Hi to all. Am watching this video and am thinking to do this myself :
What do you think, how much actual power can one get with such water flow. Or to be more exact, how much force can be produced by such water amount and speed ?..
GM
The force is the weight of water.
energy is mgh
mass times 9.8 meters per second^2 times the height of the water
power is energy per second
How much power? Infinite, given a big enough basin, however one runs into practical difficulties long before the basin is as big as the Adriatic.
How much force? Again, infinite, see above.
For _that_ basin and _that_ flow, I suggest you go to the company's website and see if there's any information to be had. You ought to be able to estimate forces on the impeller if you can figure out the impeller size and it's rotational speed.
I didn't explain my project idea correctly.
I dont have river or some water flow source so i planning to create vortex with some water propeller. The idea is to try to get more output the input. Of course :-).... So if i use 50W power source to run the propeller i thing i can get some reasonable output.
I dont know if you are familiar with work of Viktor Schauberger but there are many studies regarding this vortex phenomena. And it has some completely different views to law of physics.
Anyhow, i think it's a worth of try...
Sure. Do your experiment and report back here when you reach your goal. Until then, go away.
Jeroen Belleman
You're attempting to re-invent the fluid transmission used for decades in automobile automatic gearboxes. Go to the nearest auto junkyard and salvage yourself one, to save the tedium of building.
+1
Or just find the head height of the water source.
Cheers
The problem is that "completely different" physics are never "worth of try".
Fluid clutches in automatic cars are a concrete example of the sort of thing that can be done - if you design it well >90% efficiency is possible. A decent manual clutch is way superior in efficiency though.
I think you should probably buy the plans for a Hendershot generator instead (see thread above). P T Barnum had a point. Better that an electrical con man separates you from your hard earned dollars than some charlatan of a mechanical engineer.
Hint: Even USPTO has finally stopped accepting patents for perpetual motion machines (although they took their time about it).
Regards, Martin Brown
er
lip?
For the same reason transformers can be well >90% efficient...
... it *is* a transformer.
There are people trying to make >100% efficient transformers too. I won't bother with links.
Mark L. Fergerson
Have something to add? Share your thoughts — no account required.
Ask the community — no account required