Flywheel Generator - Split from Propane Solar Collector/Generator Thread

AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on the concept of using a flywheel-generator system powered by methane from anaerobic digesters to create energy. The original poster believes that with a constant input of methane, the flywheel can perpetually increase in speed and thus generate increasing amounts of electricity. However, several participants argue that a flywheel only stores energy and cannot produce more energy than what is inputted, emphasizing the importance of understanding thermodynamics and energy extraction principles. They caution against referring to the system as a perpetual motion machine, as it could attract negative attention and misinterpretation. The conversation highlights a fundamental misunderstanding of energy conservation laws in the context of the proposed system.
greatglory
Messages
27
Reaction score
0
I have been working on a holistic system involving flywheel-generators and http://www.lightoftheworld.com/profiles/blog/show?id=1591481%3ABlogPost%3A2884" as the power source. With all of the recent publicity given methane as a potential source of energy I figured that this was the way to go. I have some rudimentary drawings of the whole system and all of the materials should be readily available off of the shelf as is a basic requirement of all Anticipatory Design Scientists. (Buckminster Fuller). I'd love some feed back on the idea.

Basically it is a perpetual motion machine as are all machines when they have all inputs inplace. The Earth is a regenerative system and nothing operates outside of the rules of local universe. In this idea we use a vacuum mounted flywheel which should keep increasing in speed if we apply a constant influx of methane. The methane will be around as long as the animals that feed the anaerobic digester are around and the electricity will increase in amount as the flywheel-generator increases in speed. The following is a link to a picture http://api.ning.com/files/z23LVafEV*iQI-mtrDacdWDCiz405cRP4ftOZ14E5ssnRP2QHMOqF0*vKTmBsU2iJGzDQY9aS6r8zNeGTxc89QckltbX99Tp/FlywheelGeneratorandMethaneSystem.jpg?width=425&height=313
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Engineering news on Phys.org


Greatglory, this is not a new idea, and many thousands of megawatts of electricity are currently being produced from human and agricultural waste. Perhaps you should look into the (very large) market of biogas power generation, where methane from anaerobic digesters (from sewage and farm waste) is burnt in a gas engine, with the resulting waste heat being used to warm the digesters. The only difference between this and your idea is that a reciprocating engine is used for high efficiencies, control, and heat recovery.

I would also advise you avoid using the term "perpetual motion machine", this is the talk of crackpots and lunatics and will attract undeserved attention from moderators.
 


One thing though - I don't see what purpose the flywheel serves and it seems to me that you may think it is doing more than it really is: Flywheels only store energy, they cannot perpetually generate it.
 


It seems to me that if something can store energy (ie flywheel) and if it is given a constant input of new energy it is doing something that actually helps in the overall process of energy creation. My thinking is that a small engine attached to a very large flywheel will create a lot of energy. Especially if you start the flywheel off slowly and allow it to increase in speed exponetially.

As for the fact that methane is used to produce energy already of this I am totally aware. My innovation is in using a specific type of anaerobic digester made in China by a Puxin Technolgies Corporation and linking it to a special collector of the animal manure that I call a S*it bag. These S*it bags ideally will be made of Hemp and ultimately act as Silage for the digester improving the overall production of the total system.

If you could do me the favor please check your math on the ability of a flywheel that is suspended in a vacuum to create energy if given a constant input of new energy. It is my opinion that you will find that not only can it produce energy but the amount of energy it will produce will be phenomenal. (Note: one must be able to have a free spinning turbine attached to the flywheel as opposed to an internal combustion engine).
 


greatglory said:
It seems to me that if something can store energy (ie flywheel) and if it is given a constant input of new energy it is doing something that actually helps in the overall process of energy creation. My thinking is that a small engine attached to a very large flywheel will create a lot of energy. Especially if you start the flywheel off slowly and allow it to increase in speed exponetially.

No, this is not the case. The flywheel will only allow you to extract the amount of energy you put in with your small engine (minus a bit for frictional losses in the bearings). The flywheel can store an amount of energy, but it will never be more than you put in with the small engine in the first place.

If you could do me the favor please check your math on the ability of a flywheel that is suspended in a vacuum to create energy if given a constant input of new energy. It is my opinion that you will find that not only can it produce energy but the amount of energy it will produce will be phenomenal. (Note: one must be able to have a free spinning turbine attached to the flywheel as opposed to an internal combustion engine).

It's you who needs to check your maths (and understanding of basic thermodynamics) here. As Russ has already advised, a flywheel cannot 'produce' energy; only store it. You could run your engine for a year, and store lots of energy in the flywheel over a long period of time and recover this energy in a short period of time; but you'll never be able to get out of it more energy than you put in. The source (reciprocating engine, turbine, hamster wheel) is irrelevant here other than for practical considerations. End of story.
 


brewnog said:
No, this is not the case. The flywheel will only allow you to extract the amount of energy you put in with your small engine (minus a bit for frictional losses in the bearings). The flywheel can store an amount of energy, but it will never be more than you put in with the small engine in the first place.

In my original post I mentioned that the flywheel was in a vacuum much as is outer space and that the engine was to be on constantly. Those who played the lunar landing games of the 1980's will remember that a burn accelerates the craft while a non-burn keeps it moving at the same speed. If when you apply a constant burn to a flywheel it keeps accelerating is not that the same as creating energy? Unless your argument is that there will be no acceleration. Nor for that matter constant acceleration.

It's you who needs to check your maths (and understanding of basic thermodynamics) here. As Russ has already advised, a flywheel cannot 'produce' energy; only store it. You could run your engine for a year, and store lots of energy in the flywheel over a long period of time and recover this energy in a short period of time; but you'll never be able to get out of it more energy than you put in. The source (reciprocating engine, turbine, hamster wheel) is irrelevant here other than for practical considerations. End of story.

Forget if you will for a moment all LAWS and think about what I am saying. No new innovations have ever come about by men constrained in another man's law.
 


Newton's Second Law
The second law is sometimes called the Law of Dynamics, because it concerns forces and what causes objects to move. It can be stated as:

The acceleration of an object of constant mass is proportional to the force acting upon it.

Acceleration is the changing of the velocity of the object. Usually, we are talking about the object speeding up. The word "deceleration" is usually used when the object is slowing down, but that also is acceleration or changing of the velocity.

A force is a push or pull on the object. It may pushing in direct contact or pulling at a distance in the case of gravity.

This law determines the relationship between force, mass and acceleration, which is

F = ma

where:

F is the applied force
m is the constant mass
a is the resulting acceleration
ma is m times a
Note that the force F and acceleration a are in the same direction. Since they have a direction, they are called vectors.

What this law says is that while you are applying a force on an object, it will continue to accelerate or change its velocity. It also states that the greater the force on an object, the greater the acceleration.
 


There I've checked my maths and in fact if Newton's second law is correct, so am I. A flywheel operating in a vacuum will in fact continue to increase in speed as long as a constant amount of energy (force) is applied to the system. This increase in speed can be harnessed to create increasing amounts of energy from the engine and that is why it as crucial that the engine not be limited in speed as are internal combustion engines.
 


greatglory said:
Forget if you will for a moment all LAWS and think about what I am saying. No new innovations have ever come about by men constrained in another man's law.
Heh. No and no.
What this law says is that while you are applying a force on an object, it will continue to accelerate or change its velocity. It also states that the greater the force on an object, the greater the acceleration.
Correct. But that tells you nothing at all about extracting energy from a flywheel (well, you could extrapolate...).
A flywheel operating in a vacuum will in fact continue to increase in speed as long as a constant amount of energy (force) is applied to the system.
That part is true.
This increase in speed can be harnessed to create increasing amounts of energy...
That part is not.

You seem to understand how to accelerate a flywheel. What you don't understand is how to extract energy from a flywheel. Here's a hint: they are the same process, with one minor difference: a minus sign.
 
  • #10


russ_watters said:
Heh. No and no. Correct. But that tells you nothing at all about extracting energy from a flywheel (well, you could extrapolate...). That part is true. That part is not.

You seem to understand how to accelerate a flywheel. What you don't understand is how to extract energy from a flywheel. Here's a hint: they are the same process, with one minor difference: a minus sign.

Actually I do know how to extract energy from a flywheel. Remember, there are two parts to the system a flywheel and a generator that are linked together. Correct me if I am wrong. As a generator increases in speed it can produce increasing amounts of electricity. That is the beauty of this system. It will produce increasing amounts of electrical energy ad infinitum.
 
  • #11


greatglory said:
Actually I do know how to extract energy from a flywheel. Remember, there are two parts to the system a flywheel and a generator that are linked together. Correct me if I am wrong. As a generator increases in speed it can produce increasing amounts of electricity. That is the beauty of this system. It will produce increasing amounts of electrical energy ad infinitum.
You are incorrect. A generator produces energy by converting mechanical energy to electrical. This requires both an rpm and a torque. The torque is the part you are missing. Heck, if generating electricity required no torque, we could just generate an arbitrarily large amount by gearing-up our generators.
 
  • #12


greatglory said:
Actually I do know how to extract energy from a flywheel. Remember, there are two parts to the system a flywheel and a generator that are linked together. Correct me if I am wrong.

Ok. You are wrong.

As a generator increases in speed it can produce increasing amounts of electricity. That is the beauty of this system. It will produce increasing amounts of electrical energy ad infinitum.

It won't produce increasing amounts of energy. It will store increasing amounts of energy. If you take this energy out of the flywheel to produce electricity, it will slow down, and be storing less energy.

Let me repeat this one last time.

The flywheel is only a store of energy. You will always get less energy out of the flywheel than you put in; never more.

Your argument about ignoring scientific laws and facts shows a complete lack of understanding or appreciation of the most basic physical concepts. Go and read a book and learn something before you try and propogate nonsense.
 
  • #13


You are at best arguing semantics here and at worst just trying to save face. If it STORES INCREASING AMOUNTS OF ENERGY Then you can get ever increasing amounts of energy out of it. What has you so upset? It should be obvious to everyone else that a flywheel-generator combination that is increasing in speed will produce more and more electricity. I don't appreciate the insults especially when I am correct in this matter. Finally, what I was saying about ignoring laws is particularly applicable in this case as I came to my conclusions without knowing about Newton's second law but there it was to back me up. Please provide your math. I provided mine.

By the way http://www.activepower.com/solutions/ups-systems/flywheel-technology" already exists that meets all of the requirements of my system only as of now it may be being made from materials that will shatter when it gets up to top speed. New materials may be in order and it has to be linked to a methane gas turbine to provide unlimited inputs.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #14


russ_watters said:
You are incorrect. A generator produces energy by converting mechanical energy to electrical. This requires both an rpm and a torque. The torque is the part you are missing. Heck, if generating electricity required no torque, we could just generate an arbitrarily large amount by gearing-up our generators.

The torque is provided by the flywheel that is attached directly to the generator. And yes, you've finally hit the nail on the head. Were we to attach a flywheel to ALL our generators we could produce and arbitrarily large amount of electricity.
 
  • #15


greatglory said:
You are at best arguing semantics here and at worst just trying to save face.

Cobblers. At best I'm trying to teach you some science, and at worst dispairing at someone who's come here under the guise of asking for advice, with the intent of propogating nonsense and ignoring the facts.

What has you so upset? It should be obvious to everyone else that a flywheel-generator combination that is increasing in speed will produce more and more electricity.

No. It can't increase in speed AND output energy. If it's increasing in speed, that's because it's storing energy and not producing energy. As soon as you take energy out of the flywheel (to produce electricity, for instance), the flywheel slows down!

Finally, what I was saying about ignoring laws is particularly applicable in this case as I came to my conclusions without knowing about Newton's second law but there it was to back me up. Please provide your math. I provided mine.

Here you go. I think the Wikipedia page will sum it up at an appropriate level, assuming you don't fancy reading any thermodynamics texts.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Laws_of_thermodynamics

The bit about "for a thermodynamic cycle the sum of net heat supplied to the system and the net work done by the system is equal to zero" is most interesting.
 
  • #16


greatglory said:
Were we to attach a flywheel to ALL our generators we could produce and arbitrarily large amount of electricity.


For your information, every mechanical/electrical generator has a flywheel on it. This has nothing to do with producing more power (and it doesn't), it just stabilises the output of the generator and assists with transient and steady state control.
 
  • #17


greatglory said:
The torque is provided by the flywheel that is attached directly to the generator.
You're still missing the point. Why do you suppose that the flywheel can apply a torque to a generator without slowing down?
And yes, you've finally hit the nail on the head. Were we to attach a flywheel to ALL our generators we could produce and arbitrarily large amount of electricity.
Why would you assume that something so obvious could be overlooked by so many millions of scientists and engineers? Consider the more likely scenario: that you have a misunderstanding of this basic issue of flywheel operation. Consider also that you are not the first person to have this exact misunderstanding and post about it in this forum.
Please provide your math. I provided mine.
What you provided should make it clear to you why you are wrong: to make it accelerate, you apply a force. To make it generate electricity, it must apply a force and will therefore decelerate.

But also, that's not much in the way of math that you've looked into on the subject. Please look into the math of flywheel operation in the wiki page for it: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flywheel and also the wiki for angular acceleration: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Angular_acceleration

It would probably be helpful if you did some math - by that I mean an actual hypothetical calculation of the performance of your proposed device, because it would highlight your error and help you understand it. Try picking an arbitrary size for a flywheel and do the math to figure out how much energy it takes to accelerate it to a certain rpm and how much power you can extract from it without making it decelerate. And pay particular attention to the difference between the concepts of power and energy.
By the way an actual flywheel generator already exists that meets all of the requirements of my system...
Except that it says right there in the first sentence of the page that it is a UPS (a battery), not a generator. It stores energy, it doesn't continuously generate it.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #18


russ_watters said:
You're still missing the point. Why do you suppose that the flywheel can apply a torque to a generator without slowing down? Why would you assume that something so obvious could be overlooked by so many millions of scientists and engineers? Consider the more likely scenario: that you have a misunderstanding of this basic issue of flywheel operation. Consider also that you are not the first person to have this exact misunderstanding and post about it in this forum. No, actually, you have not provided any math at all. Please look into the math of flywheel operation in the wiki page for it: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flywheel and also the wiki for angular acceleration: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Angular_acceleration

It would probably be helpful if you did some math, because it would highlight your error. Try picking an arbitrary size for a flywheel and do the math to figure out how much energy it takes to accelerate it to a certain rpm and how much power you can extract from it without making it decelerate. And pay particular attention to the difference between the concepts of power and energy. Except that it says right there in the first sentence of the page that it is a UPS (a battery), not a generator. It stores energy, it doesn't continuously generate it.

Forget the words by Active Power, look at the diagram of the flywheel-generator.

The reason that my math is correct is that at no point does energy stop entering this system. Granted, the combination flywheel generator will accelerate slower when it is producing electricity than when it is not but it will always produce more and more energy AS LONG AS WE KEEP INPUTING ENERGY. Therefore the only law that is applicable is the fact of constant acceleration. So, let us take the world's largest flywheel-generator and attach it to a model airplane ram jet engine that powers a turbine attached to the flywheel.

The particular flywheel-generator of which I speak is in england and it takes almost one fifth of the total power in england to get it up to speed within a day. Now suppose instead of trying to get it up to speed immediately we let my little engine that could do the same thing accelerate the flywheel in the course of months even years sooner or later the generator will reach operational speed all for the price of nothing as the methane once again is coming from animal manure.

"Why do you assume something SO OBVIOUS could be overlooked by so many millions of scientists and engineers"? Genius is seeing what everyone else has seen and thinking what no one else has thought. Please do not forget that this is a constant burn system energy is always entering the system it is in no way a steady state system unless you consider the steady state as one of constant increase of energy, power and great glory.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #19


greatglory said:
I have been working on a holistic system involving flywheel-generators and http://www.lightoftheworld.com/profiles/blog/show?id=1591481%3ABlogPost%3A2884" as the power source. With all of the recent publicity given methane as a potential source of energy I figured that this was the way to go. I have some rudimentary drawings of the whole system and all of the materials should be readily available off of the shelf as is a basic requirement of all Anticipatory Design Scientists. (Buckminster Fuller). I'd love some feed back on the idea.

Basically it is a perpetual motion machine as are all machines when they have all inputs inplace. The Earth is a regenerative system and nothing operates outside of the rules of local universe. In this idea we use a vacuum mounted flywheel which should keep increasing in speed if we apply a constant influx of methane. The methane will be around as long as the animals that feed the anaerobic digester are around and the electricity will increase in amount as the flywheel-generator increases in speed. The following is a link to a picture http://api.ning.com/files/z23LVafEV*iQI-mtrDacdWDCiz405cRP4ftOZ14E5ssnRP2QHMOqF0*vKTmBsU2iJGzDQY9aS6r8zNeGTxc89QckltbX99Tp/FlywheelGeneratorandMethaneSystem.jpg?width=425&height=313

I hope you don't get my thread locked, as it seems you missed the point of the design.
I am not advocating the combustion of anything (although some gas could be burned to produce a more powerful system).

The intent is to recover as much as possible, the losses of a generic system of air compression, and a certain amount of the thermal energy delivered by the Sun.

A two part system, one open and one closed, the closed propane system takes in the heat of compression losses and internal resistance losses of an electric motor, which produces pressure in the propane section, which in turn drives one air motor, and the compressed air drives a second air motor, a cross flow heat exchanger allows for a change of state of each gas and the propane is returned to liquid, and the air is discharged at a much colder state than when it was taken in and subjected to compression.

This will be a very delicate system, where cold air is more important than the small amount of energy that might be converted to some form of mechanical or electric output. This is an attempt to make a system that is more efficient than current designs.

As Russ mentioned a minus sign associated with the flywheel, it is actually on both, charge and discharge of the wheel.

You might want to look up a dynamo,

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dynamo

Anything combusted cannot be perpetual.

Ron
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #20


I've read all of the articles that you have referred me to and nothing in any of them disputes my theory in fact it all supports my theory in particular this snippet.

"Rotary Converter Development

After dynamos were found to allow easy conversion back and forth between mechanical or electrical power, the new discovery was used to develop complex multi-field single-rotor devices with two or more commutators. These were known as a rotary converters. These devices were usually not burdened by mechanical loads, but watched just spinning on their own.

The rotary converter can directly convert, internally, any power source into any other. This includes direct current (DC) into alternating current (AC), 25 cycle AC into 60 cycle AC, or many different output currents at the same time. The size and mass of these was very large so that the rotor would act as a flywheel to help smooth out any sudden surges or dropouts."

And the article concerning angular acceleration specifically mentions constant acceleration which is what we are dealing with here. At this point I am forced to ask where did you guys get your "degrees"? The insult about reading "a book" hurts particularly when you refer me to "mere articles" that totally support my theory. Do you guys read the articles or do you just send people to any authority with the intent to obsfucate and confuse.

I came to test my theory and although all of the written authorities agree with me you guys continue to argue against what could be the biggest development in energy history. I would let you in on the actual workings of the particular anaerobic digester that I had in mind for this system but you might want to find fault with that also.

We all make mistakes but in this case unless I am simply blinded by foolish pride the mistake is yours not mine. Please retest your assumptions and get back to me. Forget whatever rules that you are arbitrarily applying and look at the facts. At the basis of everyone of the laws to which you've referred me is Newton's second law of dynamics. Not thermo dynamics. The separation of the heat functions and the dynamic functions comes about due to the use of a turbine that will also accelerate in speed to whatever the total speed of the particles coming out of the ram jet is.

In fact as I think about it there may be a top speed to this system that being the speed of the particles coming from the ram jet and that would violate even Newton's Second Law as you'd be applying a force to a system that should keep accelerating but has reached its limit. I am not sure about that and please don't focus on that in your reply should you decide to reply
 
  • #21


Please answer this question: how can a flywheel apply a torque to a generator without slowing down?
 
  • #22


Simple keep inputting power to the flywheel. And in fact the generator will continue to accelerate and never declerate, if it is attached to the flywheel.
 
Last edited:
  • #23


Ok, great. So you understand that to keep the flywheel from decelerating while it is turning a generator, you have to apply power to it. So how much? If the flywheel is turning a generator to geneate 1 kW of power, how much power has to be input to keep it from decelerating?
 
  • #24


For reasons of which I am not totally sure it has something to do with Inertia. A body in motion tends to stay in motion unless acted upon by a force and since this force has a direction (ie the same direction as the flywheel) it will continue to increase in speed. I will be the first to admit that a flywheel must slow down if there is no incoming energy or power. But that was never my argument. In my system there will be a constant influx of power. Endless power unless humans and/or other creature intellegent enough to keep the methane coming die out. It may not be perpetual but it is as close as we can get, realistically speaking.
 
  • #25


Again, How much power? Answer the question, please. Show you understand by answering these basic questions. Keep in mind that a generator that generates 1 kW of electrical power requires 1kW of mechanical power to turn it (not including losses, of course). So how much mechanical power must be applied to keep such a flywheel+generator from decelerating?
 
  • #26


My semi-educated guess is that to get 1kw of power out of a system at some point you have to have input at least 1kw of power. But again my argument is that some of the power is coming from the spinning of the flywheel not just the total "heat input" (not sure of the proper term here) of the system.
 
  • #27


The spinning of the flywheel is what we're talking about. If the flywheel is spinning a generator to produce 1 kW of electrical power, it will decelerate unless 1 kW of mechanical power is applied to it.
 
  • #28


The math here is pretty easy and you really should try it. The equations and explanations are in the wiki links I provided, but briefly:

Assume you have a 1 kW generator being spun at 1000 rpm by a flywheel with a moment of inertia of 10 kg-m^2. The math turns out to be very simple:

Power is torque times angular acceleration, so to get the torque required, you divide:
1000 J/s / 1000 rpm = 9.6 N-m (don't forget to convert the rpm into radians/sec!)

9.6 N-m / 10 kg-m^2 = .96 rad/sec^2 of acceleration (deceleration)

That's how a flywheel generates power.
 
  • #29


In my original post I mentioned that I am speaking of a synergetic holistic system. By looking merely at the flywheel you are missing the point. This is an entire system that continually increases in power output BECAUSE of the nature of flywheels. And actually due to the math of constant acceleration the total amount of energy needed to spin the flywheel will be equal to 1/2 Kw or something like that.

I gave you an example earlier. The largest flywheel generator spun by a tiny engine. One would not even imagine that it could be done period. But due to Newtons second law of dynamics it is inevitable and since as we find the process is reversible my little engine could provide enough energy for 1/5th of England.
 
  • #30


Earlier you one of you argued that a flywheel could not generate power only store it. And the other agreed. I see some movement on your part.
 
  • #31


greatglory said:
In my original post I mentioned that I am speaking of a synergetic holistic system. By looking merely at the flywheel you are missing the point.
I'm trying to go slowly to help you understand your error.
I gave you an example earlier. The largest flywheel generator spun by a tiny engine. One would not even imagine that it could be done period. But due to Newtons second law of dynamics it is inevitable and since as we find the process is reversible my little engine could provide enough energy for 1/5th of England.
One who understands the math would understand why it couldn't be done. Imagination has nothing to do with it.

Among other things, that example of yours implies a misunderstanding of the difference between power and energy.
This is an entire system that continually increases in power output BECAUSE of the nature of flywheels. And actually due to the math of constant acceleration the total amount of energy needed to spin the flywheel will be equal to 1/2 Kw or something like that.
Well the equations are there, in my previous post: Show how you get 1/2 kW.

If you actually look at the equations, you'll see that applying 1 kW of power to the flywheel will make it accelerate at .96 rad/s^2 and using the flywheel to generate 1 kW of power will cause it to decelerate at .96 rad/s^2. Or, link the three pieces together and you apply 1 kW of power to the flywheel and it then generates 1kW of power without accelerating or decelerating. Simple. This is the law of conservation of energy in action.
 
Last edited:
  • #32


greatglory said:
Earlier you one of you argued that a flywheel could not generate power only store it. And the other agreed. I see some movement on your part.
You misunderstood that too: An energy storage device is of course useless unless the energy can be extracted. The energy you store in a flywheel can be extracted via a generator. A flywheel (on its own) cannot, however, continuously generate electricity.
 
  • #33


Well greatglory, I can't say that I have a degree in anything but I have messed around with a lot of stuff along the lines you are talking about and have had some encouraging results, but I'm still paying a utility bill each month.
I have lots of bookmarks on my computer, of people that have converted single phase household power to three phase power (rotory converters) for their shops and these systems always require more power from the house current than they transfer into three phase power.

Tell us how your idea is different from Harold bate's "chicken powered car"

http://www.green-trust.org/2000/biofuel/batesmethane.htm

I for one have no desire to raise chickens or pigs, just to have power for my energy needs. The time and quantity of material to digest into a given amount of fuel is likely more than would be practical for me.

I believe there are things that been around for a long time that have been dismissed as "not practical" because of fuel being cheap, I do feel things are changing in this present age and look forward to seeing some developments that move efficiency into a better range than is now accepted.

I almost forgot to include the Active Power pdf of their single module UPS specs sheet, look at their ride thru time for delivering stored energy until a diesel powered backup generator kicks in. I have toured their plant in person, and was shown a 400 pound flywheel, which is held at a speed of around 7,600 rpm.

http://www.activepower.com/fileadmin/documents/data_sheets/US/CSSMS-US-1008-w.pdf

They to are working with the idea of thermal exchange of compressed, and expanded air.

RonL
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #34


Russ, I am very well aware that a flywheel cannot produce energy in and of itself without a generator and yes even with a generator it will slow down UNLESS you apply a constant force to the flywheel. In that case the combination flywheel generator WILL produce increasing amounts of electricity as has been my argument from the outset. Now it is time to throw down the gauntlet. I am not sure how this forum works exactly, but are you willing to submit this discussion to your superiors or comrades or others who may also be familiar with flywheel generators. And will you abide by their findings?

Ron L. I am familiar with Bates chicken powered car. The main difference is that my system is tied to a flywheel that WILL increase in speed and consequent power output being as we continually input methane gas into the ram jet that spins the turbine attached to the flywheel. http://www.lightoftheworld.com/profiles/blog/show?id=1591481%3ABlogPost%3A2884" to my original post concerning the total idea of how to collect the methane.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #35


russ_watters said:
If you actually look at the equations, you'll see that applying 1 kW of power to the flywheel will make it accelerate at .96 rad/s^2 and using the flywheel to generate 1 kW of power will cause it to decelerate at .96 rad/s^2. Or, link the three pieces together and you apply 1 kW of power to the flywheel and it then generates 1kW of power without accelerating or decelerating. Simple. This is the law of conservation of energy in action.

Perhaps my misunderstanding is of the nature of acceleration. To my understanding acceleration means increasing in speed exponetially. So that after two minutes of acceleration you will be going four times as fast as after one minute of acceleration and if the acceleration is constant after four minutes of acceleration you will be going 16 times as fast. Those figures won't apply to all circumstances but I am certain that there are specific instances in which that can be made to happen.

As such it matters not what the numbers say, this is a word problem for we are actually on thte same page. The law of conservation of energy does not apply when nobody is attempting to conserve energy. Remember and I repeat once again we are continually adding energy to the system. And one could say so what. All power plants continually add energy to the system, but in this case the flywheel multiplys the effect by taking the normal operations of a generator into the realms of outer space wherein a burn accelerates the craft.
 
  • #36


greatglory said:
My semi-educated guess...

Did your semi-education ever suggest that you might be able to learn something about the world from people who are fully-educated (or at least more-educated) in the field of physics and engineering?
 
  • #37


I'll just build the thing and prove to you that it works. "Good hardware is irrefutable proof of clear thinking." Buckminster Fuller
 
Last edited:
  • #38


"The great tragedy of science - the slaying of a beautiful hypothesis by an ugly fact."

-Thomas H. Huxley
 
  • #39


"Just don't hurt yourself, propane can burn in a wide range of fuel/air mixtures"

~Topher925
 
  • #40


I don't think greatglory's machine even uses propane, he's trying to utilize a flywheel to create free energy.
 
  • #41


Did your semi-education ever suggest that you might be able to learn something about the world from people who are fully-educated (or at least more-educated) in the field of physics and engineering?

I may not have a formal education in physics but I do have one in logic you are now arguing from a very weak logical position. I can learn a lot from people who are more educated in the field of phyics and engineering. The question is what have I learned from you?

Earlier I asked you to state your qualifications and subsequently to subject this post to others who CAN actually teach me something. Both reasonable requests which you have chosen to deny.
 
  • #42


I don't think greatglory's machine even uses propane, he's trying to utilize a flywheel to create free energy.

Ultimately the energy I am creating comes from the Sun by way of photo-synthesis in the growing of whatever feed stock is fed to the animals that produce the manure that is then fed into the anaerobic digester that creates the methane that powers the ramjet which spins the turbine which is attached to the flywheel-generator.
 
  • #43


The point is, you cannot extract more energy from the flywheel than was first put into it. If you spin the flywheel up to a million rpm and store 1 MJ of energy in it, you cannot extract more than 1 MJ of energy out of it again (and it's likely you'll recover much less than you put in due to various losses everywhere). Similarly, if the flywheel is spinning at a given speed and you are extracting a set power from it (say 1W), you must put at least 1W of power back into keep it spinning at the same speed; if you take into account frictional losses you'll have to put in a little bit more than 1W.

Your arguments of your "understanding" of acceleration and moment of inertia and formal education in logic are all for naught; energy in = energy out. Period.
 
  • #44


The great promise of Anticipatory Design Science - The slaying of ugly facts by good hardware." - Gregory GOrDon
 
  • #45


greatglory said:
Earlier I asked you to state your qualifications and subsequently to subject this post to others who CAN actually teach me something. Both reasonable requests which you have chosen to deny.

My credentials: A levels in Maths, Physics and Chemistry. Honours degree in mechanical engineering. Government certification for competency in gas installations and gas fuelled engines. Postgraduate study in fundamental engine science. Nearly four years working for a large manufacturer of industrial engines, developing and installing products for CHP, landfill and bio gas applications. Currently conducting independent research into biomass power for low calorific value fuels. Oh, and three weeks ago I tested an engine with a lightweight flywheel and a heavy flywheel (and I bet you can't guess which one produces more power).

Yours?
 
Last edited:
  • #46


Unfortunately for you, quotes cannot make your design work. The fact remains that you are fundamentally (and perhaps purposely) misinterpreting how a flywheel works.

Russ posed a very simple question to you a while back: if you extract 1 KW of power from a flywheel (regardless of size) how much energy must you put into the flywheel to ensure it stays at constant speed? The answer is of course 1 KW because a flywheel is not a source of energy, it is simply a mechanical energy storage device.

You can extract energy from a moving flywheel, but that energy must have been put into it first to start it spinning.
 
  • #47


First I want to thank all of you who have responded to my ravings and rantings about this idea. You have now forced me to put up or shut up so beginning on the first of January my primary focus will be on creating this very same contraption. Also, I have not felt so invigorated in any of my Internet usage as I have in the past two days. I've been forced to look up definitions of ideas that I have avoided for a long time as well as use my best debating skills. For that I thank you all. But...

The point is, you cannot extract more energy from the flywheel than was first put into it
.

Maybe YOU can't but I can and will. Where would the science of nuclear fission and fusion be if everyone thought like you?

Let's think about all of the energy that is going into this flywheel in particular and that went into the original design of all flywheels in general. Remember, as I am taking out electricity the flywheel is accelerating due to the constant input of energy.

As I've identified in my prior post the Ultimate source of the energy is to be found in the Sun, converted as it were through the aformentioned processes. Therefore whether the loss is 0% or 10% does not matter for as long as the Sun will shine we can get the needed supply of energy into the system. And again and I am tired of repeating myself on this point we are talking about acceleration which does actually have something to do with the theory of relativity.

The whole point of using a flywheel generator is that it is the most efficient form of generator. Some have been known to spin on their own even overcoming frictional losses.

At this point I'd like to extend a warm welcome to all of you to view this contraption once I get it working. "Now I've got my work cut out for me."
 
  • #48


Oh, and three weeks ago I tested an engine with a lightweight flywheel and a heavy flywheel (and I bet you can't guess which one produces more power).

Neither one, as according to you flywheels can't produce power they only "store" it.

So as to not leave without stating my credentials: Bachelor of Science Degree; International Environmental Science-Public Policy Analysis, 1980, Cook College, Rutgers University. Attended Boalt Hall School of Law, University of California Berkeley, CA. Left to do my duty as King of Kings and Lord of Lords, which was to make war with the anti-Christ: former United States President Ronald Wilson Reagan. Inventor of The Dynamic Light Reflection, Author: Impeach the Anti-Christ, Image of the Beast, The Beast Hunter and Ronald Reagan: Anti-Christ. Have appeared on over 20 national radio and television shows and have my own reality TV Big Brother type show known to me as The G's'S Christ Light Show.
 
  • #49


greatglory said:
Maybe YOU can't but I can and will. Where would the science of nuclear fission and fusion be if everyone thought like you?

Egads, it's worse than I thought...

Let me ask you then, if you're going to be extracting excess energy from the flywheel (as in, more energy than you're putting in) where is the energy coming from? You're suggesting that your invention will break the first law of thermodynamics, so I'm wondering what basis you have for backing up your claim?
 
  • #50


So because your religious you have all the answers?

Maybe YOU can't but I can and will. Where would the science of nuclear fission and fusion be if everyone thought like you?

It would be right where it is because scientists DO think like him. I think you need to take your nose out of the bible and put it into some mechanics textbooks and then report back in a few weeks.
 

Hot Threads

Recent Insights

Back
Top