Vortex ram
gdew...@gmail.com
I had envisioned drawing a vortex using a big dish a tube and a small
dish.
I've made a page with an illustration here.
http://gabydewilde.googlepages.com/vortex-ram
Let me think what you hear ok?
Thank you,
gaby de wilde
Paul Cardinale
Apparently you don't know what a vortex is.
You seem to be trying to come up with something that has negative
drag. Negative drag does exist, but only in very special situations.
Aircraft engine designers often use it to reduce the total drag of an
engine.
Paul Cardinale
gdew...@gmail.com
Hello Paul
Thanks, for the keywords. "negative drag" was what I was looking for.
I read a mohawk like sail can have negative drag while driving up
wind. I imagine it to be as solid as possible and part of the body
with the body having long tail with a decrease in volume over the
length. It should be a very slim vehicle possibly adjustable to the
shoulders width for max performance, then have something like an 8
degree decrease and drive up the wind under an angle of 10 degrees.
Are there any other ways you know of to make negative drag?
DougC
>
> Thanks, for the keywords. "negative drag" was what I was looking for.
> I read a mohawk like sail can have negative drag while driving up
> wind. I imagine it to be as solid as possible and part of the body
> with the body having long tail with a decrease in volume over the
> length. It should be a very slim vehicle possibly adjustable to the
> shoulders width for max performance, then have something like an 8
> degree decrease and drive up the wind under an angle of 10 degrees.
>
> Are there any other ways you know of to make negative drag?
Well you could start with negative air.
-----
What are you wanting this thing to do exactly?
,,,,,
If you wish to reduce the drag of a bicycle then the most common ways
that recumbent cyclists do it is by using a rigid plastic front fairing
(such as from Zzipper or Mueller Windwrap) coupled with a "body sock".
This has almost as low drag as a hard-shell body, but is much less
expensive, easier to build and not as sensitive to cross-winds (although
it can still be a handful). The lack of wind-chill has large benefits
for cold-weather riding.
There's lots of pictures on the IHPVA site.
Some people use the "real" stuff like fiberglass and various composites,
but many more recumbent riders experiment with making body work
themselves out of a material called coroplast, which is corrugated
plastic. Search Google for "coroplast fairing" for info on where it's to
be got and how's to use it.
~
Chalo
>
> gaby de wilde wrote:
> >
> > I had envisioned drawing a vortex using a big dish a tube and a small
> > dish.
> >
> > I've made a page with an illustration here.
> >
> > http://gabydewilde.googlepages.com/vortex-ram
>
>
> You seem to be trying to come up with something that has negative
> drag.
It looked to me like he was trying to do some sort of boundary layer
control. The whole thing seems counterintuitive to me, but I am often
surprised by the weirdness of aerodynamic forces and principles.
Chalo
carl...@comcast.net
Dear Chalo,
The animation shows pulsing, which makes things look faintly
plausible.
But if you draw a continuous line to show the path of a steady
airstream, you'll see that the airstream crosses itself.
If you take two hoses, start squirting, and then try to cross the
streams, the combined stream has a shorter range than the two separate
streams--the turbulence where they meet wastes lots of power.
Yes, you can re-direct the flow to provide a _local_ airstream heading
powerfully the wrong way.
But the net effect is increased overal drag, even if you simplify the
design to avoid the airstream crossing itself and just run the air
over the top and out bottom in a Z-path.
Perpetual motion is still just Paganini:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dPRWshWq9E4
The comments show that RBT threads are perfectly normal.
Cheers,
Carl Fogel
jobst....@stanfordalumni.org
> But the net effect is increased overall drag, even if you simplify
> the design to avoid the air stream crossing itself and just run the
> air over the top and out bottom in a Z-path.
> Perpetual motion is still just Paganini:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dPRWshWq9E4
> The comments show that RBT threads are perfectly normal.
Paganini composed pieces that few others could master, and of this it
is told that some musicians looked at a new score he wrote, saying
that it was beyond being played, which Paganini overheard. He entered
the room, asked for a violin and played the piece behind his back.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paganini
Jobst Brandt
gdew...@gmail.com
The ram implosion wing is one of the things that makes me think
Negative drag is a most interesting topic. http://quantumgravitics.tripod.com/id3.html
"After being rejected as an XPrize contestant for an unproven Gravitic
propulsion concept and told repeatedly by the skeptics that my
technology goes against fundamental physics, I realized that I needed
a way of proving once and for all that I had a viable technology so I
decided to install the Ram-Implo-Wing onto the roof of my van.
I knew the wing was going to work but what I had no way of knowing was
that by placing the Ram-wing onto the roof of my van that it would
increase my fuel mileage 2-x above normal. After a little tweaking of
the wing I added a set of elevated wing-lets as well as special
texture (similar to the texture of golf ball) to the wing and I
obtained 3-x above my normal fuel mileage.
After several years of R&D prototyping different types of Ram-Implo-
Wings I have developed the technology into a kit for the Do-It-
Yourselfer.
I know without a doubt that you will enjoy building this very
educational wing kit not to mention the savings in fuel cost by
building a unit that will save you money. That's right, this project
will pay for itself in no time."
My vortex ram idea of course relates more to the frontal surface area.
I'm not claiming it works or even is workable but it's an interesting
topic. Paterson says: "We watched flies on the hood stay in place
until we were traveling over 60 mph. Streamers on the surface of the
vehicle stand perpendicular, rather than parallel to the vehicle." He
also says: "the vortex went nearly 100 feet in front of the van"
Searching around I keep reading how the dimple Surface Character of a
golf ball reduces drag. Robert Patterson says his wing also benefits
from dimples. I get an overall picture of a dimples front end flat at
the rear degrading under about 8 degrees. Can apply it to the whole
body or just a single tube.
It makes you think " impossible! " but he has way to much customers
and builders to go there before taking a deep look into the
stuff. :-)
On Dec 4, 4:45 am, Paul Cardinale <pcardin...@volcanomail.com> wrote:
> ....Apparently you don't know what a vortex is....
>
I know.... Physicists would say "learn vortex physics first". Bicycle
builders would say "getting in shape makes most of the difference".
Both are right of course.
I(the philosopher *ehm*) will say "learn to dream a little".
It's far easier as getting in shape or learning physics but it does
amplify the things you already do and know and the dream obviously
makes for better mousetraps.
I know before Victor Schauberger died a broken man he said "They took
everything away from me, I don't even own myself anymore" Here is just
one of the many anecdotes in his name of which there are far to much
and which include photos and witnesses of the water wizard. One day he
took on a job. Water was flowing down hill with the goal to collect it
in a basin but the water had much to much kinetic energy so it would
just wash over the basin and collapse the small dyk around it. Victor
made the downhill even steeper and used a much smaller dyk. They
laughed at him. So he stood on top of his dyk and instructed them to
open the gate. But victor created a boal shape basin with the watter
dropping straight down into it with such force it would wash back up
the hill up-against the incoming stream. He was standing next to a
wall of water. But today Victors stuff is still mostly laughed at.
It's pretty weird, you cant really blame people for laughing. Take
this project for example.
http://blog.360.yahoo.com/factuurexpress?p=6802
You have tears in your eyes? no?
The first time I hear about this upwind acceleration topic was 20
years ago. The story was that some aerodynamics student had build a
bike that would go faster and faster straight up the wind. Some one
said he would get hurt if he would continue his project. He made jokes
about it, then one day he was cycling down the super flat Dutch polder
and he was going faster and faster then his breaks didn't have the
capacitance to work up against the acceleration. So he drove himself
into a ditch and crashed his bike at 80 km/hr. He said he always
wondered what that guy was trying to say with his "you will get hurt"
so now he knew and abandoned the project for ever after.
I thought it was a hilarious urban legend.
But still a clue was provided to us.
Now I have 4 clues I'm no longer able to accept 5th and 6th party "it
cant be done" claims. Even without much knowledge of the physics
involved I can google up much interesting documentation.
Kids use their jacket to benefit from side winds. At least I use to. I
remember with the right kind of wind it makes enormous difference.
I also read some Aerogear benefits from high speeds in contrast with
sails which may stop working if you go to fast by lack of attack
angle.
yeah, you could say I enjoy thinking about this vortex ram
velocipede :-)
Any thoughts?
Chalo
> On Tue, 4 Dec 2007 10:48:45 -0800 (PST), Chalo
>
>
>
> <chalo.col...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >Paul Cardinale wrote:
>
> >> gaby de wilde wrote:
>
> >> > I had envisioned drawing a vortex using a big dish a tube and a small
> >> > dish.
>
> >> > I've made a page with an illustration here.
>
> >> >http://gabydewilde.googlepages.com/vortex-ram
>
> >> Apparently you don't know what a vortex is.
>
> >> You seem to be trying to come up with something that has negative
> >> drag.
>
> >It looked to me like he was trying to do some sort of boundary layer
> >control. The whole thing seems counterintuitive to me, but I am often
> >surprised by the weirdness of aerodynamic forces and principles.
>
> >Chalo
>
> Dear Chalo,
>
> The animation shows pulsing, which makes things look faintly
> plausible.
>
> But if you draw a continuous line to show the path of a steady
> airstream, you'll see that the airstream crosses itself.
But that assumption, and the animation, are not necessarily indicative
of how the system might work.
It might pulsate, buffet, and cause all sorts of major turbulence--
which is what I would guess from having a look at the idea. But there
remains the possibility that the thing could scoop off some of the
boundary layer, which would in turn maintain a "bubble" that more or
less mimicked a solid nose cone. If that were the case, I still don't
know why that would be better than just using a solid nose cone. And
it looks like it would be harder to get it right than to get it wrong
and end up with a Cd of >1.0.
> Perpetual motion is still just Paganini
I didn't assume that the OP was attempting to design a device that
would be propelled directly into the airstream passing over it. If
that's what he was getting at, it's pretty silly.
Chalo
Scott Gordo
I'm too much of a moron to provide any sort of argument for or against
your model, but this much I do know: make it out of carbon fiber,
charge out the wazoo for it, and somebody will buy it.
/s
gdew...@gmail.com
On Dec 4, 8:20 pm, carlfo...@comcast.net wrote:
> The animation shows pulsing, which makes things look faintly
> plausible.
> But if you draw a continuous line to show the path of a steady
> airstream, you'll see that the airstream crosses itself.
>
Yes, this would be the main intention of the device. In a worse case
scenario the animation should merely serve as an inspiration for the
negative drag topic.
I think it's an old but exiting topic.
> Perpetual motion is still just Paganini:
>
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dPRWshWq9E4
>
Nice video but I have to disagree with your interpretation. Perpetual
motion in the physics sense there of is not possible because physics
assumes closed systems.
This assumption helps create good math but it's not very realistic.
Accelerating a mass with negative drag doesn't sound plausible in a
closed system.
But with some wind it becomes very realistic.
Using extremely novel electronics you can capture radio waves and turn
them into useful electricity. This radio can be tuned to cosmic radio
stations that will continue to broadcast long after the milky way has
been destroyed and forgotten about.
I just love the concept of machines that run forever without looking
after them. I know it's not a reality but it's still impressive how
far we actually got.
Cornelis Drebbel, who invented the submarine was granted a patent in
1598 for a machine that told the time, date, and season. The gold
machine was mounted in a globe on pillars and was powered by changes
in air pressure a sealed glass tub with liquid varied in volume
through atmospheric pressure changes.
James Cox and John Joseph Merlin build the Cox's timepiece around
1760. The device is powered from changes in atmospheric pressure via a
mercury barometer. The driving barometer contains 68 kilograms (150
pounds) of mercury. The clock is designed to enable the timepiece to
run indefinitely and overwinding is prevented by a safety mechanism.
The prime mover, encased in a finely detailed clock body, is a Fortin
mercury barometer.
Arthur Beverly build the Beverly Clock in 1864. The clock has been
running continuously since its construction. The mechanism is driven
by variations in atmospheric pressure and by daily temperature
variations. Either cause the air in a one cubic-foot air-tight box to
expand and contract, pushing on a diaphragm. A six-degree Celsius
temperature variation over the course of each day creates enough
pressure to raise a one-pound weight by one inch or 11 joules.
Jaeger LeCoulter created the Atmos, a modern clock powered by the same
principle as the Beverly Clock and Cox's clock. A mixture of gas and
liquid (ethyl chloride) expands as the temperature rises and
compresses a spring. For two days operation a temperature variation of
one degree in the range between 15 and 30 degrees Celsius is enough.
It also uses a torsion pendulum that executes two torsional
oscillations per minute.
More then perpetual enough for me.
I think the rest of the perpetula debate is more of a "my vector is
bigger as yours" kind of thing? Is it not?
In a mechanical watch the mainspring stores the energy to operate, a
long strip of hardened and blued steel or some specialised steel
alloy, iron-nickel-chromium with the addition of cobalt- molybdenum-
beryllium and cold-rolled for hardening. Such spring on average is
about 0.05-0.2 mm thick.
A torsion pendulum rotates about the vertical axis of the wire,
spinning it, instead of swinging like a pendulum, it has a heavy disk
or wheel with 3 or 4 chrome balls on ornate spokes, hanging on the
torsion spring. The force of the twisting torsion spring reverses the
direction of rotation, so the torsion pendulum oscillates slowly,
clockwise and counterclockwise. The speed can be tuned by adjusting
the spokes with the 4 balls that act like a governor. The clock's
gears apply pulses at the top of the torsion spring to keep the wheel
going as it rotates slowly it only takes little energy. the
oscillation period changes with temperature. The closer the balls move
to the axle, the smaller the moment of inertia and the faster it will
turn.
I think 1 degree over 2 days is MUCH closer to a closed system as it
is to the real world of heat fluctuation.
> The comments show that RBT threads are perfectly normal.
>
> Cheers,
>
> Carl Fogel
What do you mean with RBT threads?
You mean the thread of the thread?
he-he
gdew...@gmail.com
ha-ha Scot.
Yes, I'm sure you are right, still it would be hard to beat Mr
Patterson.
I don't think I could fake that much testimonials claiming 80-200%
increase in mileage. As he has gifted the technology to us we should
all be able to create our own reproductions.
Then if you can see it works with your own eyes you should have no
problem selling them either. People will call you a freak and others
will say "yes but he does do 3 times the mileage per gallon" Business
will self propagate.
People claimed they wrapped one out of duck tape still having 50%
extra mpg.
The shape may not be perfect jet. It may make my design redundant but
I feel just collecting the available anomalies of this kind may give
an interesting picture to share.
I read some one build a 10 000 kg human powered pendulum.
I think it means some extra mass should not be a problem for a bike. I
understand China has 10% electrically (assisted) vehicles.
So it wont be long before a simple set of super caps + a hub motor can
be used to overcome weight acceleration problems. One could then think
about adding a large flywheel to the bike.
Everything combined would make the vehicle much faster as anything on
the road today.
It's fun to think about I think. What do you think?
carl...@comcast.net
Dear Chalo,
Alas, my assumption appears to be dead accurate--have a peek at the
original poster's lengthy reply.
Cheers,
Carl Fogel
Werehatrack
>Hello all,
>
>I had envisioned drawing a vortex using a big dish a tube and a small
>dish.
>
>I've made a page with an illustration here.
>
>http://gabydewilde.googlepages.com/vortex-ram
>
>Let me think what you hear ok?
Umm, I hear that this is completely off-topic for rec.bicycles.tech
The concept looks as unworkable as the infamous topless BMW 5-series
advertised in the April edition of Car a number of years ago.
Do not, however, let any criticisms posted here dissuade you from
seeking developmental funding to pursue this concept to the point of
at least prototyping it; to maintain proper project security and
retain maximal patent potential, you should take all development
offline and keep it under wraps until you have the patents issued.
Be sure to report back after that's accomplished.
--
My email address is antispammed; pull WEEDS if replying via e-mail.
Typoes are not a bug, they're a feature.
Words processed in a facility that contains nuts.
Chalo
>
> The ram implosion wing is one of the things that makes me think
>
> "After being rejected as an XPrize contestant for an unproven Gravitic
> propulsion concept and told repeatedly by the skeptics that my
> technology goes against fundamental physics, I realized that I needed
> a way of proving once and for all that I had a viable technology so I
> decided to install the Ram-Implo-Wing onto the roof of my van.
>
> I knew the wing was going to work but what I had no way of knowing was
> that by placing the Ram-wing onto the roof of my van that it would
> increase my fuel mileage 2-x above normal. After a little tweaking of
> the wing I added a set of elevated wing-lets as well as special
> texture (similar to the texture of golf ball) to the wing and I
> obtained 3-x above my normal fuel mileage.
I don't know where to start.
My first suggestion is that you should save yourself a lot of time,
money, and trouble, and buy a kit from Mr. Patterson. Then you can
try it out and see how it works for you. If it works as claimed, then
obviously the principles are worth pursuing; if for whatever reason it
does not perform the aerodynamic trick ascribed to it, you can look
elsewhere to scratch your inventive itch.
> It's pretty weird, you cant really blame people for laughing. Take
> this project for example.
>
> http://blog.360.yahoo.com/factuurexpress?p=6802
I love the soundtrack-- how telling it is that this sort of faith-
based engineering originated from a Jesus fan. Come to think of it,
those must be Jesus fans mounted all over the car!
Chalo
Tom Sherman
> gdew...@gmail.com wrote:
>>
>> Thanks, for the keywords. "negative drag" was what I was looking for.
>> I read a mohawk like sail can have negative drag while driving up
>> wind. I imagine it to be as solid as possible and part of the body
>> with the body having long tail with a decrease in volume over the
>> length. It should be a very slim vehicle possibly adjustable to the
>> shoulders width for max performance, then have something like an 8
>> degree decrease and drive up the wind under an angle of 10 degrees.
>>
>> Are there any other ways you know of to make negative drag?
>
> Well you could start with negative air.
>
> -----
>
> What are you wanting this thing to do exactly?
> ,,,,,
> If you wish to reduce the drag of a bicycle then the most common ways
> that recumbent cyclists do it is by using a rigid plastic front fairing
> (such as from Zzipper or Mueller Windwrap) coupled with a "body sock".
> This has almost as low drag as a hard-shell body, but is much less
> expensive, easier to build and not as sensitive to cross-winds (although
> it can still be a handful). The lack of wind-chill has large benefits
Only weirdos ride bicycles like that!
See <http://www.ransbikes.com/Gallery/Archive/Sherman.htm>.
Easy to build - heck, one can sew a body sock by hand with no pattern.
(Been there, done that)
The cross-winds are not really a problem in my experience.
The sock does not provide much extra warmth (good in the summer), but if
one could find a windproof stretch fabric, the warmth increase would be
significant.
--
Tom Sherman - Holstein-Friesland Bovinia
"Localized intense suction such as tornadoes is created when temperature
differences are high enough between meeting air masses, and can impart
excessive energy onto a cyclist." - Randy Schlitter
Tom Sherman
> ...
> I know before Victor Schauberger died a broken man he said "They took
> everything away from me, I don't even own myself anymore" Here is just
> one of the many anecdotes in his name of which there are far to much
> and which include photos and witnesses of the water wizard. One day he
> took on a job. Water was flowing down hill with the goal to collect it
> in a basin but the water had much to much kinetic energy so it would
> just wash over the basin and collapse the small dyk around it. Victor
> made the downhill even steeper and used a much smaller dyk. They
> laughed at him. So he stood on top of his dyk and instructed them to
> open the gate. But victor created a boal shape basin with the watter
> dropping straight down into it with such force it would wash back up
> the hill up-against the incoming stream. He was standing next to a
Hydraulic jump?
DougC
> ....
> I didn't assume that the OP was attempting to design a device that
> would be propelled directly into the airstream passing over it. If
> that's what he was getting at, it's pretty silly.
>
> Chalo
People assumed this was impossible for a great period of time, but it
has been solved--at least for boats. Not so much a "boat" as a
cigar-shaped bobber-type thing, with a big wind-driven propeller on top
and a small water propeller on the bottom end. It automatically faces
into, and travels against the wind--by wind power.
~
carl...@comcast.net
wrote:
Dear Doug,
And you can make a traveling windmill move into the wind on a track in
the same fashion, with enough wind and enough gearing between the
wind-driven propeller and the cogs driving the machine along the
track.
But there's no such "gearing" in the animation, nor is there likely to
be any.
Cheers,
Carl Fogel
gdew...@gmail.com
> And you can make a traveling windmill move into the wind on a track in
> the same fashion, with enough wind and enough gearing between the
> wind-driven propeller and the cogs driving the machine along the
> track.
Hello Carl,
We can discuss it can we not? We can share our thoughts and patch our
errors.
> But there's no such "gearing" in the animation, nor is there likely to
> be any.
I don't want to be rude but your train of thought doesn't go anywhere.
I cant eat likelyhoods tho I wish I could. :-)
I don't see any gearing in either my vortex ram or the ram implosion
wing. Sailing also doesn't have any moving parts. It's extremely
efficient.
Cousteau's Calypso could propel it self up wind. Doug also said it has
been done already even with the gearing.
http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Image:Calypso_II.png
going faster as the wind directly down the wind is also possible.
http://www.ayrs.org/DWFTTW_from_Catalyst_N23_Jan_2006.pdf
Converting drag into forwards motion is not a problem either. The
thing that makes it interesting is that the vehicle is already
compressing the air.
the vortex ram is not looking to create extra drag but it's trying to
convert this abundantly available compressed air back into forwards
motion.
The wind is moving relative to the ground so there is more potential
energy going into the system as the rider is putting into it. The drag
is normally an annoyance, driving up the wind is even worse.
We know insects use vortexi for flight. We know golf balls have
dimples. We know shark skin is smooth in one direction and sharp in
the other.
Like a pendulum a vortex only needs a pulse every now and then. I like
to think it could be made to self sustain at far smaller cost as just
pushing the air away all the time.
Insects would be using that what works best.
Chalo
>
> Carl Fogel wrote:
> >
> > And you can make a traveling windmill move into the wind on a track in
> > the same fashion, with enough wind and enough gearing between the
> > wind-driven propeller and the cogs driving the machine along the
> > track.
>
> errors.
Carl has plenty of things to keep him busy other than trying to
disabuse a willfully deluded person of his notions.
> Cousteau's Calypso could propel it self up wind. Doug also said it has
> been done already even with the gearing.
>
> http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Image:Calypso_II.png
According to what I've read, Flettner boats can tack at less than 30
degrees from the wind, because their rotors generate a net force
vectored at 90 degrees to the direction of airflow. That's
interesting, but it's not traveling directly upwind. Only from you
have I seen a suggestion that they could travel directly upwind. And
if you'll forgive me this judgment, you have been sipping from some
tainted sources of information.
Note also that turning a rotor to generate an aerodynamic force isn't
something you get for free, any more than turning a wheel to generate
a reaction force against the road is something you get for free.
Force times distance equals work. Flettner boats use more power to
turn their rotors than they would to get the same performance with a
conventional screw.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flettner_ship
I'll guess that if a Flettner boat has been shown to travel directly
upwind, that such movement would have been made possible by water
currents in a direction different from that of the wind.
> going faster as the wind directly down the wind is also possible.
>
> http://www.ayrs.org/DWFTTW_from_Catalyst_N23_Jan_2006.pdf
Going downwind faster than the wind is, by definition, going upwind
(along with higher surface friction/rolling losses than if you were
simply traveling into the wind as it blows relative to the ground).
All the wishful thinking in the world does not change that, and I'll
believe it no sooner than I see it.
> We know insects use vortexi for flight.
<...>
> Insects would be using that what works best.
If what you are suggesting worked best, insects would not have to flap
their wings nearly as much as they do. You should tell them they've
got it all wrong.
Chalo
datakoll
a "negative drag" -to suit your search-occurs when an EQ wave passes
thru your location: a paranormal doppler effect.
ebergy from the surrounding atmosphereic voltage can be feed into the
"vortex" producing enhanced effects-like spooks, murphies law, heat
lightning...
datakoll
winter
gdew...@gmail.com
> >http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Image:Calypso_II.png
> According to what I've read, Flettner boats can tack at less than 30
> degrees from the wind, because their rotors generate a net force
> vectored at 90 degrees to the direction of airflow.
> Flettner boats use more power to
> turn their rotors than they would to get the same performance with a
> conventional screw.
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flettner_ship
>
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Turbosail
A turbosail is a naval propulsion system invented by Jacques-Yves
Cousteau and used on the Alcyone. It consists of an airfoil, vertical
and grossly ovoidal tube, with a mobile flap which improves the
separation between the intrados and extrados. An aspiration system
pulls air into the tubes, and is used to create an important
depression on one side of the sail ; propulsion occurres
perpendicularly to the pressure. In this way, the "sails" act as
wings, with air moving slower on one side, creating drag. Standard
engines can then be used in conjunction with the turbo sails. These in
turn can be coordinated with computers to control the angles, suction
power, and rotation of the sails.
The efficiency of the system is not well documented. When the Alcyone
was launched in 1985, it was suggested that tankers and other large
vessels would soon install turbosails as a mean to decrease fuel
consumption.[1]. The system was intended to power the Calypso II,
which has yet to be built.
The Alcycone reported a 1/3 fuel savings, and a larger commercial
vessel had a 15% increase in fuel efficiency over a three year study
http://www.limsi.fr/RS2005/meca/aero/aero11
Object
The turbulent separated flows past several bluff bodies, i.e. a
circular cylinder, the Malavard-Cousteau's Turbosail and a NACA0012
airfoil, are computed by using Large Eddy Simulations (LES). In order
to modify the aerodynamic coefficients of the circular cylinder, three
different control techniques are applied: rotation, boundary layer
suction and synthetic jets. For the Turbosail and the NACA0012
profile, only a control by boundary layer suction is used. Moderate
Reynolds numbers from Re = 2,000 to Re = 100,000 are considered in
this study, corresponding to the subcritical regime (laminar
separation of the boundary layer). The control efficiency on both lift
enhancement and drag reduction is analyzed as function of the control
parameters (position, intensity...). Finally, comparisons with
experimental studies carried on in LEA/ENSMA (Poitiers, France) are
shown for the flow around a circular cylinder, without and with
control by boundary layer suction, at a high Reynolds number Re =
100,000.
http://www.google.com/patents?id=0qUuAAAAEBAJ
Patent number: 4630997
Filing date: May 4, 1984
Issue date: Dec 23, 1986
Abstract
A device for producing a force when in a moving fluid, such as air or
water, and a method for using said device. The device may be placed in
a fluid moving in a first direction for producing a force in a second
direction, which is substantially transverse with respect to the first
direction....
</quotes>
datakoll
OK where does the effect suck energy from? unless you have a Mormon or
Ohio xemption, you must identify where the device get's its energy. I
mean like if the universe has to do it then you gotta do it.
Qouting Pioters, France has no grip
JimboCat
The first moron detects a relative headwind and ducks down in the
cockpit to cut the drag.
The second moron says, "Aha, finally a wind," and puts up the
sails and begins tacking back and forth.
Who wins the race?
Jim Deutch (JimboCat)
--
"Physics is to math what sex is to masturbation." - Richard Feynman
gdew...@gmail.com
> OK where does the effect suck energy from? unless you have a Mormon or
> Ohio xemption, you must identify where the device get's its energy.
>
Mine would be the adventures exemption ^__^
To me Energy sounds like figuring out how much God there is in the
device. Energy is such a weird term. It doesn't really exist jet, it's
the potential for something else to happen. ehm lol? I do know what
you mean tho.
The energy to be used for propulsion is coming from the drag. Drag
represents a constant loss of energy to the open system. Every percent
of work we can extract from this will be pure gain. Initially the
change in aerodynamic profile will obviously make it worse then a
smooth vehicle. But the moment we manage to re-use the drag that was
already created performance should skyrocket. (at least in practice)
I would love to take all credit for this as the first person who
thought of sailing or negative resistance but I'm afraid that would be
rather unrealistic. We are provided with numerous clues how to build
this device. Rather then try shoot them down one by one I try to list
them and look for patterns in the documentation. For example Victor
Schauberger created more as one astonishing device for Hitler. Those
disappeared to the USSR, the US (they apparently disappear into thin
air also)
" Early Heinkel "T" (Taifun/Typhoon) flying cigar design study for
possible use with Schauberger Repulsin vortex motor. "
http://discaircraft.greyfalcon.us/Viktor%20Schauberger.htm
"Note lack of detail of engine except for 'turbine" description. No
prop engine nor centrifugal/axial-flow turbojet either... just a
gaping inlet, ring turbine and fuselage-wide open shaft to exhaust
port."
Just like everyone else I can dismiss this very easily, all I have to
do is wave my hand and say PUH. The usual behaviour of the clueless. I
see a clear an obvious clue provided here.
I'm not claiming I could reverse engineer it. But I will claim
ignoring things will never be a useful activity.
Victor is dead, he doesn't owe you any explanation where the energy is
coming from. Neither do you owe me anything of this sort.
But it would be exiting if we could manage to figure it out.
Here is the Paris Hilton news in case you think I'm wasting my time.
http://news.google.com/news?q=paris+hilton
The latest headlines on World of war craft perhaps?
http://news.google.com/news?q=world+of+warcraft
How exiting!
datakoll
> How exiting!
I'm late. it's 6:55. I has a potato buring in the microwave.
Ok. I haven't read the whole thing but whatever your purpose.
The device, any device, generates heat from friction. So, as you
develop the idea in fiction writing, recovering heat loss or better
than generating heat loss takes the writing to a place of escape.
Escape is a good start there. I'm waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaay behind on my SF
so....
You are GD Wilde and off course I am also 'GD Wilde' so you, the
poseur ? are suspect. In fact under the current conditions you are
decidedly stinky.
But as I am the real thing, I'll let you in on some reality.
If you're not suspect then let me ask you what you thought of my first
reply?
When I began writing bicycle, The Skeptic showed in RBT and began a
loooong whoha about this and that. He went away. He doesn't annoy me
as I have a International AAA psychic rating and I'm one of the good
guys.
I have a two page resume!
Including trying to save the country several times and the planet, the
planet with a free energy device, a collector energy trap for the 40
microvolts/meter''' I am what is called a "ground" and I'm
telekinetic.
I have demonstrated the effects and NASA investigated. I'm living at
Cape Canaveral to devote a year's time to collector and national
security within the NASA intelligence sphere-like a large university
effect.
I can use the effect to produce rain. I asked a main researcher in
that area if he was interested: never heard from him.
There's a lot going on here. Ever see "THE MAN WHO FELL TO EARTH"?
The Mafia hired women, the psychics you see advertsing, to read my
mind and scream at me thru ship's hailer mounted on pickup trucks and
vans, one now in my backyard- everytime I think.
24/7/365 for 14 years. The FBI, Florida Sheriff's, FDLE, NASA all
support the continuous attack.
So far, the attack cost the mob close to one million dollars.
The mob controls and directs the USAF and National Guard fighters to
strafe me while I'm running an experiment. The mob collects and
orders 7-8 fishing boats to stand off shore where I'm remotely camped
so I cannot develop the idea: the boats blow horns together when I try
to think in terms of a collector.
Here at Cape Canaveral, the local sheriff allows the mob to broadcast
CONTINUOUS screaming threats at 140-160 db thru my backyard from 10PM
to 6AM, against county ordinance. Many of my neighbors in a gated
beach community work at KSC. They support the mob as does most of the
local population. NASA workers support the mob. You know, the mob that
poisons NASA's children with narcotics and meth. Many NASA workers are
the mob. Certainly the Sheriff's are the mob.
None of these people are interested in energy collection or national
security. Yet if they thought, an interesting idea, I had a grip on
the device, stealing it would be a priority. I do have a grip on it.
The idea of it doesn't fit into their reality, sniffing tourist's
assholes to see if the tourists will give them money. Several NASA
people in the area have wives and daughters who work as prostitutes.
All prostitutes will courier drugs for the mob or else it's the bus
stop.
These people actually suppport serial killers, drug pushers and child
rapists as mutual travelers on life's highway.
The FBI and Federal government support the mob. Worthless. I could be
in East Germany, 1960.
NASCAR announcing, NPR, all Orlando FM and TV- when I listen they
attack me. For example, a soap opera going on in the wall TV while I'm
at the Laundromat gets totally overdubbed with dialogue attacking me.
NPR works with mob mind readers who direct attacks on me, Sirius
satellite radio - jerk named Dave -same deal. All connected to media
music distribution.
That's a possible reality when the work is more than a fiberglass
toilet seat on a van roof.
Androcles
"datakoll" <data...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:b1fcd175-022c-4a14...@e6g2000prf.googlegroups.com...
:
: > How exiting!
Wow! Was it Elvis who left the building?
gdew...@gmail.com
> If you're not suspect then let me ask you what you thought of my first
> reply?
hello datakoll,
Your previous reply was better.
You asked where the energy comes from.
I explain it comes from the propulsion.
the engine spins => wheels turn => air is compressed => vehicle moves
forward
=> ****pressure is released****
So the energy comes from the scalar quality.
It's not more complicated as that, if you could explain what you
understand of it I can refine my explanation. The topic is to gather
links and thoughts towards this goal. I'm sure the creation of some
decent documentation would make it easier for those with the tools and
brains to implement it.
That's what I think about it.
We think we are pedaling the bike to move the bike. But we are
actually moving the air in the opposite direction. This moving air
suffers drag just like the bicycle. Eventually the motion ends in
small vortexi. It would make sense to engineer the right kind of
vortex.
But one bit of air moves another bit of air and that has to move
another bit again, this harmonica chain reaction is taking all the
energy we are pedalling into the machine.
Please advance the thought and/or correct me where I'm wrong.
Thanks,
___
http://gabydewilde.googlepages.com/vortex-ram
gabydewilde - vortex ram
Maximust
>
> But one bit of air moves another bit of air and that has to move
> another bit again, this harmonica chain reaction is taking all the
> energy we are pedalling into the machine.
>
> Please advance the thought and/or correct me where I'm wrong.
Harmonica Chain Reaction:
http://youtube.com/watch?v=1h7T4FRpMEA
unforg...@juno.com
>
> I had envisioned drawing a vortex using a big dish a tube and a small
> dish.
>
> I've made a page with an illustration here.
>
> http://gabydewilde.googlepages.com/vortex-ram
>
> Let me think what you hear ok?
>
>
> gaby de wilde
Oh, what the hell. It's Friday. I could go into a long physical
explanation of how changing the direction of air flow even in the
absence of friction requires momentum transfer, but your viewpoint
seems a bit too whimsical to believe it. Instead, I dropped a sketch
of your vortex ram into Comsol Multiphysics. The scale is meters, and
the far-field flow is 18m/s. Contours are velocity, boundaries are
colored by pressure, and arrows are normalized.
http://s223.photobucket.com/albums/dd171/unforgiven99/?action=view¤t=vortexram.jpg
Note two important points: 1) Flow is right to left (-x) and all
pressure values on the dish boundaries are negative. This is what you
would call positive drag. I haven't done the boundary integrals and
compared the shape to a flat plate, but it looks like it's probably
not much better. 2) Your animation shows what appears to be a jet of
air concentric with the flow field going from left to right. This
kind of structure is not stable for a viscous fluid at any reasonable
Reynolds number. From my analysis at a realistic length scale and
velocity, I cannot even see any indication of where this jet might be
trying to form.
If you think that the discrepancies are the result of my eyeballing
the geometry, e-mail me a dxf of your design and I'll run it for you.
A Muzi
>> If you're not suspect then let me ask you what you thought of my first
>> reply?
gdew...@gmail.com wrote:
> Your previous reply was better.
>
> You asked where the energy comes from.
>
> I explain it comes from the propulsion.
>
> the engine spins => wheels turn => air is compressed => vehicle moves
> forward
>
> => ****pressure is released****
>
> So the energy comes from the scalar quality.
>
> It's not more complicated as that, if you could explain what you
> understand of it I can refine my explanation. The topic is to gather
> links and thoughts towards this goal. I'm sure the creation of some
> decent documentation would make it easier for those with the tools and
> brains to implement it.
>
> That's what I think about it.
>
> We think we are pedaling the bike to move the bike. But we are
> actually moving the air in the opposite direction. This moving air
> suffers drag just like the bicycle. Eventually the motion ends in
> small vortexi. It would make sense to engineer the right kind of
> vortex.
>
> But one bit of air moves another bit of air and that has to move
> another bit again, this harmonica chain reaction is taking all the
> energy we are pedalling into the machine.
>
> Please advance the thought and/or correct me where I'm wrong.
Let's start with the word 'vortices'
--
Andrew Muzi
www.yellowjersey.org
Open every day since 1 April, 1971
carl...@comcast.net
Dear Unforgiven,
For that, I forgive you!
Cheers,
Carl Fogel
datakoll
a oddular tube worm structure of both zero gravity and below Kelvin.
At 008973 GMT, THE COMMISSION placed the following structure into the
OTW. Generation of Z Waves will begin thricely.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=us7YB7eiOeQ
DVBORKNAG!
datakoll
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
I went on to other computer tasks after writing the novella's opening
paragraph.
I heard then thought, "HOLY DUNG BEETLE, the laptop's blown a chip."
Very softly I could hear: zip zip zip zing zing zerk zerk zerk zack
zack...
That was the clock mechanism sound track running under the top and
current page.
Harharharharharharhar
Lately, the laptop's software is organizing tabs experimentally.
OFF course, an identifying characteristic for OTW Z Waves
gdew...@gmail.com
>[snip]
Non-information = dis info
_____________
http://blog.360.yahoo.com/factuurexpress
gdew...@gmail.com
The Vorticity wikipedia page may be of interest to readers who have
that.
"One way to visualize vorticity is this: consider a fluid flowing.
Imagine that some tiny part of the fluid is instantaneously rendered
solid, and the rest of the flow removed. If that tiny new solid
particle would be rotating, rather than just translating, then there
is vorticity in the flow."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vorticity
"The vorticity equation describes the evolution of the vorticity (\vec
\omega) of a fluid element as it moves around. The vorticity equation
can be derived from the conservation of momentum equation.[1] In its
general vector form it may be expressed as follows,"
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vorticity_transport_equation
gdew...@gmail.com
> > Dear Chalo,
>
> > The animation shows pulsing, which makes things look faintly
> > plausible.
>
> > But if you draw a continuous line to show the path of a steady
> > airstream, you'll see that the airstream crosses itself.
>
> But that assumption, and the animation, are not necessarily indicative
> of how the system might work.
>
Yes, you are awfully right here. The illustration is just for
illustration. The actual ram would look much more like Mr Patterson's
vortex implosion ram and of course the poorly documented many
creations of Victor Schauberger.
http://discaircraft.greyfalcon.us/Viktor%20Schauberger.htm
http://www.pureenergysystems.com/events/conferences/2004/teslatech_SLC/RobertPatterson/RamImplosionWing.htm
Patterson says a rough surface is mandatory. I'm beginning to think it
should even have bumps on it...
"Wind tunnel tests of scale-model humpback whale flippers have
revealed that the scalloped, bumpy flipper is a more efficient wing
design than is currently used by the aeronautics industry on
airplanes. The tests show that bump-ridged flippers do not stall as
quickly and produce more lift and less drag than comparably sized
sleek flippers. "
http://www.pratt.duke.edu/news/index.php?story=156
I've made a page with links here
http://gabydewilde.googlepages.com/vortex-ram-suggested-reading
I should have updated everything, sorry about that.
datakoll
the idea creates more drag and more drag and more drag
without creating energy
the idea doesn't create energy, it creates drag-friction-heat-energy
loss.
the energy must come from somewhere if only creative writing, not
quotable obfuscations.
datakoll
sure, "creates lift," stick it in your Word proceesor and search.
creates lift: 30 mph down and 75 mph forward
positive thinking?
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/12/10/sports/othersports/10flying.html?_r=1&hp&oref=slogin
gdew...@gmail.com
> On Dec 3, 10:06 pm, "gdewi...@gmail.com" <gdewi...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > Hello all,
>
> > I had envisioned drawing a vortex using a big dish a tube and a small
> > dish.
>
> > I've made a page with an illustration here.
>
> >http://gabydewilde.googlepages.com/vortex-ram
>
> > Let me think what you hear ok?
>
> > Thank you,
>
> > gaby de wilde
>
> Oh, what the hell. It's Friday. I could go into a long physical
> explanation of how changing the direction of air flow even in the
> absence of friction requires momentum transfer, but your viewpoint
> seems a bit too whimsical to believe it. Instead, I dropped a sketch
> of your vortex ram into Comsol Multiphysics. The scale is meters, and
> the far-field flow is 18m/s. Contours are velocity, boundaries are
> colored by pressure, and arrows are normalized.
>
>
> Note two important points: 1) Flow is right to left (-x) and all
> pressure values on the dish boundaries are negative. This is what you
> would call positive drag. I haven't done the boundary integrals and
> compared the shape to a flat plate, but it looks like it's probably
> not much better. 2) Your animation shows what appears to be a jet of
> air concentric with the flow field going from left to right. This
> kind of structure is not stable for a viscous fluid at any reasonable
> Reynolds number. From my analysis at a realistic length scale and
> velocity, I cannot even see any indication of where this jet might be
> trying to form.
>
> If you think that the discrepancies are the result of my eyeballing
> the geometry, e-mail me a dxf of your design and I'll run it for you.
That's a great graph.
You know,
I think physics could use some better art in it's explanations. Boring
is an analog figure. :-)
Still, the design I made was merely intended to inspire the topic. I
had extracted some most interesting ideas from the being of this
discussion already. :-)
Maybe if one pictures a sailboat sailing up-wind having a windmill on
it. In a curved sail the wind is compressed, the aerodynamic profile
will generate some additional compression and our boat is already
moving forwards compressing the frontal stream even more(the real
drag).
Here, this is a bit more down to earth.
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.bicycles.tech/msg/4c2f012215ad820f
On Dec 14 1994, 11:26 pm, r...@wolverine.utias.utoronto.ca (Roger
Barry Hertz) wrote:
> In article <3c9mkq...@hippo.shef.ac.uk>,
>
> T Robinson <ci...@sunc.sheffield.ac.uk> wrote:
>
> >I am posting the following for an 'A' level student in the UK. The message is
> >self-explanatory
>
> > I am an A-level student from Sheffield, England and am currently undertaking
> > a design project on an anti-crosswind front wheel for pedal cycles which
> > produces less drag than conventional spoked wheels. Solid disk wheels cannot
> > be used as front wheels on bicycles, as crosswinds cause hazardous steering
> > problems. The design is mainly targetted at use by time triallists, for whom
> > seconds of time can mean winning or losing a race.
> > I intend to fix a limited-angle rotatable aerofoil onto each spoke of the wheel
> > which would be tilted by the crosswind to allow the wind to pass through the
> > wheel. The aerofoils would be approximately 250mm long and 40mm wide at the top,
> > tapering to 10mm at the bottom.
>
> > Any relevant references or comments?
> > Stephen Mosley
> > Eckington School
>
> Yes, I believe this will work quite well. Let me relate some experience that
> I have with using a similar concept with super-mileage vehicles (with the
> SAE).
>
> At the University of Saskatchewan, this concept was used for developing a
> body style for a small 3 wheel car, designed for very high fuel economy.
> The car was designed so that it was a vertical airfoil (it had a specific
> number, I believe). The airfoil was symmetric. When faced with a cross
> wind, the shape of the car could produce *negative* drag. The drag is
> negative because the component of lift in the direction of travel (along
> the axis of the airfoil, rather then the attack angle of the wind), which
> overcomes the aerodynamic drag. The angles of attack for this situation
> to exist are small. I think it was something like 10 to 15 degrees from
> the direction of travel.
>
> In the specific competition (1986), the car (Canadian Challenge I think)
> obtained around 5600 mp(imperial)g. The day of the competition was sunny,
> and quite windy ;-).
>
> The SAE at UofS experimented with varying the angle of attack the next year
> of the competitions. They did this by introducing rear wheel steering in
> the car. They found that it was quite difficult for the driver to adjust
> the angle to its optimum in practice, although theoretically it gave a much
> bigger range of negative drag attack angles.
>
> Your application with the bicycle spokes is similar in many ways. If
> each spoke has less drag, then the resistance of the bicycle will decrease,
> and people will be able to go faster! I would recommend first selecting
> an airfoil shape that works without rotation, if that is possible. One problem
> is that the airfoil will usually be in choppy air, so you may not be able to avoid
> separation at the best of times. A static airfoil would be able to provide
> a component of thrust when hit by a cross wind in either direction.
>
> If any one wants references, I could dig some up. I know one student did his
> Masters on this concept, and also looked into applying it to heavy transport
> vehicles (trucks).
>
> Roger Hertz
> --
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> r...@wolverine.utias.utoronto.ca
> University of Toronto Ph: (416) 667-7744
> Institute for Aerospace Studies Fax: (416) 667-7799
gdew...@gmail.com
Compare it to a sailboat sailing up-wind having a windmill on it.
The ship could use it's anchor to power the windmill just the same
moving up the wind should allow for the same wind to be used.
The windmill works when it's standing still, it doesn't stop working
when we sail ahead.
So we can also use a windmill to power the bike directly. ^_^
It's how sailing works basically.
So theoretically we can go as fast as we want. But we don't want to
use batteries and we don't want a gigantic vehicle. We want an
Ærodinamic shape that accelerates it self. I think the facts say it's
worth looking for gold here. I'm not claiming we will find any but it
could potentially make us laugh all the way out of the oil age. I
think drag is the only reason bicycles don't go 100 km/hr without
effort? So we would be happy if you just find some major improvements.
^_^
____
http://blog.360.yahoo.com/factuurexpress?tag=bicycle&list=1
datakoll
more drag. it's only windmill's turning. listen. The sailboat's
windmill will generate auxiliary electricity but a windmill large
enlough to power the sailboat-nada.
the idea with creative writing in perpetual motion is intriguing
obfuscation when you get to the daynewmah
"The ship could use it's anchor to power the windmill just the same
moving up the wind should allow for the same wind to be used....."
gotta flesh it ut so it's beyond confusing to entertaining: once
entertained, you're in!
maybe there's a bibliography in cyberspace?
BTW, my story is a new and apparently somewhat original complete
explaination of reality. TOOT TOOT
gdew...@gmail.com
> [snip]
I'm not your babysitter Mr datakoll.
Try find something interesting to say.
datakoll
sheeeeet. this here's a disssssscussssion group. Who dya wanna speak
with? Brandt Brown, Armstrong, Muzi, Chalo... Phil Brown?
Weeez sitting you dude.
Tom Sherman
Armstrong posts to rec.bicycles.tech?
--
Tom Sherman - Holstein-Friesland Bovinia
"Localized intense suction such as tornadoes is created when temperature
differences are high enough between meeting air masses, and can impart
excessive energy onto a cyclist." - Randy Schlitter
gdew...@gmail.com
> Chalo wrote:
> > ....
> > I didn't assume that the OP was attempting to design a device that
> > would be propelled directly into the airstream passing over it. If
> > that's what he was getting at, it's pretty silly.
>
> > Chalo
>
> People assumed this was impossible for a great period of time, but it
> has been solved--at least for boats. Not so much a "boat" as a
> cigar-shaped bobber-type thing, with a big wind-driven propeller on top
> and a small water propeller on the bottom end. It automatically faces
> into, and travels against the wind--by wind power.
> ~
But now that we have datakoll spamming his gospel in the topic there
has to be something he doesn't like here. It's almost like a hydrogen
on demand discussion. I even read the words perpetual motion? ha-ha?
But it's an interesting topic. It basically doesn't matter how fast
the vehicle moves up the wind, the wind it self can always be used.
An S shaped blade standing up vertically makes a great windmill, it
can capture a lot of wind. For a vehicle the part in the center should
be removed. I'm currently investigating if they can be used to guide
the wind outwards in front and inwards behind the vehicle. This seems
to be the most workable. solution up to now.
I've made a new post here.
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.bicycles.tech/browse_frm/thread/c93719739bfe9ae7
_____
more on "Wind"
http://blog.360.yahoo.com/factuurexpress?tag=wind&list=1
Ben C
> more drag. it's only windmill's turning. listen. The sailboat's
> windmill will generate auxiliary electricity but a windmill large
> enlough to power the sailboat-nada.
Never mind boats, think of a wheeled platform with a windmill connected
through some nice low gears to the wheels. I think you will be able to
move forwards into the wind perfectly well.
You've got gears so you can get as much force as you like at the wheels.
You've got power >0 from the windmill. That's all you need.
datakoll
Stormgrin?
gdew...@gmail.com
"but a windmill large enlough to power the sailboat-nada."
http://i.treehugger.com/images/2007-2-21/Windmill-Sailboat.jpg
???
gdew...@gmail.com
>
> > Hello all,
>
> > I had envisioned drawing a vortex using a big dish a tube and a small
> > dish.
>
> > I've made a page with an illustration here.
>
> >http://gabydewilde.googlepages.com/vortex-ram
>
> > Let me think what you hear ok?
>
> > Thank you,
>
> > gaby de wilde
>
> Oh, what the hell. It's Friday. I could go into a long physical
> explanation of how changing the direction of air flow even in the
> absence of friction requires momentum transfer, but your viewpoint
> seems a bit too whimsical to believe it. Instead, I dropped a sketch
> of your vortex ram into Comsol Multiphysics. The scale is meters, and
> the far-field flow is 18m/s. Contours are velocity, boundaries are
> colored by pressure, and arrows are normalized.
>
>
> Note two important points: 1) Flow is right to left (-x) and all
> pressure values on the dish boundaries are negative. This is what you
> would call positive drag. I haven't done the boundary integrals and
> compared the shape to a flat plate, but it looks like it's probably
> not much better. 2) Your animation shows what appears to be a jet of
> air concentric with the flow field going from left to right. This
> kind of structure is not stable for a viscous fluid at any reasonable
> Reynolds number. From my analysis at a realistic length scale and
> velocity, I cannot even see any indication of where this jet might be
> trying to form.
>
> If you think that the discrepancies are the result of my eyeballing
> the geometry, e-mail me a dxf of your design and I'll run it for you.
Here, this is fun.
http://community-2.webtv.net/SkyVessel/Control/
Also:
http://www.rexresearch.com/alxandr/alexandr.htm
He wasn't the first to build it. Not the first fuel less auto to
disappear either. But he does seem to explain why his engine works.
I think you are capable of making sense of it.
Good luck.
Chalo
>
> Here, this is fun.http://community-2.webtv.net/SkyVessel/Control/
>
> Also:http://www.rexresearch.com/alxandr/alexandr.htm
>
> He wasn't the first to build it. Not the first fuel less auto to
> disappear either. But he does seem to explain why his engine works.
Umm, he just whisks together some meaningless mumbo-jumbo that
probably sounded more esoteric then than it does now. But then, your
story was published in the National Tattler, which was a tabloid
comparable to the Weekly World News ("WWII Bomber Found On Moon!"):
http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=220147771422
http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=320168189425
http://www.goantiques.com/detail,national-tattler-brigitte,734889.html
http://a-hole-in-the-head.blogspot.com/2007/04/national-tattler-and-other-tales-from.html
It seems the Tattler was all over the whole fuelless-car theme,
though:
http://www.free-energy.ws/images/Img0002.jpg
http://www.free-energy.ws/images/Img0001.jpg
http://www.free-energy.ws/images/2inventors1.jpg
http://www.free-energy.ws/images/WorldsFirst1.jpg
(All above images and more at http://www.free-energy.ws/gray.html )
The link you posted was a 1973 story, which means that the "invention"
is well out of patent protection by now. Go get 'em, tiger! You
could make a fortune from magical fuelless cars these days, as long as
they're magical fuelless giant SUVs.
> I think you are capable of making sense of it.
No, it takes a break from reality to make sense of it-- unless by
"make sense of" you mean "dismiss as false".
Chalo
datakoll
is real and ranks for potential energy production. all in groups
sci.geo.earthquakes. and Ann Rand off course-wikipedia if not up to
actually reading.
rattle rattle
gdew...@gmail.com
> No, it takes a break from reality to make sense of it-- unless by
> "make sense of" you mean "dismiss as false".
>
Personally I read what some one wrote then I treat it as something
some one wrote.
I never agree or disagree with anything.
The information should speak for it self.
But as productive vortexes are much to complicated to ram into place
I've combined the concept with 2 windmills mounted to the side facing
a bit forwards. They should face forwards enough for the forwards
moving side of the blade to tack up the drag.
Each cubic meter of converted drag holds a fixed amount of wind.
Thus I conclude:
Going faster = more wind
lol
But using propellers is cheating I think. I don't know how but it
should eventually be done solid state I bet.
:-)
datakoll
carl...@comcast.net
Dear Chalo,
Nice links!
I particularly enjoyed the part about how the miracle engine produced
10 horsepower, roughly 7,500 watts, using only 26.8 watts from the
batteries. With this technology, a pair of bicycle light generators
could power a riding lawnmower!
Speaking of tabloids . . .
In "Missionary Stew," the late Ross Thomas has an unfortunate reporter
meeting his mother, who runs a tabloid similar to the Tattler. The
reporter's misfortune was to be jailed in Africa and to be told that
he was eating monkey meat that turned out to be the missionary stew
that the dictator sometimes enjoyed. His mother, a practical sort,
offers to buy his story for her readers. Although homeless and
clinically depressed after his release from prison, he declines his
mother's of $50,000 for the text for "My Son, the Cannibal."
On his way through the tabloid office hallway to meet his mother,
"What really bothered Citron was the cryptlike silence . . . There
were no ringing phones. No typewriters. No teletypes. No voices. There
were only closed doors behind which Citron suspected perfectly
god-awful fibs were being carefully concocted. He even thought one up
himself: TOT LOCKED IN FRIDGE GNAWS OFF TOES, although he wasn't all
at sure he hadn't cribbed that one from a copy of the 'Investigator'
he had scanned once while standing in line, food stamps in hand, at
the checkout counter . . ."
As I used to point out to impressionable freshmen, a good writer
reinforces his theme in subtle ways. It's no accident that Thomas has
his reporter come up with a headline about a child eating his own toes
while locked in a refrigerator, nor that the image is associated with
food stamps. After all, the reporter was imprisoned, starved, and
tricked into eating the flesh of some other innocent even more
unfortunate than himself.
Thanks for reminding me about that passage involving the tabloid
headline--I hadn't ever really stopped to think about it.
Cheers,
Carl Fogel
datakoll
RETIRED TEACHER ATTACKED BY CACTUS
Bill Sornson
> RETIRED TEACHER ATTACKED BY CACTUS
prick
gdew...@gmail.com
Yes, you clearly are upset by this topic.
It makes you talk all colors of diarrhea.
This is fascinating.
There is something here that is worth your time.
It's not hard to guess.
But you are now debunked.
:-)
On Dec 6, 4:44 am, datakoll <datak...@yahoo.com> wrote:
: a "negative drag" -to suit your search-occurs when an EQ wave passes
: thru your location: a paranormal doppler effect.
: ebergy from the surrounding atmosphereic voltage can be feed into
the
: "vortex" producing enhanced effects-like spooks, murphies law, heat
: lightning...
On Dec 6, 4:48 am, datakoll <datak...@yahoo.com> wrote:
: winter
On Dec 6, 2:16 pm, datakoll <datak...@yahoo.com> wrote:
: OK where does the effect suck energy from? unless you have a Mormon
or
: Ohio xemption, you must identify where the device get's its energy.
I
: mean like if the universe has to do it then you gotta do it.
: Qouting Pioters, France has no grip
On Dec 7, 12:56 am, datakoll <datak...@yahoo.com> wrote:
:
: I'm late. it's 6:55. I has a potato buring in the microwave.
:
: Ok. I haven't read the whole thing but whatever your purpose.
: The device, any device, generates heat from friction. So, as you
: develop the idea in fiction writing, recovering heat loss or better
: than generating heat loss takes the writing to a place of escape.
: Escape is a good start there. I'm waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaay behind on my SF
: so....
: You are GD Wilde and off course I am also 'GD Wilde' so you, the
: poseur ? are suspect. In fact under the current conditions you are
: decidedly stinky.
: But as I am the real thing, I'll let you in on some reality.
: If you're not suspect then let me ask you what you thought of my
first
: reply?
: When I began writing bicycle, The Skeptic showed in RBT and began a
: loooong whoha about this and that. He went away. He doesn't annoy me
: as I have a International AAA psychic rating and I'm one of the good
: guys.
: I have a two page resume!
: Including trying to save the country several times and the planet,
the
: planet with a free energy device, a collector energy trap for the 40
: microvolts/meter''' I am what is called a "ground" and I'm
: telekinetic.
: I have demonstrated the effects and NASA investigated. I'm living at
: Cape Canaveral to devote a year's time to collector and national
: security within the NASA intelligence sphere-like a large university
: effect.
: I can use the effect to produce rain. I asked a main researcher in
: that area if he was interested: never heard from him.
: There's a lot going on here. Ever see "THE MAN WHO FELL TO EARTH"?
: The Mafia hired women, the psychics you see advertsing, to read my
: mind and scream at me thru ship's hailer mounted on pickup trucks
and
: vans, one now in my backyard- everytime I think.
: 24/7/365 for 14 years. The FBI, Florida Sheriff's, FDLE, NASA all
: support the continuous attack.
: So far, the attack cost the mob close to one million dollars.
: The mob controls and directs the USAF and National Guard fighters to
: strafe me while I'm running an experiment. The mob collects and
: orders 7-8 fishing boats to stand off shore where I'm remotely
camped
: so I cannot develop the idea: the boats blow horns together when I
try
: to think in terms of a collector.
: Here at Cape Canaveral, the local sheriff allows the mob to
broadcast
: CONTINUOUS screaming threats at 140-160 db thru my backyard from
10PM
: to 6AM, against county ordinance. Many of my neighbors in a gated
: beach community work at KSC. They support the mob as does most of
the
: local population. NASA workers support the mob. You know, the mob
that
: poisons NASA's children with narcotics and meth. Many NASA workers
are
: the mob. Certainly the Sheriff's are the mob.
: None of these people are interested in energy collection or national
: security. Yet if they thought, an interesting idea, I had a grip on
: the device, stealing it would be a priority. I do have a grip on it.
: The idea of it doesn't fit into their reality, sniffing tourist's
: assholes to see if the tourists will give them money. Several NASA
: people in the area have wives and daughters who work as prostitutes.
: All prostitutes will courier drugs for the mob or else it's the bus
: stop.
: These people actually suppport serial killers, drug pushers and
child
: rapists as mutual travelers on life's highway.
: The FBI and Federal government support the mob. Worthless. I could
be
: in East Germany, 1960.
: NASCAR announcing, NPR, all Orlando FM and TV- when I listen they
: attack me. For example, a soap opera going on in the wall TV while
I'm
: at the Laundromat gets totally overdubbed with dialogue attacking
me.
: NPR works with mob mind readers who direct attacks on me, Sirius
: satellite radio - jerk named Dave -same deal. All connected to media
: music distribution.
: That's a possible reality when the work is more than a fiberglass
: toilet seat on a van roof.
On Dec 7, 7:53 pm, datakoll <datak...@yahoo.com> wrote:
: .0028 parsecs off AVAGADRO, a red dwarf in the BLUE RHINO galaxy,
lies
: a oddular tube worm structure of both zero gravity and below Kelvin.
: At 008973 GMT, THE COMMISSION placed the following structure into
the
: OTW. Generation of Z Waves will begin thricely.
:
: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=us7YB7eiOeQ
:
: DVBORKNAG!
On Dec 8, 11:55 pm, datakoll <datak...@yahoo.com> wrote:
: the idea creates more drag and more drag and more drag
: without creating energy
: the idea doesn't create energy, it creates drag-friction-heat-energy
: loss.
: the energy must come from somewhere if only creative writing, not
: quotable obfuscations.
On Dec 10, 3:00 pm, datakoll <datak...@yahoo.com> wrote:
: WINTER HAS US IN ITS GRIP...
:
: sure, "creates lift," stick it in your Word proceesor and search.
: creates lift: 30 mph down and 75 mph forward
: positive thinking?
:
: http://www.nytimes.com/2007/12/10/sports/othersports/10flying.html?_r...
On Dec 12, 4:29 am, datakoll <datak...@yahoo.com> wrote:
: more drag. it's only windmill's turning. listen. The sailboat's
: windmill will generate auxiliary electricity but a windmill large
: enlough to power the sailboat-nada.
:
: the idea with creative writing in perpetual motion is intriguing
: obfuscation when you get to the daynewmah
:
: "The ship could use it's anchor to power the windmill just the same
: moving up the wind should allow for the same wind to be used....."
: gotta flesh it ut so it's beyond confusing to entertaining: once
: entertained, you're in!
: maybe there's a bibliography in cyberspace?
:
: BTW, my story is a new and apparently somewhat original complete
: explaination of reality. TOOT TOOT
On Dec 12, 5:36 am, datakoll <datak...@yahoo.com> wrote:
: sheeeeet. this here's a disssssscussssion group. Who dya wanna speak
: with? Brandt Brown, Armstrong, Muzi, Chalo... Phil Brown?
: Weeez sitting you dude.
On Dec 12, 5:48 pm, datakoll <datak...@yahoo.com> wrote:
: Stormgrin?
datakoll
A bicyclist from another county was reported wandering in a
residential area yesterday.
Shortly after the Sheriff received the first report, a fourth report
was received of an attack on the cyclist from local cactus.
The bicyclist was found laying on the road at the end of an exclusive
residential area, semi conscious, bleeding from numerous skin
lacerations.
The bicyclist was laying on and in a road area heavily littered with
goat heads. Sheriff Hawg concluded the bicyclist was attacked by
cactus.
The bicyclist was taken to Fernwall General. The bicyclist is reported
in serious but stable condition after a transfusion of castor oil. The
cyclist lost several toes during the encounter. The cyclist continues
semi-conscious incoherence in what sounds like quotes from late 19th
century Scientific American magazines.
Information from a call to the bicyclist's home revealed the bicyclist
had wandered off earlier in the day and was not expected back.
Residents report strange noises that night from the surrounding area.
datakoll
gdew...@gmail.com
> I particularly enjoyed the part about how the miracle engine produced
> 10 horsepower, roughly 7,500 watts, using only 26.8 watts from the
> batteries. With this technology, a pair of bicycle light generators
> could power a riding lawnmower!
>
Then it would be an electric bike.
Michael Press
<79lem31h5mre5vvde...@4ax.com>,
carl...@comcast.net wrote:
Another fun novel set in a tabloid weekly:
_Trust_Me_on_This_ by Donald E. Westlake.
--
Michael Press
Michael Press
<e5573319-6cb7-493c...@a35g2000prf.googl
egroups.com>,
"gdew...@gmail.com" <gdew...@gmail.com> wrote:
Hooked and wriggling.
--
Michael Press
gdew...@gmail.com
> Hooked and wriggling.
>
We have datakoll all figured out, he just needs a hug. HAHAhahAHAhaha
Ok, back to my topic. *grin*
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ramjet
"A ramjet, sometimes referred to as a stovepipe jet, is a form of jet
engine that contains no major moving parts and can be particularly
useful in applications requiring a small and simple engine for high
speed use; such as missiles. They have also been used successfully,
though not efficiently, as tipjets on helicopter rotors."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scramjet
"A scramjet (supersonic combustion ramjet) is a variation of a ramjet
with the key difference being that the flow in the combustor is
supersonic. At higher speeds it is necessary to combust supersonically
to maximize the efficiency of the combustion process. Projections for
the top speed of a scramjet engine (without additional oxidiser input)
vary between Mach 12 and Mach 24 (orbital velocity), but the X-30
research gave Mach 17 due to combustion rate issues. By way of
contrast, the fastest conventional air-breathing, manned vehicles,
such as the U.S. Air Force SR-71, achieve approximately Mach 3.4 and
rockets achieved Mach 30+ during the Apollo Program.
Like a ramjet, a scramjet essentially consists of a constricted tube
through which inlet air is compressed by the high speed of the
vehicle, a combustion chamber where fuel is combusted, and a nozzle
through which the exhaust jet leaves at higher speed than the inlet
air."
http://www.alt-accel.com/ramjet2.htm
"The literature on the F-80 tests of ramjets on the wingtips states
that they were ignited at 200 mph. And the Little Henry helicopter
started it's ramjets at rotor tip velocities of 150 fps, or about 100
mph.
An amateur ramjet experimenter interviewed stated that he started his
rotor-tipped ramjets by stuffing a gasoline-soaked rag in the exhaust,
lighting it, giving the rotor a swing with his hand, and letting it
accelerate on its own. Interestingly, his test stand was a long rotor
on a stand in the middle of a pasture."
http://gabydewilde.googlepages.com/vortex-ram
gabydewilde - vortex ram
RicodJour
>
> An amateur ramjet experimenter interviewed stated that he started his
> rotor-tipped ramjets by stuffing a gasoline-soaked rag in the exhaust,
> lighting it, giving the rotor a swing with his hand, and letting it
> accelerate on its own. Interestingly, his test stand was a long rotor
> on a stand in the middle of a pasture."
I don't know about anyone else, but that's _exactly_ how I'd like to
jump start my bicycle! Or maybe a few shotgun shells like they used
to start the engine on the rebuilt airplane in The Phoenix.
I think I just heard an air horn - why don't you run out in the street
and see if a truck is coming...?
R
gdew...@gmail.com
cool, you are the first person on the Internets to mention "jump
starting bicycles". A ram jet is good at high speed, pedals are good
above 5 km/hr Jump starting is a great concept to boot up a flywheel.
When standing still one can jerk a belt or kick start a few times
until the flywheel is up to speed. It will be supper efficient as you
are storing it mechanically and using it straight away.
A clock spring could also store such energy.
Some years ago I invented the spring-flywheel utilising the same mass
2 times. It doesn't make either of them super useful but at least it
removes half their uselessness.
http://gabydewilde.googlepages.com/sailtrain
gabydewilde - Sailtrain
There is absolutely nothing wrong with wind powered public transport
but people desperately want the wind to come from exactly straight
ahead. They cant seem to put that desire out of their heads. Turbines
would fix this "problem", driving those up the wind will increase the
force of the wind. Trains are so huge there should be more then enough
surface area for them to be means of generating power in stead of
being an economic drain.
But I guess sailing is something so new it's not documented enough to
become a reality? Right?
RicodJour
> On Dec 20, 4:13 pm, RicodJour <ricodj...@worldemail.com> wrote:
> > On Dec 20, 2:27 am, "gdewi...@gmail.com" <gdewi...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > An amateur ramjet experimenter interviewed stated that he started his
> > > rotor-tipped ramjets by stuffing a gasoline-soaked rag in the exhaust,
> > > lighting it, giving the rotor a swing with his hand, and letting it
> > > accelerate on its own. Interestingly, his test stand was a long rotor
> > > on a stand in the middle of a pasture."
>
> > I don't know about anyone else, but that's _exactly_ how I'd like to
> > jump start my bicycle! Or maybe a few shotgun shells like they used
> > to start the engine on the rebuilt airplane in The Phoenix.
>
> > I think I just heard an air horn - why don't you run out in the street
> > and see if a truck is coming...?
>
>
> starting bicycles". A ram jet is good at high speed, pedals are good
> above 5 km/hr Jump starting is a great concept to boot up a flywheel.
> When standing still one can jerk a belt or kick start a few times
> until the flywheel is up to speed. It will be supper efficient as you
> are storing it mechanically and using it straight away.
>
> A clock spring could also store such energy.
>
> Some years ago I invented the spring-flywheel utilising the same mass
> 2 times. It doesn't make either of them super useful but at least it
> removes half their uselessness.
Do I also get the pleasure of lugging the extra weight uphill with
me? Somehow I get the feeling you live in a flat country...
> http://gabydewilde.googlepages.com/sailtrain
> gabydewilde - Sailtrain
>
> There is absolutely nothing wrong with wind powered public transport
> but people desperately want the wind to come from exactly straight
> ahead. They cant seem to put that desire out of their heads. Turbines
> would fix this "problem", driving those up the wind will increase the
> force of the wind. Trains are so huge there should be more then enough
> surface area for them to be means of generating power in stead of
> being an economic drain.
>
> But I guess sailing is something so new it's not documented enough to
> become a reality? Right?
Heya. In another thread, the one on negative drag, people have seen
the obvious, that you _can_ get energy out of the wind. That's not my
objection. My objection is using boats and planes as analogies (last
I checked, if I am off by a foot or two in my steering I get hit by a
car), ignoring wind shear and shifting winds (ever been in a crosswind
and have a truck go by and momentarily block all of the crosswind then
hit you with the - wait for it - vortex turbulence? What's going to
happen with your greatly increased "bicycle's" sail area?), ignoring
overturning moments (there's a reason for those wide wings, broad
boats/heavy keels), vehicle weight, etc.
You could certainly build something that would help propel the bike,
but the cost in weight, expense and reliability would make it an
exercise in futility. Excuse me, that would actually be a _lack_ of
exercise. Don't help breed fat people - there are too many of them
already.
If you want to develop a wind-powered car, great, knock yourself out -
it's just not going to be a bicycle, at least not in the sense of what
the word bicycle means to us today, and it probably wouldn't be
recognizable as a bicycle at all. So here's your opportunity - coin a
word for it.
R
gdew...@gmail.com
If I remember correctly NASA build flywheels that loose 50% of their
speed in 24 hours. We don't have the luxury of vacuum chambers and
amazing gear ratio. But making one that keeps on spinning for an hour
or so is quite easy if you know how. I agree the gear ratio's
couplings and belts could defeat the purpose of a flywheel various
times over. SAY 10 times. But combining the weight of the flywheel and
the spring does remove half their weight without reducing usefulness.
So the purpose is only defeated 5 times. By making "them" smaller the
capacity obviously drops dramatically. It will be a very small device
that is only useful for the first seconds of acceleration and for
regenerative breaking.
> >http://gabydewilde.googlepages.com/sailtrain
> > gabydewilde - Sailtrain
>
> > There is absolutely nothing wrong with wind powered public transport
> > but people desperately want the wind to come from exactly straight
> > ahead. They cant seem to put that desire out of their heads. Turbines
> > would fix this "problem", driving those up the wind will increase the
> > force of the wind. Trains are so huge there should be more then enough
> > surface area for them to be means of generating power in stead of
> > being an economic drain.
>
> > But I guess sailing is something so new it's not documented enough to
> > become a reality? Right?
>
> Heya. In another thread, the one on negative drag, people have seen
> the obvious, that you _can_ get energy out of the wind. That's not my
> objection. My objection is using boats and planes as analogies (last
> I checked, if I am off by a foot or two in my steering I get hit by a
> car),
You are talking about the US I assume? Or the UK? It's saddening to
hear about traffic in this group. A recumbent are to low to be safe it
appears?
They have a flag here, it doesn't help much. If I ever manage to build
a bike it will have a sail on top. I don't know what all of you are
interested in, I like getting that extra bit of attention rather then
getting run over. But I think I'm safe, looking at the feedback it
probably wont happen.
> ignoring wind shear and shifting winds (ever been in a crosswind
> and have a truck go by and momentarily block all of the crosswind then
> hit you with the - wait for it - vortex turbulence? What's going to
> happen with your greatly increased "bicycle's" sail area?), ignoring
> overturning moments (there's a reason for those wide wings, broad
> boats/heavy keels), vehicle weight, etc.
>
Yes one would expect that.
A guy with a land sailing "car" tested traffic one time. He was
curious what effect big vehicles had. To his big surprise he concluded
the truck is driving into a wall of drag and his car slightly
accelerated. There was no annoyance of any kind. It was a 3 wheeler
but it had a big sail.
A sail on top would make a recumbent much more visible. It wouldn't
have to be big at all and most of the time leaving it pointing
straight backwards would be productive enough. At least compared to
getting squashed like a bug? A few extra knobs on the steering wheel
to tune the propulsion would make the ride a bit more challenging
which should also be fun if you have the time for it.
> You could certainly build something that would help propel the bike,
good, that would be what I'm interested in basically.
RicodJour
> On Dec 22, 6:42 am, RicodJour <ricodj...@worldemail.com> wrote:
>
> > Do I also get the pleasure of lugging the extra weight uphill with
> > me? Somehow I get the feeling you live in a flat country...
>
> If I remember correctly NASA build flywheels that loose 50% of their
> speed in 24 hours. We don't have the luxury of vacuum chambers and
> amazing gear ratio. But making one that keeps on spinning for an hour
> or so is quite easy if you know how. I agree the gear ratio's
> couplings and belts could defeat the purpose of a flywheel various
> times over. SAY 10 times. But combining the weight of the flywheel and
> the spring does remove half their weight without reducing usefulness.
> So the purpose is only defeated 5 times. By making "them" smaller the
> capacity obviously drops dramatically. It will be a very small device
> that is only useful for the first seconds of acceleration and for
> regenerative breaking.
Fair enough. Riddle me this, Batman, for those few extra seconds of
free help-energy, how much your-sweat/energy does it cost you to lug
it around for all of the many minutes/hours you're riding?
> > Heya. In another thread, the one on negative drag, people have seen
> > the obvious, that you _can_ get energy out of the wind. That's not my
> > objection. My objection is using boats and planes as analogies (last
> > I checked, if I am off by a foot or two in my steering I get hit by a
> > car),
>
> You are talking about the US I assume? Or the UK? It's saddening to
> hear about traffic in this group. A recumbent are to low to be safe it
> appears?
It has nothing at all to do with the type of bicycle or country. If
you're on a roadway riding a bicycle, whether on a roadway or a cycle
path, you have a couple feet maximum of leeway in steering. Sailboats
and airplanes don't have the same problem, except at critical moments
which are generally few and far between.
> They have a flag here, it doesn't help much. If I ever manage to build
> a bike it will have a sail on top. I don't know what all of you are
> interested in, I like getting that extra bit of attention rather then
> getting run over. But I think I'm safe, looking at the feedback it
> probably wont happen.
It's kind of you to say so, but unnecessary - it's obvious you're all
about the attention. :)~
> > ignoring wind shear and shifting winds (ever been in a crosswind
> > and have a truck go by and momentarily block all of the crosswind then
> > hit you with the - wait for it - vortex turbulence? What's going to
> > happen with your greatly increased "bicycle's" sail area?), ignoring
> > overturning moments (there's a reason for those wide wings, broad
> > boats/heavy keels), vehicle weight, etc.
>
> Yes one would expect that.
Expect what? That you're ignoring reality?
> A guy with a land sailing "car" tested traffic one time. He was
> curious what effect big vehicles had. To his big surprise he concluded
> the truck is driving into a wall of drag and his car slightly
> accelerated. There was no annoyance of any kind. It was a 3 wheeler
> but it had a big sail.
Oh, well, that's conclusive - an apocryphal singular experience.
Hell, let's start production!
Do you ride a bicycle? In still winds, a truck passes and you're
first hit with a blast of wind throwing you off to the side of the
road, a momentary lull as the truck passes, then you're caught in the
truck's turbulence which tends to suck you towards the middle of the
road. You'd need a damn wide bicycle to deal with the overturning
moment and precise steering to keep from being lunch meat.
> A sail on top would make a recumbent much more visible. It wouldn't
> have to be big at all and most of the time leaving it pointing
> straight backwards would be productive enough. At least compared to
> getting squashed like a bug? A few extra knobs on the steering wheel
> to tune the propulsion would make the ride a bit more challenging
> which should also be fun if you have the time for it.
Ah, steering wheel, dashboard...so you do want to make the bicycle a
car. So please lose the bicycle terminology and just make a sailcar.
> > You could certainly build something that would help propel the bike,
>
> good, that would be what I'm interested in basically.
And not surprisingly you cut out the stuff you're not.
Without dealing with the negatives you're simply pissing into a
vortex.
R
gdew...@gmail.com
> On Dec 22, 3:04 am, "gdewi...@gmail.com" <gdewi...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > On Dec 22, 6:42 am, RicodJour <ricodj...@worldemail.com> wrote:
> > > Do I also get the pleasure of lugging the extra weight uphill with
> > > me? Somehow I get the feeling you live in a flat country...
>
> > If I remember correctly NASA build flywheels that loose 50% of their
> > speed in 24 hours. We don't have the luxury of vacuum chambers and
> > amazing gear ratio. But making one that keeps on spinning for an hour
> > or so is quite easy if you know how. I agree the gear ratio's
> > couplings and belts could defeat the purpose of a flywheel various
> > times over. SAY 10 times. But combining the weight of the flywheel and
> > the spring does remove half their weight without reducing usefulness.
> > So the purpose is only defeated 5 times. By making "them" smaller the
> > capacity obviously drops dramatically. It will be a very small device
> > that is only useful for the first seconds of acceleration and for
> > regenerative breaking.
>
> Fair enough. Riddle me this, Batman, for those few extra seconds of
> free help-energy, how much your-sweat/energy does it cost you to lug
> it around for all of the many minutes/hours you're riding?
>
At this stage it only exists in your brain. :-) I really hope you
won't collapse under the load but I think you are safe. hehehe
> > > Heya. In another thread, the one on negative drag, people have seen
> > > the obvious, that you _can_ get energy out of the wind. That's not my
> > > objection. My objection is using boats and planes as analogies (last
> > > I checked, if I am off by a foot or two in my steering I get hit by a
> > > car),
>
> > You are talking about the US I assume? Or the UK? It's saddening to
> > hear about traffic in this group. A recumbent are to low to be safe it
> > appears?
>
> It has nothing at all to do with the type of bicycle or country. If
> you're on a roadway riding a bicycle, whether on a roadway or a cycle
> path, you have a couple feet maximum of leeway in steering.
There is no leeway if you have wheels and you have em :-) You have the
wrong picture I think. It works the other way around. The sail surface
on a recumbent should not interfere with the cycling. Only the already
available surface should be used.
If you have a reasonable size Mohawk shape sail on the roof cars have
less trouble avoiding you. horizontal stability is made with small
wings. The bike needs some surface into the height or it becomes
invisible.
Putting a bigger flag on it would be ridiculous.
In stead of cry about it and flapping your arms up and down as~if
wings I suggest you try figure out a way to puzzle up a recumbent
engineering trick to improve chances for survival in the urban jungle
of iron monsters.
:-)
RicodJour
> On Dec 22, 4:20 pm, RicodJour <ricodj...@worldemail.com> wrote:
> > On Dec 22, 3:04 am, "gdewi...@gmail.com" <gdewi...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > On Dec 22, 6:42 am, RicodJour <ricodj...@worldemail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > Do I also get the pleasure of lugging the extra weight uphill with
> > > > me? Somehow I get the feeling you live in a flat country...
>
> > > If I remember correctly NASA build flywheels that loose 50% of their
> > > speed in 24 hours. We don't have the luxury of vacuum chambers and
> > > amazing gear ratio. But making one that keeps on spinning for an hour
> > > or so is quite easy if you know how. I agree the gear ratio's
> > > couplings and belts could defeat the purpose of a flywheel various
> > > times over. SAY 10 times. But combining the weight of the flywheel and
> > > the spring does remove half their weight without reducing usefulness.
> > > So the purpose is only defeated 5 times. By making "them" smaller the
> > > capacity obviously drops dramatically. It will be a very small device
> > > that is only useful for the first seconds of acceleration and for
> > > regenerative breaking.
>
> > Fair enough. Riddle me this, Batman, for those few extra seconds of
> > free help-energy, how much your-sweat/energy does it cost you to lug
> > it around for all of the many minutes/hours you're riding?
>
> At this stage it only exists in your brain. :-) I really hope you
> won't collapse under the load but I think you are safe. hehehe
Thanks.
> > > > Heya. In another thread, the one on negative drag, people have seen
> > > > the obvious, that you _can_ get energy out of the wind. That's not my
> > > > objection. My objection is using boats and planes as analogies (last
> > > > I checked, if I am off by a foot or two in my steering I get hit by a
> > > > car),
>
> > > You are talking about the US I assume? Or the UK? It's saddening to
> > > hear about traffic in this group. A recumbent are to low to be safe it
> > > appears?
>
> > It has nothing at all to do with the type of bicycle or country. If
> > you're on a roadway riding a bicycle, whether on a roadway or a cycle
> > path, you have a couple feet maximum of leeway in steering.
>
> There is no leeway if you have wheels and you have em :-) You have the
> wrong picture I think. It works the other way around. The sail surface
> on a recumbent should not interfere with the cycling. Only the already
> available surface should be used.
Hopefully you don't have leeway, but as it is apparent that a bicycle
is a theoretical device to you and something with which you have no
experience, that you have never experienced firsthand the wind blowing
a rider across a roadway. Google ' bicycle echelon' and see if you
can surmise why such a technique developed if there were no leeway.
Perhaps you mean that you are not sliding sideways when you say there
is no leeway on a bike. Indeed. I've had that happen to me as well -
even with that less than sail-like sail I call my body. There is,
however you want to spin your sophistry, a sideways force from the
wind. That force must be counterbalanced. In light winds and slow
speeds it may be hardly noticeable on a bike. In stronger winds and
higher speeds it can be literally a life and death struggle to stay in
lane. And you want to increase the sail area and ignore the leeway.
Lotsa luck.
Your body is a smart animal, far smarter than you hope to be. If you
had ever straddled a bike, managed to balance on two wheels and
started making headway, your body would learn in short order how to
balance those forces. Your body would not, unlike your wet-ware, keep
repeating the same ineffective refrain hoping for a different result.
As I do not have any interest in continuing to beat my head against a
wall (you), I'll leave you to your daydreams and dancing visions.
Merry Christmas.
R
gdew...@gmail.com
> Perhaps you mean that you are not sliding sideways when you say there
> is no leeway on a bike. Indeed.
come come Rick. I think it's perfectly clear what I mean buddy. You
don't have to guess. You know exactly what I mean. You tell me to do
everything for you? I have already made various web pages for you.
I've done some research and I'm far from done.
but but.... your cries are in- and premature.
This was funny tho.
On Dec 22, 6:42 am, RicodJour <ricodj...@worldemail.com> wrote:
> Heya. In another thread, the one on negative drag, people have seen
> the obvious, that you _can_ get energy out of the wind. That's not my
> objection. My objection is using boats and planes as analogies (last
> I checked, if I am off by a foot or two in my steering I get hit by a
> car), ignoring wind shear and shifting winds (ever been in a crosswind
> and have a truck go by and momentarily block all of the crosswind then
> hit you with the - wait for it - vortex turbulence?
haha,
Leme try explain,
I see people on bikes going 60 mph. This makes me think there is still
a Branch of science that doesn't run on perpetuated lies. No,
apparently cyclists actually make it their business to be conditioned
organisms. Well at least some of them do.
I was listening to some guy who builds super efficient electric
vehicles and he was making jokes about his failure at keeping up with
the bicycles. The most advanced thing on his drawing board can only go
57 mph.
There is also the sector of high millage vehicles that don't go so
fast but drive 10 000 kilometers on a litter of gas (the electric car
builder says)
Cyclists seem by far the most frustrated with how efficient their rig
is thus they build far more efficient means of transportation as
anyone. :-)
That what you are complaining about actually means you have a pretty
damn good idea what can and what cant be done. People need to get out
of their damn cars and onto their bikes. That's what you are
complaining about. You just got the question wrong, that's how it
became an impossibility. :-) The best way to accomplish this is by
making a vehicle that costs nothing per month, costs nothing per mile,
gets you on your destination just as fast as a tank AND makes for a
good exercise.
If we can make that the remaining drivers will soon get used to seeing
bicycles. Just like a pack of lions they only need to make so much
kills per day to satisfy their ignorance.
If we can get the reinforcements we can win this.