# How much energy could be collected from such a setup?

• balazsdavid
In summary: Hi balaz,The purpose of the water is to reduce the buoyancy and friction of the mercury. This is why the energy difference between A and B is 14755 kilojoules- the water reduces the potential energy of the system. Adding a waterwheel to the system would not reduce the energy available, as the energy would still be in the form of kinetic energy.
balazsdavid

Suppose that we have a tower with two compartments. The upper one is filled with mercury and the bottom one with water. The floor can be opened (and so the compartments are abolished), and mercury could flow down to the bottom of the tower. I have calculated the potential energies of the two setup (A and B) and came to the conclusion that there is an energy difference of 14755 kilojoules. My question is that if we modify the setup (C) by adding a channel for the flowing mercury and a waterwheel (or a similar device) then how much energy could be collected of that 14 755 kilojoules?

If no exact calculation can be made, then any estimate? I have found in Wikipedia that a waterwheel can have an efficiency of 60%, but I suppose that a setup with mercury and water has a different efficiency than a setup with water and air.

I'm not a professional physicist, nor an engineer, so please no offense if I'm completely wrong at some point.

What purpose does the water serve? Why not just drop the mercury over a waterwheel in an empty tank? The only thing having the mercury flow through water accomplishes is reduce the useful energy available due to buoyancy and friction.

You are right, in this setup water has no purpose, but the drawing is only one part of a system in which water is necessary. I tried to simplify, this is the only part I'm having troubles with.

Wikipedia says: "If the object is much denser than the fluid, then B (the buoyancy force) approaches zero and the object's upward acceleration is approximately −g, i.e. it is accelerated downward due to gravity as if the fluid were not present"

So buoyancy isn't reducing the energy available. I don't really feel that because of friction the system would loose "too much" energy in the form of heat. Any ideas on how to calculate it based on the viscosic properties of water and mercury?

60% is as good an estimate as any.

balazsdavid said:
So buoyancy isn't reducing the energy available. I don't really feel that because of friction the system would loose "too much" energy in the form of heat. Any ideas on how to calculate it based on the viscosic properties of water and mercury?
Maybe you never had the opportunity to walk through water. Otherwise you should feel how much more energy is required to move something through water as compared to moving through air.
As for calculation, it will depend on the shape and size of the wheel. There is no way to calculate it in general. You may be able to design the wheel in a way that will reduce the drag.

Hi balaz,
I'm not going to check your math but it looks like you set it up properly. The amount of potential energy difference between A and B is what you show in your calculations. It is the hypothetical amount of energy that can be extracted given 100% efficiency, which is obviously not possible. Putting a wheel inside the system to extract that energy is one possible way to remove that energy, but it will be much less than 100%. To do any reasonable calculation on it, you'd need to add all sorts of details around the wheel and even then it would only be so accurate. There's just too many variables for a quickie calculation.

PS: This isn't part of a perpetual motion machine idea is it? Needless to say, perpetual motion is impossible.

nasu said:
Maybe you never had the opportunity to walk through water. Otherwise you should feel how much more energy is required to move something through water as compared to moving through air.

Good point, I was not considering drag and now I have realized that turbulence is another issue to deal with.

Q_Goest said:
PS: This isn't part of a perpetual motion machine idea is it? Needless to say, perpetual motion is impossible.

No, it isn't. As I said I'm not a physicist, nor an engineer, but that does not mean that I'm a fool!

Anyway, thanks for the answers and if someone has any other remarks then please feel free to share!

If it's not part of a perpetual motion machine then is it intended as a method of energy retrieval? If it is, then you would be much better to take the mercury through an external tube and through a turbine, (rotating in air) and back into the bottom of the tower.. Your losses would be a lot lower.
If it's just a 'thought experiment' then change your efficiency to something much lower, to account for the losses of this wheel sloshing around under water. I'd think something like 15% as you'll be stirring up all that water to no avail.

## 1. How is "energy" defined in this context?

"Energy" in this context refers to the amount of power that can be harnessed and converted into a usable form, such as electricity, from the setup being studied.

## 2. What factors affect the amount of energy that can be collected?

The amount of energy that can be collected from a setup depends on various factors, such as the size and efficiency of the setup, the location and availability of the energy source, and the technology used to convert the energy into a usable form.

## 3. Can the energy collected from the setup be stored?

Yes, the energy collected from the setup can be stored in batteries or other storage devices for later use. This is especially important for renewable energy sources, which may not produce a constant supply of energy.

## 4. Is there a maximum limit to the amount of energy that can be collected from a setup?

Yes, there is a maximum limit to the amount of energy that can be collected from a setup. This limit is determined by the laws of thermodynamics and the efficiency of the setup in converting the energy source into usable energy.

## 5. How can the energy collected from the setup be used?

The energy collected from the setup can be used for various purposes, such as powering homes and businesses, transportation, and industrial processes. It can also be fed back into the grid to supply electricity to the wider community.

Replies
3
Views
1K
Replies
3
Views
4K
Replies
16
Views
34K
Replies
2
Views
1K
Replies
3
Views
3K
Replies
10
Views
2K
Replies
22
Views
2K
Replies
4
Views
1K
Replies
2
Views
1K
Replies
3
Views
2K