It's most unfortunate that not many people have.
It most certainly works. Popular Science wouldn't have written it up if it didn't. I don't know what restrictions are in place in your country regarding Freon, but that would be the liquid of choice. Using Freon, you only need a temperature differential of 3.5 degrees F.. A black tarp over a tub of water would give you that easy.
-Casey
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freon
I’ve also never have heard of this chemical.
But if I can get it, it would be nice.
Do you by any change know if this device have the power to deliver power, like to drive a alternator and did you ever tried to build it, to check it out ?
I’ve also never have heard of this chemical.
But if I can get it, it would be nice.
Do you by any change know if this device have the power to deliver power, like to drive a alternator and did you ever tried to build it, to check it out ?
You need to read the article I linked to again, as well as the others listed in the Google search.
A 40 ft. wheel (or 10 4 ft. wheels on a common shaft) produces 8.69 hp, thats 6.48 Kw. The speed needs to be increased around a thousand times (it's all torque at low speed) through a tandem of 10to1 pulley/belt setups to get a usable speed to drive an alternator..but it most certainly will.
A point on alternators. You can fairly easily get up to 5 Kw out of an alternater by replacing the diode bridge with higher voltage ones, and modifying the field coil circut to produce 120 volts instead of 12, its the current limitations of the alternator that limits the theoretical output. 5Kw is the limit the alternator bearings can handle.
I was living in an area that was covered in snow and ice 8 months out of the year when I researched it, and have since moved to an area with cheap, clean Hydro power. I lost interest and never built one, but did enough homework to know it would work.
If I still had my notes I would share, but I don't. All of this is proven and low tech enough that if your serious, I suspect you could get a fully functional power plant up within a year, and an investment under $5K.
Besides the net, I would look at Lindsay's Books, for both the technology of alternators, as well as instruction material on the mechanics involved. Starting with this one.
Good luck
-Casey
A 40 ft. wheel (or 10 4 ft. wheels on a common shaft) produces 8.69 hp, thats 6.48 Kw. The speed needs to be increased around a thousand times (it's all torque at low speed) through a tandem of 10to1 pulley/belt setups to get a usable speed to drive an alternator..but it most certainly will.
A point on alternators. You can fairly easily get up to 5 Kw out of an alternater by replacing the diode bridge with higher voltage ones, and modifying the field coil circut to produce 120 volts instead of 12, its the current limitations of the alternator that limits the theoretical output. 5Kw is the limit the alternator bearings can handle.
I was living in an area that was covered in snow and ice 8 months out of the year when I researched it, and have since moved to an area with cheap, clean Hydro power. I lost interest and never built one, but did enough homework to know it would work.
If I still had my notes I would share, but I don't. All of this is proven and low tech enough that if your serious, I suspect you could get a fully functional power plant up within a year, and an investment under $5K.
Besides the net, I would look at Lindsay's Books, for both the technology of alternators, as well as instruction material on the mechanics involved. Starting with this one.
Good luck
-Casey
Anybody who doesn't know about Wally's Wheel, or is familiar with that novelty toy, has got to think your nuts.It does in fact demenstrate the very principle's involved, but works because of the short distance, and the skinny capillary between the bulbs. I think one of them dead smart guys invented it
.It uses alcohol.
I don't believe it.
Look at the diagram. The claim is that it was running at 1 rpm. Think about what that means. The liquid in the bottom bottle is supposed to boil and recondense in the top bottle. At 1 rpm it has to boil and condense in 1/4 second (there are 4 bottles and each has to pass through the water tank). I find it hard to believe you'll be able to transfer enough energy from the warm water to the liquid in the bottle to boil it all (or enough to make the thing turn) in 1/4 second.
Think about large bottles of liquids and the mechanical support structure plunging into and out of the water tank 4 times per second. There's going to be a lot of work done to push the water aside. There's also going to be a hell of a lot of splashing.
There's no free lunch guys. The heat transferred has to be equivalent to the work required to raise the liquid from the bottom to the top bottle, which is what has to happen.
Imagine a large wheel. The tube will have to be large diameter to transfer the large amount of liquid/gas to the top bottle rapidly. What will prevent the liquid from condensing in the long tube and falling back into the bottom bottle?
This is why you don't see them everywhere: it doesn't work.
I_F
Look at the diagram. The claim is that it was running at 1 rpm. Think about what that means. The liquid in the bottom bottle is supposed to boil and recondense in the top bottle. At 1 rpm it has to boil and condense in 1/4 second (there are 4 bottles and each has to pass through the water tank). I find it hard to believe you'll be able to transfer enough energy from the warm water to the liquid in the bottle to boil it all (or enough to make the thing turn) in 1/4 second.
Think about large bottles of liquids and the mechanical support structure plunging into and out of the water tank 4 times per second. There's going to be a lot of work done to push the water aside. There's also going to be a hell of a lot of splashing.
There's no free lunch guys. The heat transferred has to be equivalent to the work required to raise the liquid from the bottom to the top bottle, which is what has to happen.
Imagine a large wheel. The tube will have to be large diameter to transfer the large amount of liquid/gas to the top bottle rapidly. What will prevent the liquid from condensing in the long tube and falling back into the bottom bottle?
This is why you don't see them everywhere: it doesn't work.
I_F
Surely at 1 RPM it would require 15 seconds not 1/4 seconds?
maybe I'm being super dumb, which is entirely possible, I would think that it would work better with multiples of 3 bottles to get the balance off the vertical. or possibly with one way valves in a complete ring around the bottles
Nick.
Nice Idea, might try it with glass bottles and alcohol as a cheap experiment. Obviously using higher temperatures generated inefficiently.
maybe I'm being super dumb, which is entirely possible, I would think that it would work better with multiples of 3 bottles to get the balance off the vertical. or possibly with one way valves in a complete ring around the bottles
Nick.
Nice Idea, might try it with glass bottles and alcohol as a cheap experiment. Obviously using higher temperatures generated inefficiently.
I wont argue with your math, but a couple of things to consider.
The "1 rpm" claim was made by the reporter witnessing it (best guess), and the big wheel was never made to see if it would work. The key here is that the prototype was witnessed by an experienced science/technology reporter for Popular Science during their "salad days" before becoming what we see today.
Wally Minto was no charlatan. He had several write up's in the mag.
I believe the reason we don't see them around is two fold..1) a heck of a lot of work to construct a huge device for such a minimal output, and 2) It wouldn't be the first time something was developed for the "third world" that was rejected with the question "If it's so good, why aren't you using it?"
-Casey
Edit:I-Forgot..we were posting at the same time, so I didn't see your back peddle before I wrote this post.
First it doesn't work, now it works but isn't practical
Define practical. By modern methods of producing energy it's not, was never intended to be. But for a low tech approach that doesn't need to produce "big time" power, with no consideration of the size required, it could be quite practical.
Skeptisism is a good thing..but you can have too much of a good thing.
I have followed along these "free energy follies" threads from the begining for the entertainment value, and you have been a good warrior for sanity, but in this case I think your mindset has gotten the better of you.
-Casey
First it doesn't work, now it works but isn't practical
Define practical. By modern methods of producing energy it's not, was never intended to be. But for a low tech approach that doesn't need to produce "big time" power, with no consideration of the size required, it could be quite practical.
Skeptisism is a good thing..but you can have too much of a good thing.
I have followed along these "free energy follies" threads from the begining for the entertainment value, and you have been a good warrior for sanity, but in this case I think your mindset has gotten the better of you.
-Casey
This is really interesting. I have known abiout this principle for as long as I can remember but never gave it a thought in recent years when I am now very actively head scratching and putting hardware together to power my farm estate which has a commercial quality wind resource.
Didn`t know the name of the inventor listed here either. Must do some further research. This could be worth building. A mechanical power source that makes 4 horsepower 24-7, is all I need to make 48 kW hours each day of useable electricity through a battery bank and inverter setup.
Propane is practical as a working fluid I think but the head pressure of around 125 PSI limits what you can use for the rotating tanks. I wonder what liquid ether would do instead?
Anyone have any other suggestions for possible working fluids?
Didn`t know the name of the inventor listed here either. Must do some further research. This could be worth building. A mechanical power source that makes 4 horsepower 24-7, is all I need to make 48 kW hours each day of useable electricity through a battery bank and inverter setup.
Propane is practical as a working fluid I think but the head pressure of around 125 PSI limits what you can use for the rotating tanks. I wonder what liquid ether would do instead?
Anyone have any other suggestions for possible working fluids?
Once your finished building your magic wheel you can connect it to one of these.......
http://www.harborfreight.com/cpi/ctaf/displayitem.taf?Itemnumber=45416
I picked one of these up at the local harborfreight store a couple years ago. I had planned to build my own generator, but I moved and lost my only work space; and ambition. So for now its just sitting in storage.
If all else fails you can connect it to a treadmill and and throw some of the local children on it.
http://www.harborfreight.com/cpi/ctaf/displayitem.taf?Itemnumber=45416
I picked one of these up at the local harborfreight store a couple years ago. I had planned to build my own generator, but I moved and lost my only work space; and ambition. So for now its just sitting in storage.
If all else fails you can connect it to a treadmill and and throw some of the local children on it.
valveitude said:Edit:I-Forgot..we were posting at the same time, so I didn't see your back peddle before I wrote this post.
First it doesn't work, now it works but isn't practical
Define practical. ... in this case I think your mindset has gotten the better of you.
-Casey
Yes, I'm not afraid to back-pedal when I see error in my thinking.
Practical- defined here as something that produces useful work comparable to that produced by other methods of similar or higher cost and/or complexity.
My mindset is just fine. Reason and understanding are still the only way anything technological gets accomplished. Politics is another matter...
I_F
I-Forgot-
As I alluded to in the portion of your quote of me that was truncuated, I have been admiring your thought process during these "debates". I see nothing wrong with your "mind set" per se.
M-kay, please point out another approach that is less complicated, has an efficiency greater than 80%, and requires less "care and feeding" than a wheel turning 1 RPM..Oh ya, and can be cobbled together with basic skills, tools, and materials.
I don't view this as a "save the world" Holy Grail..just a slick implementation of basic physics, that under the right conditions (you've got the space, and you dont need boo-koo power) could be very practical.
-Casey
As I alluded to in the portion of your quote of me that was truncuated, I have been admiring your thought process during these "debates". I see nothing wrong with your "mind set" per se.
M-kay, please point out another approach that is less complicated, has an efficiency greater than 80%, and requires less "care and feeding" than a wheel turning 1 RPM..Oh ya, and can be cobbled together with basic skills, tools, and materials.
I don't view this as a "save the world" Holy Grail..just a slick implementation of basic physics, that under the right conditions (you've got the space, and you dont need boo-koo power) could be very practical.
-Casey
jacquesl said:
http://www.microchemicals.com/solvents.html
something Metil Alkol
Methanol boiling point - 64.7 °C
And acetone, boiling point 56.3 °C <<------ easy available for me
If you check out the video It’s only 100K, you can see how it will works, it’s interesting
Nice low boiling point
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/R134a
- Status
- This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.