Crackpot perpetual energy generator idea

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around a proposed device intended to generate perpetual hydroelectric power using capillary action. Participants explore the feasibility of the concept, examining the mechanics of water movement through tubes and the implications of energy conservation principles.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Debate/contested
  • Technical explanation

Main Points Raised

  • One participant suggests a device that uses capillary action to move water up tubes to generate hydroelectric power, but expresses doubt about the mechanism's viability.
  • Another participant points out that once the tubes are full, they cannot pull more water, and that there is a maximum height for water to be drawn up due to energy constraints.
  • A third participant explains that capillary action relies on surface tension and that water cannot spill over the top of the tube, which is necessary for the proposed device to function.
  • Some participants propose modifications, such as changing the tube's orientation to allow water to drop back into a pool, but express uncertainty about the effectiveness of these changes.
  • One participant introduces the idea of a hypothetical pump that could extract water from the surface of the tube, claiming it would require less energy than raising water, but acknowledges a flaw in this reasoning.
  • Another participant asserts that there is no such thing as a 100% efficient pump, challenging the assumptions made in the proposed ideas.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants generally disagree on the feasibility of the proposed perpetual energy generator, with multiple competing views on the mechanics of capillary action and energy requirements. The discussion remains unresolved, with no consensus on a viable solution.

Contextual Notes

Limitations include assumptions about the efficiency of pumps, the nature of capillary action, and the energy dynamics involved in moving water through tubes. These factors contribute to the uncertainty surrounding the proposed device's functionality.

climbhi
Okay, this seems like it should work, but I know that it ought not too. Please tell me what you think.

My idea is for a device which will be able to perpetually produce hydroelectric power. It works based on the ideas of cappilary action. Start with a large pool of water, and take a whole freaking ton of small tubes which water will travel up by capillary action. Have the water travel up the tubes and then form a new pool higher up, where a new batch of capillary tubes will be waiting to suck that water higher up, and the cycle goes on until you reach a sufficient height. Here you cause the pool which has accumulated at the top level to fall off over an edge, go down and strike a rotor which works the same as any hydroelectric plant rotor works. After it strikes this the water returns to the original pool and the process repeats. And voila! (pretty sure that's spelled wrong) you have a perpetual energy generator!

So tell me what you think?? I think the flaw to the idea is the part where the water comes out of the top of the cappillary pipes to make a new pool. But what do you think?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
I think the issues are 1) the tubes will fill with water, but not keep pulling up more after they're full, and 2) there is a max height you can pull water with up a given tube, and it likely takes a corresponding amount of energy to pull the water at the top out of the tube.
 
The main problem is that capillary action is a function of surface tension. While the height that water will rise in a tube is inversely proportional to the diameter of the tube, if the tube is shorter than this height, the water will rise to the top of the tube and no more.

The water crawls up the tube because of the molecular attraction between the water and the wall of the tube. It can't climb up over the top of the tube, because there is no more wall to climb up.

For this device to work, the water would have to spill up over the top of the tube, and capillary action won't cause this.
 
Originally posted by Janus
For this device to work, the water would have to spill up over the top of the tube, and capillary action won't cause this.

Yes that's what I said my concern was. To bad it wouldn't work, it would be a great device if only you could get it to work! But then again there's a million things out there that would be great devices if only you could get them to work.
 
What if the top of the tube turns down then widens out? The water would climb up turn and climb down, then lose attraction to the wall as it widens and drop in the pool.
 
Well artman, i think the water will not be able to climb in a horizontal way (you know, at some point the tube will be horizontal for it to get down eventually).

I have another good idea (based on this one).
Suppose we were able to make some kind of pump that only sucks the water from the surface of the tube to put it into the container at that level, suppose the pump has effiecency of 100%.
The energy needed to do so will be less than the energy needed to raise the water from the lower container to the upper one.
So we will still have some kind of 'free energy' there (i know it is impossible, so there is some flaw in the logic that i don't see now).

Any comments ?
 
Originally posted by STAii
I have another good idea (based on this one).
Suppose we were able to make some kind of pump that only sucks the water from the surface of the tube to put it into the container at that level, suppose the pump has effiecency of 100%.
The energy needed to do so will be less than the energy needed to raise the water from the lower container to the upper one.
So we will still have some kind of 'free energy' there (i know it is impossible, so there is some flaw in the logic that i don't see now).

Any comments ?

My gut tells me that the adhesive force that causes the capillary action in the first place will also act to resist your pump right at the surface you are trying to pull the water from. That is to say, not only are you pulling the water perhaps slightly up from the top of the tubes, but you also have to break the adhesive force from the tube to get the water into your pump.
 
And there is no such thing as a 100% efficient pump.
 
Artman said:
What if the top of the tube turns down then widens out? The water would climb up turn and climb down, then lose attraction to the wall as it widens and drop in the pool.
...I don't quite understand why Artman's arrangement won't work. (Not that I believe it will, I just don't understand why it won't.)
 

Similar threads

High School Water Wicking between two containers
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
920
High School Question about pressure of a liquid
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
1K
Undergrad Capillary action, evaporative pumping or bio-mechanical pumping....
  • · Replies 18 ·
Replies
18
Views
3K
Undergrad Infinite flow with capillary tubes?
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
High School Conservation of Energy: Ball on a U-Shaped Ramp
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K
High School Mousetrap Car Energy efficiency
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
1K
High School How Does Gravity Influence Energy Production in Hydroelectric Generators?
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
2K
Misc. Improving the accuracy of a grandfather clock
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
1K
Undergrad Help understanding how my "magic" siphon works....
  • · Replies 17 ·
Replies
17
Views
5K
High School Where the extra energy comes from?
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K