Jump to content


Photo
* * * - - 3 votes

New engine


  • Please log in to reply
1377 replies to this topic

#1151 Kelpiecross

Kelpiecross
  • Member

  • 850 posts
  • Joined: October 10

Posted 30 July 2013 - 02:35

None of your examples contradict the law of conservation of energy.

The energy content of food is well known. An adult male in a labour intensive job may consume 15,000 - 20,000 kJ/day. That is about 0.5 kW for 8 hours. In reality he can probably output no more than 0.1 kW averaged over 8 hours.

Increasing entropy? There are no exceptions yet discovered to the best of my knowledge.

The universe will continue to grow. It will cool off and darken too. I am not worried.


Life and living things are an important "local" exception to the law of increasing entropy. And evolution produces living things of continually increasing complexity and decreasing entropy.
Presumably the reducing entropy of living things is more than balanced by the increasing entropy that life causes elsewhere.

When you think about it, life is a very strange phenomenon.

Advertisement

#1152 Wuzak

Wuzak
  • Member

  • 3,472 posts
  • Joined: September 00

Posted 30 July 2013 - 04:45

Meanwhile, in another forum I have been trying to explain that torque is not a form of energy.

#1153 gruntguru

gruntguru
  • Member

  • 5,196 posts
  • Joined: January 09

Posted 30 July 2013 - 05:32

Meanwhile, in another forum I have been trying to explain that torque is not a form of energy.

Yet another technical forum no doubt.

#1154 gruntguru

gruntguru
  • Member

  • 5,196 posts
  • Joined: January 09

Posted 30 July 2013 - 05:35

Life and living things are an important "local" exception to the law of increasing entropy.

How so? Are you talking about entropy in the classical thermodynamic sense?

#1155 Wuzak

Wuzak
  • Member

  • 3,472 posts
  • Joined: September 00

Posted 30 July 2013 - 07:34

Yet another technical forum no doubt.


Correct.

I have been told I take the "populist" view of torque!

#1156 Kelpiecross

Kelpiecross
  • Member

  • 850 posts
  • Joined: October 10

Posted 31 July 2013 - 03:23

How so? Are you talking about entropy in the classical thermodynamic sense?


You don't think that the fact that a random collection of carbon, hydrogen, oxygen etc. etc. atoms apparently spontaneously organise themselves into the complex molecules of living things is not just a bit against the normal laws of entropy?

#1157 h4887

h4887
  • Member

  • 875 posts
  • Joined: July 04

Posted 31 July 2013 - 11:50

Talk about thread drift...!
Here is an interesting essay on life, disorder and entropy

http://www.talkorigi...mo/entropy.html

#1158 Feliks

Feliks
  • Member

  • 639 posts
  • Joined: December 04

Posted 31 July 2013 - 22:28

Returning to my anecdotes .. Beautiful demonstration of how much electrical energy can give Peltier, despite the relatively small temperature difference cold and hot water. I made ​​a similar show, (also aluminum edges) .. Peltier provides electricity, visible on a universal scale electric meter ... Just make your finger and you can see tens of millivolts meter .. Once I measured the temperature difference ... It was about 3 degrees Celsius, and electricity was a lot .. And here you can see that something does not quite this T1-T2 ....


https://www.youtube....ature=endscreen

Andrew :smoking: :smoking:

Most important, the power to do so, we need to replace the water vapor.

Edited by Feliks, 31 July 2013 - 22:50.


#1159 gruntguru

gruntguru
  • Member

  • 5,196 posts
  • Joined: January 09

Posted 31 July 2013 - 22:44

How so? Are you talking about entropy in the classical thermodynamic sense?


You don't think that the fact that a random collection of carbon, hydrogen, oxygen etc. etc. atoms apparently spontaneously organise themselves into the complex molecules of living things is not just a bit against the normal laws of entropy?


OK so you weren't.

Advertisement

#1160 gruntguru

gruntguru
  • Member

  • 5,196 posts
  • Joined: January 09

Posted 31 July 2013 - 22:49

Talk about thread drift...!

If any thread is gonna drift - its this one!

#1161 Kelpiecross

Kelpiecross
  • Member

  • 850 posts
  • Joined: October 10

Posted 01 August 2013 - 02:52

This whole subject of evolution, life and entropy etc. is somewhat hampered by various interest groups taking positions that suit their way of thinking. Creationists think it is anti the law of entropy and evolutionists argue that it agrees with entropy laws. I should point out that I am personally very anti-religion and anti-Creation and being in the past involved in geology clearly I regard evolution theory as being valid and self-evident.
Nevertheless I think there is something very mysterious about the way life actually began - surely it is against entropy that atoms etc. would spontaneously organise themselves into living things - even with a few billion years to do this.

And I am buggered if I know the difference between classical and non-classical entropy.

#1162 gruntguru

gruntguru
  • Member

  • 5,196 posts
  • Joined: January 09

Posted 01 August 2013 - 06:55

Read H4887's link.

Entropy is a property of matter, considered in thermodynamics - quite abstract and difficult to imagine. The terms randomness and disorder are often used to help picture it, but it has nothing to do with organisation or disorganisation of atoms, tidiness of ones desk etc etc.

http://www.talkorigi...mo/entropy.html

#1163 Kelpiecross

Kelpiecross
  • Member

  • 850 posts
  • Joined: October 10

Posted 01 August 2013 - 11:43

Read H4887's link.

Entropy is a property of matter, considered in thermodynamics - quite abstract and difficult to imagine. The terms randomness and disorder are often used to help picture it, but it has nothing to do with organisation or disorganisation of atoms, tidiness of ones desk etc etc.

http://www.talkorigi...mo/entropy.html


I think I see what you mean about classical/non-classical entropy now - I am definitely talking non-classical entropy. At uni I successfully answered many questions involving calculations involving entropy - but I have to admit I could never quite see the point of it all - I just learnt the methods etc. slightly parrot-fashion. As you say the idea of randomness etc. was never really mentioned. However, in real life, the idea of things always tending towards randomness and disorder is a very useful and self-evident concept whereas formal entropy calculations seem slightly meaningless - at least to me they do.

With a lot of these "big" questions like evolution/entropy, the origin of life, is there other life in the universe, where do flies go in the winter etc. etc. - nobody really knows the answers. I seem to recall Carl Sagan was an exobiologist - a specialist in life elsewhere in the universe (how do you become a specialist in something that may not exist?). But he really didn't know if there was life elsewhere at all - essentially his opinion on life etc. was no better or worse than your or my opinion - he didn't really know, we don't really know.

(Although there is a finite possibility that you are actually a little green man from the planet Spon and you do actually know).

#1164 RogerGraham

RogerGraham
  • Member

  • 106 posts
  • Joined: October 12

Posted 01 August 2013 - 12:02

(Although there is a finite possibility that you are actually a little green man from the planet Spon and you do actually know).


KC, that is completely ridiculous.

As everyone knows, the beings on Spon are blue.

Edited by RogerGraham, 01 August 2013 - 12:03.


#1165 Tony Matthews

Tony Matthews
  • Member

  • 17,498 posts
  • Joined: September 08

Posted 01 August 2013 - 22:06

It is a greenish blue...

#1166 gruntguru

gruntguru
  • Member

  • 5,196 posts
  • Joined: January 09

Posted 02 August 2013 - 00:08

In the ambient light on Spon it is more towards purple. Unfortunately the retinal response of the male Sponker makes everything look pink.

I think this thread belongs in the paddock club.



#1167 Feliks

Feliks
  • Member

  • 639 posts
  • Joined: December 04

Posted 03 August 2013 - 00:19

It is a greenish blue...


Yes ,You right.


Posted Image

And his bike ...


http://www.new4strok...Yodabicycle.jpg

Posted Image


Andrew :smoking: :smoking:

#1168 Wuzak

Wuzak
  • Member

  • 3,472 posts
  • Joined: September 00

Posted 03 August 2013 - 01:16

Yes ,You right.


Posted Image

And his bike ...


http://www.new4strok...Yodabicycle.jpg

Posted Image


Andrew :smoking: :smoking:



Surely Yoda's bike doesn't need pedals or venturi tubes - he just thinks forward, and off he goes!

#1169 Wuzak

Wuzak
  • Member

  • 3,472 posts
  • Joined: September 00

Posted 03 August 2013 - 01:19

With regards to the air engine, isn't a high pressure air source required. You are providing a small amount of vacuum, I presume, to the outlet side, but there won't be much power from that small a pressure difference.

#1170 desmo

desmo
  • Tech Forum Host

  • 12,908 posts
  • Joined: January 00

Posted 03 August 2013 - 02:41

Imagine if instead of six devices, it had 600! 100 times the power! It might need giant drag chutes just to remain still!

#1171 manolis

manolis
  • Member

  • 374 posts
  • Joined: May 03

Posted 03 August 2013 - 04:46

Quote from "Engines of Our ingenuity"

Robert Fludd proposed one of the famous perpetual motion machines. It worked like this: A water wheel grinds grain, and it pumps the water back into its own supply tank. If such a thing could work, you could lock the whole business in a room and it'd grind grain forever. You wouldn't need a stream.

Fludd was Europe's best known scientist in his time. When his ideas finally fell, it was because he didn't protect himself from the lightning bolts of change. Every 17th-century scientist we know about today took time out to attack Fludd's ideas. He was the lightning rod that called the new science down on alchemy. When he died in 1637, alchemy died with him.



The big patent offices decided, long ago, to not accept applications for "perpetual motion" mechanisms.

Felix, your last mechanism seems quite simple to built.
I propose to secure the bicycle, by a horizontal beam, on a vertical shaft that drives an electric generator.
If you are right, after an initial push the system will provide electric power for ever and ever.
If you are wrong (or joking), you can always focus on other, more useful, projects.

Manolis Pattakos

#1172 Feliks

Feliks
  • Member

  • 639 posts
  • Joined: December 04

Posted 03 August 2013 - 11:36

Quote from "Engines of Our ingenuity"

[i][indent=1]Robert Fludd proposed one of the famous perpetual motion machines. It worked like this: A water wheel grinds grain, and it pumps the water back into its own supply tank. If such a thing could work, you could lock the whole business in a room and it'd grind grain forever. You wouldn't need a stream.

Fludd was Europe's best known scientist in his time.


Manolis, your lectures about Perpetua mobile, it may on another forum .. Well, for example, the forum where even to this day, believe that a machine heavier than air can not fly .. Only balloon ... I guess all those "scientists" whose cites, so they thought ... It is known that there is perpetual motion, because the losses .. And I have not written anywhere that this is a perpetual motion .. just you and a few others think so ... I wrote that this device can help us to ride a bike .. rather than advise the other, (which is rude) what to do and how to deal with, try to raise himself to do such a device, and then you will know whether it helps or not. ... Because it is my contention that the real airplanes fly, but are heavier than air .. sometimes look to the sky above, and you'll see .. And please, no more of these're trying to straighten my statements before all these things out of order by the end of the ..

Andrew :smoking: :smoking:

#1173 Feliks

Feliks
  • Member

  • 639 posts
  • Joined: December 04

Posted 03 August 2013 - 11:51

Surely Yoda's bike doesn't need pedals or venturi tubes - he just thinks forward, and off he goes!


Oh yeah, you're right ... But I think we need to walk used to it and slowly develop your skills. Especially these technical and you can not skip some of the steps ... :rolleyes:

Andrew :wave:

#1174 gruntguru

gruntguru
  • Member

  • 5,196 posts
  • Joined: January 09

Posted 03 August 2013 - 12:24

Manolis, your lectures about Perpetua mobile, it may on another forum .. Well, for example, the forum where even to this day, believe that a machine heavier than air can not fly .. Only balloon ... I guess all those "scientists" whose cites, so they thought ... It is known that there is perpetual motion, because the losses .. And I have not written anywhere that this is a perpetual motion .. just you and a few others think so ... I wrote that this device can help us to ride a bike .. rather than advise the other, (which is rude) what to do and how to deal with, try to raise himself to do such a device, and then you will know whether it helps or not. ... Because it is my contention that the real airplanes fly, but are heavier than air .. sometimes look to the sky above, and you'll see .. And please, no more of these're trying to straighten my statements before all these things out of order by the end of the ..

Andrew :smoking: :smoking:

Skeptics may have discounted heavier than air flying machines but intelligent people such as Leonardo looked at the birds and reasoned that it must be possible. Perpetual motion machines on the other hand are in violation of some very basic laws of science and are unlikely to ever be possible. If they are it will not be as simple as a generator driven by a motor or an air motor driven by a Venturi.

#1175 Feliks

Feliks
  • Member

  • 639 posts
  • Joined: December 04

Posted 03 August 2013 - 13:33

Yes, certainly nothing is that simple ... For even have different opinions and views on what is our home ... Earth



Andrew :wave:

Edited by Feliks, 03 August 2013 - 13:34.


#1176 manolis

manolis
  • Member

  • 374 posts
  • Joined: May 03

Posted 03 August 2013 - 16:14

Manolis, your lectures about Perpetua mobile, it may on another forum .. Well, for example, the forum where even to this day, believe that a machine heavier than air can not fly .. Only balloon ... I guess all those "scientists" whose cites, so they thought ... It is known that there is perpetual motion, because the losses .. And I have not written anywhere that this is a perpetual motion .. just you and a few others think so ... I wrote that this device can help us to ride a bike .. rather than advise the other, (which is rude) what to do and how to deal with, try to raise himself to do such a device, and then you will know whether it helps or not. ... Because it is my contention that the real airplanes fly, but are heavier than air .. sometimes look to the sky above, and you'll see .. And please, no more of these're trying to straighten my statements before all these things out of order by the end of the ..
Andrew


Feliks,

Don’t get me wrong; I just try to help.

In this thread you have presented, so far, several mechanisms that produce, as you claim, “free” energy.
Gliders, guitars, music tubes, venturi tubes and so on.

What is the polite way for someone to tell you that you are wrong?
That in every isolated system of bodies the total amount f energy can neither increase a bit, nor decrease a bit?
That a guitar cannot generate more sound energy than the energy given to the guitar strings? (no matter if many are confused by the term “amplifier” used for the resonance box of the guitar).
That a glider elevates only because it exploits the air streams?


Before the Wright brothers, there were people claiming that the flight of a heavier than the air body is impossible; others, more clever, looking at the flying birds and at the flying bugs (all heavier than the air), knew that it was just a matter of time for the man to fly.

The “free energy” is quite different than the flight of heavier than the air bodies.
In the nature there is nothing supporting the “free energy” theory; nothing at all.


Unless I am wrong, you claim that your bicycle with the “venturi tubes pack” (post 1169) will go faster than the same bicycle without the “venturi tubes pack”.
As I understand it, with your system some “free energy” (i.e. without spending any fuel) is generated that pushes the bicycle forward.
Is this what you claim?
Can you explain in simple words how this happens?
At which moment and where the additional energy is created?
Isn’t this a realization of the “perpetual motion” dream?


If you don’t like strictly technical objections / remarks to your posts, it's OK with me. Just say so, and I’ll stop posting here.

On the other hand, when you see someone hitting with his head a rock trying to smooth-out the rock surface, don't you have the obligation to explain him how wrong he is?

Thanks
Manolis Pattakos


#1177 Feliks

Feliks
  • Member

  • 639 posts
  • Joined: December 04

Posted 03 August 2013 - 17:14

On another forum, or some little thing trying to understand, or understand the unwelcome.

I explained I will not be simple drawings.

In my mind, photovoltaic energy and wind energy is completely free energy, and as most people call it ...
We can also be produced by the wind and the light of other ways of doing it as nature ... And we want to increase the speed of the wind, then use the nozzle venturi. And it gives us this desired speed that is higher .. Only and only a ...
Similarly as in the description below ....

I understand that it's me helping you, not the other way around..


Felix. While interments and yagis amplify some frequency in some vectors they do it at the expense of other frequencies at other vectors. You cant put 100W into a Yagi and get 200 out. You seem to be thinking you get free energy by using a venturi the wind or a tuned instrument this in incorrect.


There is inversely If you want to have a good range, the same as a 200 watt transmitter at the dipole, the transmitter with 100 watts you get the same range, and even better, using YAGI 14 elemets ..

We meant about the extent and so we get .. not the increase in power .. :rolleyes:

Andrew


Andrew :smoking: :smoking:

#1178 manolis

manolis
  • Member

  • 374 posts
  • Joined: May 03

Posted 03 August 2013 - 19:34

On another forum, or some little thing trying to understand, or understand the unwelcome.
I explained I will not be simple drawings.
In my mind, photovoltaic energy and wind energy is completely free energy, and as most people call it ...
We can also be produced by the wind and the light of other ways of doing it as nature ... And we want to increase the speed of the wind, then use the nozzle venturi. And it gives us this desired speed that is higher .. Only and only a ...
Similarly as in the description below ....
I understand that it's me helping you, not the other way around..
Andrew


Feliks,

Neither the photovoltaic energy is “free energy” (no matter how people use to call it), nor the wind energy is “free energy”
Fuel (Hydrogen) has been “burnt” (to Helium) in the sun in order the photovoltaic to provide electricity.
For every 100 Joules of energy generated in the sun, less than 20 Joules are taken as electricity from the photovoltaic.
The photovoltaic cells just convert a small part of the sunlight energy into another type of energy (electricity).

In my humble opinion, you are helping nobody; instead, you are confusing many, especially the young ones.

Thanks
Manolis Pattakos


#1179 Feliks

Feliks
  • Member

  • 639 posts
  • Joined: December 04

Posted 04 August 2013 - 14:45

Feliks,


In my humble opinion, you are helping nobody; instead, you are confusing many, especially the young ones.

Thanks
Manolis Pattakos


Mamolis, no offense, but your arguments are about the young ones ", some arguments remind me of the Romanian women on the street, with a small child in her arms ..
It is good that these young people are open to progress, otherwise we were stuck with the absolute lack of ..

Now you can go back to my engine project new4stroke that you very much approve of ..

https://en.wikipedia...gine_efficiency

Friction[edit source | editbeta]

An engine has many moving parts that produce friction. Some of these friction forces remain constant (as long as applied load is constant); some of these friction losses increase as engine speed increases, such as piston side forces and connecting bearing forces (due to increased inertia forces from the oscillating piston). A few friction forces decrease at higher speed, such as the friction force on the cam's lobes used to operate the inlet and outlet valves (the valves' inertia at high speed tends to pull the cam follower away from the cam lobe). Along with friction forces, an operating engine has pumping losses, which is the work required to move air into and out of the cylinders. This pumping loss is minimal at low speed, but increases approximately as the square of the speed, until at rated power an engine is using about 20% of total power production to overcome friction and pumping losses.


And now this. My engine new4stroke is the most vital advantage, even though it does not appear on any animation ..
Many people have spoken out about the efficiency of four-stroke engine, was stating with such engine already reached peaks of efficiency possible, and to get it to improve by 2% "The great issue" about three bilion dollars a year on research ..
Because they thought impossible, that you can make a difference when it comes to basic parameter or friction, which presented the current position of Wikipedia.
Meanwhile, my engine, changing the ratio of friction to the size of the intake air through the engine. So, but it's something that everyone seemed so far out that is constant and unchanging.
And here's the joke ... my engine, even though it is built on a base the size of a two-cylinder engine, 600 ccm, geometrically speaking, sucks about 950 ccm ... (in fact much greater).
So as if normal engine but with an additional 3 1/6 cylinder .. but the cylinder does not. This increase in the displacement give only two intake valves piston located in the cylinder head. And there may be nothing revolutionary, were it not that these pistons with rods they turn two times slower than the basic pistons ... In connection with this, the force of inertia, which is realized as the additional volume (350 ccm) are swept up four times smaller (which I also take into account the Wikipedia)
So in general we can say that this "extra cylinder", if it could be adjoined to the basic operating system of the twice the speed, with the same parameters as the pistons sucking friction should have only 88 cc. So the difference 350 - 88 = 262 ccm, give for free, with my engine system ... We can say that in relation to its basic size 600 ccm. Friction has been reduced by as much as 43%. suction against displacement in the traditional way ...
With modesty will not ask where my 43/2 x 3000000000000 = 64 bilon $ .... which do not have the "Great" lecture every year on the 2% increase in efficiency ....

And the real efficiency gain can be easily demonstrated mathematically ...

Posted Image

And of course, what Daniel suggested must take place within the limits of reasonable operation of the engine...

I can understand a lot, even that can be
stunned silence, but not for so many years ...

Also understand that it may be hard to admit to the fact that I thought differently, but I think that should be a hit in the chest and publicly admit to mistakes. Because we all now see that the physical performance engine can zoom in on a lot of ...


I think it is a step by step to resolve these problems, but probably need to order, then it will be easier for us to understand next.

Yet as we have beautiful animations new4stroke flat engine .. :rolleyes:


Andrew :smoking: :smoking:

Edited by Feliks, 06 August 2013 - 19:50.


Advertisement

#1180 manolis

manolis
  • Member

  • 374 posts
  • Joined: May 03

Posted 05 August 2013 - 04:11

The perpetual motion machines are like the drugs.
Once someone gets involved (trapped), it is difficult to escape (to get released).

I know several people (they contact me from time to time) who think they have discovered “the” working “perpetual motion machine” (an engine running without a fuel), or the “antigravity” machine etc.
It is a vicious circle: on one hand they cannot make, by themselves, the necessary calculations in order to prove they are right (despite they deeply believe they are right), on the other hand they cannot trust a stranger to make the calculations for them, because they do not want to put at risk their “great” / “unique” / “revolutionary” etc idea / intellectual property.

In my previous posts I tried to warn the potential “perpetual motion machine inventors” to be more than suspicious when they read that someone claims he can produce energy without spending fuel.
And because the young ones are the most vulnerable, the warning was directed to the young forum members.


Feliks, does it fit to “a woman begging for money, keeping a baby in her arms”?


It is good to see you return to real machines (those that do spend fuel to provide energy).

Making an animation for an engine does not mean that “you very much approve” it.

The new4stroke arrangement combines characteristics from the 2-stroke engines and from the 4-stroke engines, like the Bristol valve-less radial engines.
The question is whether it combines only the good characteristics of the two groups.

An obvious issue of the new4stroke engine is the lubrication: you need lubricant on the walls of the small-ported cylinders, wherein the piston / valves (and their rings) thrust.
When the ports are revealed by the piston / valves, what is stopping the lubricant from entering into the combustion chamber?

Another issue is the friction. Are you sure about your calculations? Did you think about the downsized turbo engines?

When Honda moved from their initial VTEC (B16A engines, red line at 8000 rpm) to the roller-bearing VTEC (Honda 2000, red line at 9000rpm), they officially announced that the friction inside the valve train dropped to 25% of their non-roller-bearing old version (i.e. they claim a 75% friction reduction inside the valve train).

If the friction is the dominant advantage of the new4stroke, why not to move to the PatOP:

Posted Image

at http://www.pattakon....ttakonPatOP.htm : a 2-stroke (one combustion per cylinder per crank rotation) having “4-stroke-like” lubrication, keeping unloaded its crankshaft basic journals, etc, etc,

or to the PatMar:

Posted Image

at http://www.pattakon....takonPatMar.htm , wherein the 2-stroke operates with true 4-stroke lubrication, etc?

Thanks
Manolis Pattakos

#1181 Feliks

Feliks
  • Member

  • 639 posts
  • Joined: December 04

Posted 05 August 2013 - 09:36

The perpetual motion machines are like the drugs.
Once someone gets involved (trapped), it is difficult to escape (to get released).

I know several people (they contact me from time to time) who think they have discovered “the” working “perpetual motion machine” (an engine running without a fuel), or the “antigravity” machine etc.

Thanks
Manolis Pattakos



Yes, the drug is not going to fight, as someone pretends he does not have the right to Bernoulli, the discussion boils down to publishing things from World War II are known in civilized countries .. not, for example, such as Commer ... However, venturi nozzle, is not used to increase speed of movement, box guitar rezonas not be used to enhance the sound, trumpet sizes do not serve to strengthen the sound of a brass band, ... You're right, these things are not used for this purpose .... You've convinced me. But all they see, what is it that you share ... I also know a few Romanian women with children in their arms ...

No I do not know, whose animation better ..


http://www.ecomotors...poc-dual-module

Feliks :smoking: :smoking:

#1182 Feliks

Feliks
  • Member

  • 639 posts
  • Joined: December 04

Posted 05 August 2013 - 23:59

51 Anniversary of the death of MM...



:clap:



#1183 mariner

mariner
  • Member

  • 1,367 posts
  • Joined: January 07

Posted 06 August 2013 - 13:46

Here is a BBC peice about a new aircraft engine , the SABRE, being developed in the UK

http://www.bbc.co.uk...onment-23332592

It has attracted gov't funding and help (?) from th European Space Agency.

Not being into thermodynamics I'm not sure if the super chiling "pre cooler" at the heart of the concept is just to stop the actual jet thrust engne from melting or to boost the efficiency by widening the temperature gap.

I suppose its efficiency depends on how you pump the helium coolant around and disspate the collected heat energy on board the aircraft.

#1184 Feliks

Feliks
  • Member

  • 639 posts
  • Joined: December 04

Posted 06 August 2013 - 20:01

Here is a BBC peice about a new aircraft engine , the SABRE, being developed in the UK

http://www.bbc.co.uk...onment-23332592

It has attracted gov't funding and help (?) from th European Space Agency.

Not being into thermodynamics I'm not sure if the super chiling "pre cooler" at the heart of the concept is just to stop the actual jet thrust engne from melting or to boost the efficiency by widening the temperature gap.

I suppose its efficiency depends on how you pump the helium coolant around and disspate the collected heat energy on board the aircraft.



You can clearly see that the nozzle Venturi does not solve all our problems and expectations. Here you can see clearly that sending ships into space, it's not easy and requires a lot of resources in order to do it as efficiently ..


Andrew :wave:

#1185 gruntguru

gruntguru
  • Member

  • 5,196 posts
  • Joined: January 09

Posted 06 August 2013 - 23:45

You can clearly see that the nozzle Venturi does not solve all our problems and expectations.

In fact the venturi nozzle will not provide any solutions that have not already been recognized.

- It will not amplify wind energy to a level greater than that available at the venturi entry.
- It will not assist in propelling any moving vehicle by utilising the "apparent wind" created by the vehicle's motion.

#1186 Feliks

Feliks
  • Member

  • 639 posts
  • Joined: December 04

Posted 07 August 2013 - 01:37

In fact the venturi nozzle will not provide any solutions that have not already been recognized.

- It will not amplify wind energy to a level greater than that available at the venturi entry.
- It will not assist in propelling any moving vehicle by utilising the "apparent wind" created by the vehicle's motion.



Of course, you're right .. It does not strengthen the nozzle venturi wind energy ... Strengthens its speed .....

Andrew :smoking: :smoking:

#1187 Feliks

Feliks
  • Member

  • 639 posts
  • Joined: December 04

Posted 07 August 2013 - 01:48

Peltier I started to deal with in 1993, in a small laboratory scale.In the following years I did in the mid-scale laboratory I made such a demonstration, where the yen element size 50mmm x50mm is placed on an aluminum bracket, on the other hand, covered with a copper plaque, located to the heat from a finger could easily trickle out over the entire surface of the ceramic peltier.



Also done once a thermometer measuring the wireless side of aluminum and copper hand when I touched her finger. It turned out that the temperature difference was only 2 to 3 degrees Celsius, and has to show voltage of tens of millivolts, as a result of the heat of the finger ... Despite the fact that we do not need to produce electricity already heated water, replace it on steam, drive turbines ing or reciprocating engine, then the generator, electricity can receive this very simple method and a minimum temperature difference ..
Well, for example, temperature 2 meters under the ground and air temperature of 30 degrees Celsius .. The outside can be also negatynie 20 degrees Celsius, and the resulting current changes polarity only ... And here again joke .. The greater this negative temperature, the greater the difference in the temperature of 2 meters below the surface (about 7 degrees)and you get more power .. so I dreamed we would have this .. the bigger the frost, we have more energy ..And here the principle of T1-T2 / T1 does not look to the end was a real .... For where, for example, we have in the way of the physical size of the time? because there is a fundamental difference if you have time 0.01 sec or 10000 sec .... a rhetorical question ...

Andrew :smoking: :smoking:

#1188 Kelpiecross

Kelpiecross
  • Member

  • 850 posts
  • Joined: October 10

Posted 07 August 2013 - 04:09

51 Anniversary of the death of MM...



:clap:


MM - Mickey Mouse?

#1189 Kelpiecross

Kelpiecross
  • Member

  • 850 posts
  • Joined: October 10

Posted 07 August 2013 - 04:20

Here is a BBC peice about a new aircraft engine , the SABRE, being developed in the UK

http://www.bbc.co.uk...onment-23332592

It has attracted gov't funding and help (?) from th European Space Agency.

Not being into thermodynamics I'm not sure if the super chiling "pre cooler" at the heart of the concept is just to stop the actual jet thrust engne from melting or to boost the efficiency by widening the temperature gap.

I suppose its efficiency depends on how you pump the helium coolant around and disspate the collected heat energy on board the aircraft.


I don't know if this engine would work or not - but this is something like what I would think is the best solution for getting into orbit (and hopefully getting back) - rather than current big rockets/shuttles and certainly "space elevators".

Bloody good idea if it works.

#1190 mrdave

mrdave
  • New Member

  • 22 posts
  • Joined: October 12

Posted 07 August 2013 - 08:47

1,189 posts??

Dont feed the trolls...

Edited by mrdave, 07 August 2013 - 08:48.


#1191 Feliks

Feliks
  • Member

  • 639 posts
  • Joined: December 04

Posted 07 August 2013 - 09:33

MM - Mickey Mouse?


so that something of this kind .. :rolleyes: , .. but for some time for the spacer can be used .. :smoking:

It has only two minutes :rolleyes:

As you have something to seriously, it might be that



:wave:

#1192 Feliks

Feliks
  • Member

  • 639 posts
  • Joined: December 04

Posted 07 August 2013 - 13:07

In fact the venturi nozzle will not provide any solutions that have not already been recognized.

- It will not amplify wind energy to a level greater than that available at the venturi entry.
- It will not assist in propelling any moving vehicle by utilising the "apparent wind" created by the vehicle's motion.



And so at all, how do you know that the entrance of the venturi nozzle is the energy and not greater as you think? Mr. Betz successfully tricked you, as you can see ..

:rotfl: :rotfl:

#1193 Feliks

Feliks
  • Member

  • 639 posts
  • Joined: December 04

Posted 07 August 2013 - 14:03

MM - Mickey Mouse?


Oh no ... it is Marilyn Monroe..Our unchanging beauty :rolleyes:

And here is the airplane ... Hunting H.126. ... With his performance shows the unit load on the wing is about 250 Kg per 1 square meter .... Now, your personal car has an area average 1.8 x 4 = 7.2 m square ... and weighs 1200 KG have any. So on one square meter. ie 1 m square around 166 kg, which is much less than in the plane. which is very likely that should begin with the car have to go over the road, at any speed of 40 km / h ... ... Because aircraft N-126 mimics the speed 51 km / h (32 mph). So that your car properly equipped with such parameters would have glide above the road ... Just what does that say manufacture shock absorbers ... So any, of the principle of conservation of energy?

Do you like Marilyn Monroe (no shock)?

http://www.secretpro...p?topic=12324.0

Andrew :smoking: :smoking: :smoking:

Edited by Feliks, 07 August 2013 - 21:09.


#1194 Feliks

Feliks
  • Member

  • 639 posts
  • Joined: December 04

Posted 07 August 2013 - 14:17

So now, cyclist, be enough to at his weight 100kg with bike had over one another wing with an area of ​​100/250 = 0.4 m square, and already at the speed of 50 km / h will be flying around over the roadway ..
:smoking: :smoking:

Edited by Feliks, 07 August 2013 - 14:19.


#1195 gruntguru

gruntguru
  • Member

  • 5,196 posts
  • Joined: January 09

Posted 08 August 2013 - 00:12

And so at all, how do you know that the entrance of the venturi nozzle is the energy and not greater as you think? Mr. Betz successfully tricked you, as you can see ..

Oh dear!

If you can prove Mr Betz wrong you really should write a paper. It will be one of the scientific discoveries of the decade.

Better still, your claims do not only contradict Betz's law, they contradict the first law of thermodynamics. That would be the scientific discovery of the millenium.

Edited by gruntguru, 08 August 2013 - 00:15.


#1196 Feliks

Feliks
  • Member

  • 639 posts
  • Joined: December 04

Posted 08 August 2013 - 09:30

Oh dear!

If you can prove Mr Betz wrong you really should write a paper. It will be one of the scientific discoveries of the decade.

Better still, your claims do not only contradict Betz's law, they contradict the first law of thermodynamics. That would be the scientific discovery of the millenium.



You can see that fairly imprecise take care of physics. Maybe someone on hand to make it, omitting some things, it was .. Because in my mind, with "the wind in the same time nothing like fotovoltanic too .." thermo ". At most wind can be warm or cold .. As you come to an opening in the winter the wind at most cause the more you will feel cold and this can be your "thermo". because longer even in ordinary thermal windmill has nothing say.'s it. so do not ask for the rights of "thermo", because in May the same as gingerbread to a windmill, which is exactly nothing.

:smoking: :smoking:

Edited by Feliks, 08 August 2013 - 09:31.


#1197 h4887

h4887
  • Member

  • 875 posts
  • Joined: July 04

Posted 08 August 2013 - 15:53

:confused: Is it me? :confused:
Or have I fallen into a parallel universe where language and the laws of physics are only vaguely related to what I am familiar with?

#1198 desmo

desmo
  • Tech Forum Host

  • 12,908 posts
  • Joined: January 00

Posted 08 August 2013 - 19:32

The phrase "word salad" is called to mind :lol:

#1199 Feliks

Feliks
  • Member

  • 639 posts
  • Joined: December 04

Posted 08 August 2013 - 22:24


Devil is not so terrible as he is painted.. :)

Lest there be any lack of clarity... :smoking:

Posted Image


Andrew :smoking: :smoking:

Advertisement

#1200 gruntguru

gruntguru
  • Member

  • 5,196 posts
  • Joined: January 09

Posted 09 August 2013 - 00:03

If a bicycle is moving in still air an apparrent wind is generated. If you harvest energy from this apparrent wind, the source of the energy is the cyclists legs. If you feed the harvested energy back into the bicycle wheels and the overall result is a faster bicycle, you have succeeded in harvesting more energy than you extracted from the cyclists legs in the first place. This is a perpetual motion machine and contradicts the second law of thermodynamics.

Thermodynamics. The branch of physical science concerned with the interrelationship and interconversion of different forms of energy and the behaviour of macroscopic systems in terms of certain basic quantities, such as pressure, temperature, etc.

Heat energy does not need to be a major factor but always needs to be considered in any system - even a wind turbine.