farsideofmoon Posted April 12, 2020 Posted April 12, 2020 SeaPower description Attached is a diagram that details a new energy generating power source using the expanding rise of air underwater as a lifting force. This is the same principal that keeps a boat afloat. In the diagram, there is a linear row of balloons. The lower balloon or inverted umbrella; is injected with 300 cubic feet of air compressed to 18 ATM resulting in a volume of 16.66 cubic feet of air. When the first balloon rises 99 feet (3 ATM) a second balloon attached to the first one is injected with 300 cubic feet of air compressed to 16.66 cubic feet of air. In the diagram provided this process is repeated having five (5) balloons rising. The upper balloon at 3 ATM has a lifting force of 6.400 pounds The next balloon at 6 ATM has a lifting force of 3,200 pounds The next balloon at 9 ATM has a rising force of 2,133 pounds The next balloon at 12 ATM has a lifting force of 1,600 pounds The next balloon at 15 ATM has a lifting force of 1,080 pounds --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Total pulling force is a continuous lifting force of 14,413 pounds Principles to run the machine [1] an enclosed container (X) of air submerged in water has a lifting force (Y) equal to the volume of the water displaced minus the weight of the container; [yes] [no] [2] connection multiple containers one on top of the other creates a combined lifting force of (Y)+ (Y)+ (Y)+ (Y)+ (Y)+ (Y)+ (Y)+ (Y)+ (Y)+ (Y) Which is a greater lifting force than (Y); [yes] [no] [3] the energy needed to fill one container is equal to the energy needed to sustain the combined lifting force of the 10 (ten) containers referenced above minus the energy needed to keep it running. ; [yes] [NO] SEAPOWER.pdf
Ghideon Posted April 12, 2020 Posted April 12, 2020 Hello. can you show a calculation of the energy required to run the machine compared to the energy it generates? Intuition says there will be no net power generated. (But I may have misinterpreted the principle behind the devices)
Endy0816 Posted April 12, 2020 Posted April 12, 2020 (edited) Unfortunately you can't steal energy from gravity(buoyancy = weight of displaced fluid). Going to at best break even, but will likely take more energy overall than you get back out. Edited April 12, 2020 by Endy0816
MigL Posted April 12, 2020 Posted April 12, 2020 What about compressing the air ? How much energy does that use ? I would say exactly the same as putting that much weight on balloons, to submerge them to an equal depth, and re-compress the air.
Sensei Posted April 12, 2020 Posted April 12, 2020 1 hour ago, Endy0816 said: Unfortunately you can't steal energy from gravity ...tides are created by gravitational pull of the Moon..
studiot Posted April 12, 2020 Posted April 12, 2020 2 hours ago, farsideofmoon said: The lower balloon or inverted umbrella; is injected with 300 cubic feet of air compressed to 18 ATM resulting in a volume of 16.66 cubic feet of air. So what is in the balloon before the pressurised air is injected? If you say nothing, it is just floppy, then a considerable amount of energy is expended expanding the volume from nothing to 16.66 cuft against the pressure of the water at that depth. How have you allowed for this?
Endy0816 Posted April 12, 2020 Posted April 12, 2020 32 minutes ago, Sensei said: ...tides are created by gravitational pull of the Moon.. Slowing down the Earth's rotation among other effects. Trading is okay, stealing is not.
Strange Posted April 12, 2020 Posted April 12, 2020 6 minutes ago, Endy0816 said: Slowing down the Earth's rotation among other effects. Trading is okay, stealing is not. It would be an interesting exercise to work out how much energy you would need to extract to cause, say, an extra leap second to be needed.
J.C.MacSwell Posted April 12, 2020 Posted April 12, 2020 You can't break even. Every significant part of the process requires a net increase of entropy. (degradation of available energy) But, if you have a sufficient source of compressed air at the bottom, or heat for the balloons at the right point/s in the cycle, then you have, in principle at least, a system that can harness that available energy source. Just don't waste your money on a patent without confirming those sources are available, and ascertaining that's the best way to harvest it.
Endy0816 Posted April 12, 2020 Posted April 12, 2020 1 hour ago, Strange said: It would be an interesting exercise to work out how much energy you would need to extract to cause, say, an extra leap second to be needed. It would be. I'm sure it'd take a ton to speed up that process. I've read a few analysis saying we could power our civilization for a thousand years with just a bit of that energy.
farsideofmoon Posted April 13, 2020 Author Posted April 13, 2020 (edited) SEAPOWER4.pdf Edited April 13, 2020 by farsideofmoon trying to delete it
Strange Posted April 13, 2020 Posted April 13, 2020 8 minutes ago, farsideofmoon said: SEAPOWER4.pdfUnavailable ! Moderator Note Please do not post files with no explanation. This is a discussion forum and the rules require you to post more than just a file or a link.
farsideofmoon Posted April 13, 2020 Author Posted April 13, 2020 4 minutes ago, Strange said: ! Moderator Note Please do not post files with no explanation. This is a discussion forum and the rules require you to post more than just a file or a link. wrong forum-i will try to delete it
Strange Posted April 13, 2020 Posted April 13, 2020 Just now, farsideofmoon said: wrong forum-i will try to delete it ! Moderator Note It appears to be the correct place. You cannot delete posts.
farsideofmoon Posted April 13, 2020 Author Posted April 13, 2020 (edited) SeaPower description Attached is a diagram that details a new energy generating power source using the expanding rise of air underwater as a lifting force. This is the same principal that keeps a boat afloat. In the diagram, there is a linear row of balloons. The lower balloon or inverted umbrella; is injected with 300 cubic feet of air compressed to 18 ATM resulting in a volume of 16.66 cubic feet of air. When the first balloon rises 99 feet (3 ATM) a second balloon attached to the first one is injected with 300 cubic feet of air compressed to 16.66 cubic feet of air. In the diagram provided this process is repeated having five (5) balloons rising. The upper balloon at 3 ATM has a lifting force of 6.400 pounds The next balloon at 6 ATM has a lifting force of 3,200 pounds The next balloon at 9 ATM has a rising force of 2,133 pounds The next balloon at 12 ATM has a lifting force of 1,600 pounds The next balloon at 15 ATM has a lifting force of 1,080 pounds --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Total pulling force is a continuous lifting force of 14,413 pounds Principles to run the machine [1] an enclosed container (X) of air submerged in water has a lifting force (Y) equal to the volume of the water displaced minus the weight of the container; [yes] [no] [2] connection multiple containers one on top of the other creates a combined lifting force of (Y)+ (Y)+ (Y)+ (Y)+ (Y)+ (Y)+ (Y)+ (Y)+ (Y)+ (Y) Which is a greater lifting force than (Y); [yes] [no] [3] the energy needed to fill one container is equal to the energy needed to sustain the combined lifting force of the 10 (ten) containers referenced above minus the energy needed to keep it running. ; [yes] [no] This mechanical process can be converted to electrical output. If it takes less power to keep the system running than the output created; then this is a positive idea. If not; this is a dead horse with nowhere to go. See diagram in next post. Comments pro or con are welcome SEAPOWER4.pdf EI INCUMBIT PROBATIO QUI DICIT NON QUI NEGAT Latin, meaning The burden of the proof lies upon him who affirms not he who denies. Edited April 13, 2020 by farsideofmoon
Ghideon Posted April 13, 2020 Posted April 13, 2020 4 minutes ago, farsideofmoon said: If it takes less power to keep the system running than the output created; then this is a positive idea. If not; this is a dead horse with nowhere to go Is that something you intend to answer or is it a question to the forum?
Strange Posted April 13, 2020 Posted April 13, 2020 ! Moderator Note @farsideofmoon That post appears to be identical to your first post. You have not addressed any of the questions or comments. If you are not interested in discussing this, then the thread will be closed.
farsideofmoon Posted April 13, 2020 Author Posted April 13, 2020 (edited) 1 hour ago, Ghideon said: Is that something you intend to answer or is it a question to the forum? It is a question 1 hour ago, Strange said: That post appears to be identical to your first post. You have not addressed any of the questions or comments. If you are not interested in discussing this, then the thread will be closed. I want to discuss the mechanics of the system and whether it could produce useful work. The speed of the rising bubbles needs to be calculated along with other variables I came here because this is where the brightest of the bright congreate Edited April 13, 2020 by farsideofmoon
swansont Posted April 13, 2020 Posted April 13, 2020 Blowing up a balloon and letting it rise doesn’t generate power.
Strange Posted April 13, 2020 Posted April 13, 2020 8 minutes ago, farsideofmoon said: I came here because this is where the brightest of the bright congreate ! Moderator Note And yet you are ignoring all the feedback so far. If you do not answer some of the questions asked in your next post, this will be closed.
farsideofmoon Posted April 13, 2020 Author Posted April 13, 2020 On 4/12/2020 at 1:38 PM, Ghideon said: can you show a calculation of the energy required to run the machine compared to the energy it generates? Intuition says there will be no net power generated. That is one of the reasons I came here. There are a number of calculations that need to be done before its potential can be determined. That's why I am here. 1 minute ago, swansont said: Blowing up a balloon and letting it rise doesn’t generate power. It is the combined lifting force of the ten balloons that generates the real power. While it only talks the energy to blow up one balloon at a time to keep the system running. 20 hours ago, J.C.MacSwell said: Just don't waste your money on a patent without confirming those sources are available, and ascertaining that's the best way to harvest it. J.C.MacSwell, I am here because I need your input. fire away
swansont Posted April 13, 2020 Posted April 13, 2020 3 minutes ago, farsideofmoon said: It is the combined lifting force of the ten balloons that generates the real power. While it only talks the energy to blow up one balloon at a time to keep the system running. It generates no net power. In reality, it will take more energy to run, owing to inefficiencies
Ghideon Posted April 13, 2020 Posted April 13, 2020 12 minutes ago, farsideofmoon said: It is a question Ok 2 hours ago, farsideofmoon said: If it takes less power to keep the system running than the output created; then this is a positive idea. If not; this is a dead horse with nowhere to go. Answer: It is a dead horse. On 4/12/2020 at 7:21 PM, farsideofmoon said: injected with 300 cubic feet of air compressed to 18 ATM resulting in a volume of 16.66 cubic feet of air. It takes energy to compress 300 cubic feet of air to 18 ATM. When losses are accounted for there will be more power needed to run the system than it will generate.
farsideofmoon Posted April 13, 2020 Author Posted April 13, 2020 (edited) 3 minutes ago, swansont said: It generates no net power. In reality, it will take more energy to run, owing to inefficiencies It is the combined lifting force of the ten balloons that generates the real power. While it only takes the energy to blow up one balloon at a time to keep the system running. I call this the multiplying effect Edited April 13, 2020 by farsideofmoon
Ghideon Posted April 13, 2020 Posted April 13, 2020 1 minute ago, farsideofmoon said: I call this the multiplying effect Can you define it so that it can be calculated?
Recommended Posts