Can Energy Be Saved When Using an Air Pump to Lift a 5kg Weight?

AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on the energy dynamics of using an air pump to lift a 5kg weight from a depth of 11 meters in a lake. It questions whether the energy required by the air pump could be less than that needed to lift the weight directly. Responses clarify that the energy used by the pump will be equal to or greater than the gravitational potential energy gained by the weight. The conversation also touches on the impossibility of creating perpetual motion machines or over-unity energy systems. Ultimately, the thread concludes that the energy requirements cannot be reduced below the gravitational potential energy needed for lifting.
tiago000000
Messages
1
Reaction score
0
Hi everyone! I regularly use the forum to learn but never registered to post anything, as I have nothing to teach really…
But today I have a question regarding the law of conservation of energy that I can’t find the answer to, and maybe someone will help me understand:

(I’ve attached a drawing)
Say we have a weight of 5kg at the bottom of a lake (11m deep), and an upside down 10L bucket above it attached to it by a few strings (9m deep). I then have an efficient air pump above the water line that pumps roughly 20L (I think, because of how it compresses down there) into the bucket and the whole apparatus comes up to the surface.

My question is: is the amount of energy used by the air pump equal/greater than the energy that would be needed to pull the same weight to the same place, or would it be possible for it to be smaller?

And if it was possible to use less energy to pump air down than it would be to pull the weight up, could you use this same principle to produce electric energy?

Ironically, as I’m waiting for the picture to upload, I’ve noticed a thread titled “why we don’t discuss perpetual motion machines”

Thank you everyone and I’m sorry for such a long post!
 

Attachments

  • 1AF17904-EE81-4B49-91D9-E6939059588E.jpeg
    1AF17904-EE81-4B49-91D9-E6939059588E.jpeg
    21.8 KB · Views: 163
Engineering news on Phys.org
tiago000000 said:
Ironically, as I’m waiting for the picture to upload, I’ve noticed a thread titled “why we don’t discuss perpetual motion machines”
Yup.

tiago000000 said:
And if it was possible to use less energy to pump air down than it would be to pull the weight up, could you use this same principle to produce electric energy?
Nope.

tiago000000 said:
My question is: is the amount of energy used by the air pump equal/greater than the energy that would be needed to pull the same weight to the same place, or would it be possible for it to be smaller?
The energy to drive the pump will be equal to or greater than the change in gravitational potential energy (GPE) that the mass gained in being lifted to the surface.

As you noted, we don't discuss PMMs or over-unity mechanisms. Thread is closed for now.
 
  • Like
Likes russ_watters and tiago000000
Hi all, I have a question. So from the derivation of the Isentropic process relationship PV^gamma = constant, there is a step dW = PdV, which can only be said for quasi-equilibrium (or reversible) processes. As such I believe PV^gamma = constant (and the family of equations) should not be applicable to just adiabatic processes? Ie, it should be applicable only for adiabatic + reversible = isentropic processes? However, I've seen couple of online notes/books, and...
Thread 'How can I find the cleanout for my building drain?'
I am a long distance truck driver, but I recently completed a plumbing program with Stratford Career Institute. In the chapter of my textbook Repairing DWV Systems, the author says that if there is a clog in the building drain, one can clear out the clog by using a snake augur or maybe some other type of tool into the cleanout for the building drain. The author said that the cleanout for the building drain is usually near the stack. I live in a duplex townhouse. Just out of curiosity, I...
I have an engine that uses a dry sump oiling system. The oil collection pan has three AN fittings to use for scavenging. Two of the fittings are approximately on the same level, the third is about 1/2 to 3/4 inch higher than the other two. The system ran for years with no problem using a three stage pump (one pressure and two scavenge stages). The two scavenge stages were connected at times to any two of the three AN fittings on the tank. Recently I tried an upgrade to a four stage pump...
Back
Top