+ Post New Thread
Page 5 of 9 FirstFirst 123456789 LastLast
Results 61 to 75 of 122
General Chat Thread, kickstarter.. in General; Originally Posted by plexer Why will the train use more fuel? The turbine is mounted on the station the train ...
  1. #61


    Join Date
    May 2009
    Posts
    3,038
    Thank Post
    269
    Thanked 804 Times in 609 Posts
    Rep Power
    295
    Quote Originally Posted by plexer View Post
    Why will the train use more fuel? The turbine is mounted on the station the train going past will use no more fuel than if the turbine wasn't there?
    The train uses fuel to push the air. As the train accelerates, the air beside it will speed up and travel with it. For a given speed there will be an equilibrium where the air is bleeding energy from the train (air friction). If you extract energy from that volume of air, the train will need to accelerate more air to replace it.

    The sort version is you don't get something for nothing.

  2. #62

    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Kent
    Posts
    634
    Thank Post
    274
    Thanked 51 Times in 43 Posts
    Rep Power
    40
    Quote Originally Posted by pcstru View Post

    The sort version is you don't get something for nothing.
    I was hoping to all that is holy that he wasn't intending to put the turbines actually on trains

  3. #63

    nephilim's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Dunstable
    Posts
    11,941
    Thank Post
    1,628
    Thanked 1,898 Times in 1,410 Posts
    Blog Entries
    2
    Rep Power
    429
    God no, not on the trains, and the turbine itself would be an upright one, the way that the blades are designed, they can accept airflow from any direction (at least in small scale tests). As for using more trains, no, they won't use more fuel. The air friction happens from the air head on and the vehicle moves and the air around the side causes drag, it is not generated from the side as it is in motion. If this was the case, a car would use dramatically more fuel when going through tunnels, car parks, country roads where there are a buildup of trees etc and this isn't the case.

    I have put 18 months (around work and family commitments) of research into this, and so far, everything in my computer model testing and small scale prototype (10cmx5cmx5cm - without the electrical charging capacity) says I am on track for this (pardon the pun), and I am currently building a full scale prototype to test first.
    Last edited by nephilim; 4th July 2013 at 09:56 AM.

  4. #64


    Join Date
    May 2009
    Posts
    3,038
    Thank Post
    269
    Thanked 804 Times in 609 Posts
    Rep Power
    295
    Quote Originally Posted by nephilim View Post
    God no, not on the trains, and the turbine itself would be an upright one, the way that the blades are designed, they can accept airflow from any direction (at least in small scale tests). As for using more trains, no, they won't use more fuel. The air friction happens from the air head on and the vehicle moves and the air around the side causes drag, it is not generated from the side as it is in motion. If this was the case, a car would use dramatically more fuel when going through tunnels, car parks, country roads where there are a buildup of trees etc and this isn't the case.

    I have put 18 months or so of research into this, and so far, everything in my computer model testing and small scale prototype (10cmx5cmx5cm - without the electrical charging capacity) says I am on track for this (pardon the pun), and I am currently building a full scale prototype to test first.
    It is the case that a car will use more fuel as it transits into a tunnel, within the tunnel it will establish a new equilibrium. If you think your turbine doesn't cause the train to use more fuel then please explain exactly where the energy does come from?

  5. #65

    nephilim's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Dunstable
    Posts
    11,941
    Thank Post
    1,628
    Thanked 1,898 Times in 1,410 Posts
    Blog Entries
    2
    Rep Power
    429
    Along with the wind that is naturally occurring, the residual energy from air friction as it leaves the train in motion generates the energy.

  6. #66

    X-13's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    /dev/null
    Posts
    9,095
    Thank Post
    592
    Thanked 1,953 Times in 1,351 Posts
    Blog Entries
    19
    Rep Power
    814
    Quote Originally Posted by Greenbeast View Post
    I was hoping to all that is holy that he wasn't intending to put the turbines actually on trains
    Train > Helicopter rolling transformation.

    MAKE. IT. HAPPEN.

  7. 2 Thanks to X-13:

    Greenbeast (4th July 2013), zag (4th July 2013)

  8. #67
    north-ict's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Posts
    729
    Thank Post
    207
    Thanked 147 Times in 111 Posts
    Rep Power
    106
    Hopefully sometime this month I should get my original grain watches that I helped fund. When I do get them I will post pics.

  9. #68

    plexer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    Norfolk
    Posts
    13,620
    Thank Post
    648
    Thanked 1,619 Times in 1,449 Posts
    Rep Power
    421
    Even if the train uses more fuel as it goes past it's going to be an inconsequential amount.

    I'm slightly worried that you say your calcs are not based on the turbines under load when generating.

    Ben

  10. #69

    nephilim's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Dunstable
    Posts
    11,941
    Thank Post
    1,628
    Thanked 1,898 Times in 1,410 Posts
    Blog Entries
    2
    Rep Power
    429
    When the full scale prototype is finished, I will be testing it in a wind tunnel with a local company near to me, which can generate wind variances as if a train/car/plane etc were going past. Will cost around £500 for the testing, but it will be invaluable. If I get the results I hope, then happy days, if not, the adjustments will be made.

  11. #70


    Join Date
    May 2009
    Posts
    3,038
    Thank Post
    269
    Thanked 804 Times in 609 Posts
    Rep Power
    295
    Quote Originally Posted by nephilim View Post
    Along with the wind that is naturally occurring, the residual energy from air friction as it leaves the train in motion generates the energy.
    Sorry, I don't follow that at all. Let's make it simple. It's a still air day, there is no natural wind at all. The only things in existence that we need to worry about are a train and a turbine. We can measure the energy used by the train and the energy gained by the turbine.

    Situation 1 : A train travels for 10 miles at 100mph. It uses X amount of energy. For convenience we measure that in joules.
    Situation 2 : A train travels for 10 miles at 100mph. Every mile there are 10 turbines which collect y amount of energy per turbine, so in total Y=100*y total energy. The Train uses Z energy.

    If the train does not provide the energy to the turbines then Z=X and Y comes from nowhere. You have just won the Nobel prize and saved mankind from a horrible fate frying in our own waste gasses. In fact Z=X+Y (ignoring that situation 2 will involve additional losses).

  12. #71


    Join Date
    May 2009
    Posts
    3,038
    Thank Post
    269
    Thanked 804 Times in 609 Posts
    Rep Power
    295
    Quote Originally Posted by plexer View Post
    Even if the train uses more fuel as it goes past it's going to be an inconsequential amount.
    It is not inconsequential if in using it, the laws of physics are not broken.

  13. #72

    nephilim's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Dunstable
    Posts
    11,941
    Thank Post
    1,628
    Thanked 1,898 Times in 1,410 Posts
    Blog Entries
    2
    Rep Power
    429
    Quote Originally Posted by plexer View Post
    Even if the train uses more fuel as it goes past it's going to be an inconsequential amount.

    I'm slightly worried that you say your calcs are not based on the turbines under load when generating.

    Ben
    I hooked my 10% scale model to a mini homemade generator, it makes around 0.05v from me blowing on it (using my voltmeter and my bike speed gauge says I am blowing around about 18mph).

  14. #73


    Join Date
    May 2009
    Posts
    3,038
    Thank Post
    269
    Thanked 804 Times in 609 Posts
    Rep Power
    295
    Quote Originally Posted by nephilim View Post
    I hooked my 10% scale model to a mini homemade generator, it makes around 0.05v from me blowing on it (using my voltmeter and my bike speed gauge says I am blowing around about 18mph).
    0.05v? How much power does it put out. How does that scale? How much energy is there in a meter cubed of our lovely atmospheric gas mixture moving at 10ms-1 anyway?

    Before you spend £500 on a wind tunnel test, sign yourself up to Village of the Banned - All Discussions and give some details on your set-up. You might save yourself £500 and learn a lot in the process.

  15. #74

    nephilim's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Dunstable
    Posts
    11,941
    Thank Post
    1,628
    Thanked 1,898 Times in 1,410 Posts
    Blog Entries
    2
    Rep Power
    429
    In terms of watts that it generated it was a total of 0.15W for 10 seconds of blowing.

    Scaled to 1 minute this equates to 0.9W.
    Scaled to 1 hour this equates to 54W.

    Bare in mind that is if it has a constant flow of air.

  16. #75

    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Kent
    Posts
    634
    Thank Post
    274
    Thanked 51 Times in 43 Posts
    Rep Power
    40
    Quote Originally Posted by nephilim View Post
    In terms of watts that it generated it was a total of 0.15W for 10 seconds of blowing.

    Scaled to 1 minute this equates to 0.9Wh.
    Scaled to 1 hour this equates to 54Wh.

    Bare in mind that is if it has a constant flow of air.
    there fixed that for you

SHARE:
+ Post New Thread

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •