fuelless, if a single ‘hamster’ (or pachyderm or series of humans) are used. With the bio base producing food for fueling of the animal.
    Disadvantages, too slow. Develop teleportation instead? But in a fuelless world this would be cheapest and least pollutive in an enclosed space craft.

    You can laugh yourselves to death or whatever now :P

    #13662
    Profile photo of elspru
    elspru
    Participant

    you could have a fly wheel or several going at a time to encourage boat stability in heavy waters.

    also flywheels can be used for storing energy, and can be peddle powered to activate them.

    two-flywheels going in oppsite directions on top of each other and you’ll make an anti-gravity drive.

    calm aware desire choice love express intuit move

    #13666
    Profile photo of
    Anonymous

    What you describe above completely violates the First Law of Thermodynamics, ie: energy can be converted but not created or destroyed, AND Newton’s Third Law of Motion, ie: for ever action there is an equal and opposite reaction. You cannot gain motion by having the components of a system pushing against other components of the said same system. The equivelency principle states that for motion you must transfer energy created or stored in one system out of that system and into another one for force to be created via the converstion of energy. Through equivelency you can see that transfering energy from one part to another of the same system results in a null-transer in the quantity of an internal energy system, thus the system retains the equivelent amount of energy. To expect to produce work or force from this system would be to attempt to create Perpetual Motion.

    #13684
    Profile photo of elspru
    elspru
    Participant

    emmettvm wrote:

    What you describe above completely violates the First Law of Thermodynamics, ie: energy can be converted but not created or destroyed,

    Er why would you think otherwise?

    AND Newton’s Third Law of Motion, ie: for ever action there is an equal and opposite reaction. You cannot gain motion by having the components of a system pushing against other components of the said same system.

    there is no “pushing” they are merely spinning near each other..

    The equivelency principle states that for motion you must transfer energy created or stored in one system out of that system and into another one for force to be created via the converstion of energy. Through equivelency you can see that transfering energy from one part to another of the same system results in a null-transer in the quantity of an internal energy system, thus the system retains the equivelent amount of energy. To expect to produce work or force from this system would be to attempt to create Perpetual Motion.

    Perpetual motion is quite different from what I’m refering to.

    Though fly-wheels do spin for a long time, they require force to get them started and maintained.

    Also they don’t create a “force” but rather a vortex. Nazi scientists have some fairly good documentation on the particulars.

    Here is a simple diagram of the Haunebu’s anti-gravity drive and workings:

    The larger or faster one is where there is pull towards.

    The nazi’s at some point for high-speeds made the disks out of ferro-particles suspended in mercury. turned via electrical induction.

    One of my main motivations for seasteading is that such beneficial technologies are often secreted away by landlubbers.

    On seasteads we at least have a chance of making technologies and keeping them.

    calm aware desire choice love express intuit move

    #13687
    Profile photo of
    Anonymous

    I was talking about seasteader-‘s post, not yours. Honestly, i didnt even read yours (embarassed grimace)

    #13996
    Profile photo of
    Anonymous

    Ever notice the breeze when you ride in a power boat? Put a wind turbine on the front of the boat to use this breeze to power the propellor. Once you get it started, it’ll never need to stop. I saw this on a model boat once at a science fair, thought it was pretty clever, not sure why it never caught on. Maybe an oil company bought the patent and shelved it.

    #13999
    Profile photo of shredder7753
    shredder7753
    Participant

    admiral wrote:

    Ever notice the breeze when you ride in a power boat? Put a wind turbine on the front of the boat to use this breeze to power the propellor. Once you get it started, it’ll never need to stop. I saw this on a model boat once at a science fair, thought it was pretty clever, not sure why it never caught on. Maybe an oil company bought the patent and shelved it.

    yo – i HAVE to see this in action

    ____________

    My work

    “Leadership and do-ership are not the same thing”

    #14002
    Profile photo of
    Anonymous

    no video of the boat in action at the science fair, but then camcorders weren’t around yet.

    #14004
    Profile photo of GenSeneca
    GenSeneca
    Participant

    admiral wrote:
    Put a wind turbine on the front of the boat to use this breeze to power the propellor. Once you get it started, it’ll never need to stop.

    That sounds like…

    Perpetual Motion

    There is undisputed scientific consensus that perpetual motion would violate either the first law of thermodynamics, the second law of thermodynamics, or both.

    Despite the fact that successful perpetual motion devices are physically impossible in terms of our current understanding of the laws of physics, the pursuit of perpetual motion remains popular.

    #14011
    Profile photo of
    Anonymous

    While you could use such a turbine on a moving vehicle to generate power, the return on the power versus the drag created by the device would result in a net loss of energy. There is work being done with nano-level depression generators which would be coated onto the skin or paint of a vehicle which would, when hit by the force of wind, create additional power without additional drag, creating a net gain of energy, but they would never be able to create more energy than it took to move them.

    All of this is stipulated by the first two laws of thermodynamics, as I described above in my response to seasteaderp

    #14682
    Profile photo of
    Anonymous

    I'm not much of a sailor, coming as I do from Indiana, but I do know of a technology called DDWFTTW. Driving Down Wind Faster Then The Wind. It's only been proven for about a year in prototype, experimental land racers. It uses a propeller-axle linkage to use the wind to initially start spinning the prop, hence driving the vehicle forward with the axle. As the craft approaches speed parity with the wind, the axle takes over and starts driving the prop and the vehicle passes through the "wind barrier" and starts travelling faster than the air that's propelling it.

    http://www.fasterthanthewind.org/

    They claim it can continue accellerating indefinitely, but I doubt that. I'm even less sanguine about using it to drive a set of sea propellers with a set of wind turbines, but when you're going the same direction as the wind, but your craft can't abide a giant mast and sails, it might be a viable alternative to burning fossil fuels, or otherwise expending energy to travel at a reasonable speed. If the respective props were properly designed, it might be as simple as adding a gearbox to cut out the engines and cut in the wind powered shaft.

    --
    I have a thorium reactor under the hood of my car. I get ∞ miles per gallon.

    #14696
    Profile photo of wohl1917
    wohl1917
    Participant

    I haven’t looked and the link yet but it sounds like perpetual motion to me. I am a sailor and I can tell you it can’t work. Still, welcome aboard.

    < http://ocr.wikia.com/wiki/Oceanic_Citizens_Republic_Wiki>

    Profile photo of
    Anonymous

    I believe it works on land. I’ve seen the YouTube videos and read the descriptions of their data. I just don’t know that it can be translated to an ocean-going vessel.

    I have a thorium reactor under the hood of my car. I get ∞ miles per gallon.

    #14709
    Profile photo of wohl1917
    wohl1917
    Participant

    and it is an interesting machine but still, you can’t get something for nothing. I’ve seen vidio of a windmill powered boat sailing directly into the wind but what these guys are proposing just won’t work at sea or on land.

    < http://ocr.wikia.com/wiki/Oceanic_Citizens_Republic_Wiki>

    Profile photo of
    Anonymous

    it sounds like either we have incomplete information on exactly how their craft is powered, or their claims are “innacurate.” Approaching the problem from the standpoint of physics, if we consider the only power for the vehicle (land or sea) to be the energy emparted by the wind via the force of the wind impacting the vehicle, and all other conditions ceteris paribus, you can make a few assumptions and also apply a few rules.

    First of all, at vehicle speed ZERO and wind speed X, the difference between the vehicle and the wind speed applied to the surface area of the sails/wing (minus all of the VERY complicated math required to understand any one of the four competing principles of lift) equals a certain amount of energy, say energy Y. While the vehicle could use Y in at varying levels of efficiency, even at 100% energy transmission it would be impossible for the vehicle to move faster than the total amount of energy in Y. There are a number of factors in how fast this would be (ground friction, lost energy, vehicle weight, mechanical resistance, etc).

    More realistically, though, you also have to include calculations affecting acceleration of the vehicle, and thats where their claims fall apart. As the vehicle moves faster, and begins to approach the speed X (wind speed) the amount of energy that exists via the difference of the vehicle and the wind approaches zero.

    These assumptions are, of course, only for a vehicle moving WITH the wind, not on a tack across it, but with real world conditions I still find their claims improbable.

Viewing 15 posts - 1 through 15 (of 15 total)

You must be logged in to reply to this topic.



Posted on at

Categories:

Written by

Blog/Newsletter

Donate