Power output from a falling masss over a time period

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around calculating the power output from a falling mass over a specified time period, particularly in relation to a 5 kW alternator. Participants explore concepts of gravitational potential energy, efficiency in energy conversion, and the practical application of these calculations in energy generation systems, such as gravity lighting or pumped hydro power.

Discussion Character

  • Technical explanation
  • Conceptual clarification
  • Debate/contested
  • Mathematical reasoning

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants inquire about the specifics of the falling mass calculation, questioning whether it pertains to free fall or a controlled descent.
  • There is a suggestion that to maintain a longer fall duration, one might need to lift the mass higher, although this is met with skepticism regarding its practicality.
  • Participants discuss the efficiency of gears in energy conversion, with one suggesting to first consider the system without gearing.
  • A participant proposes using a large mass of water as a more practical example, referencing pumped hydro power and its efficiency.
  • Calculations are presented regarding the potential energy of a 1,000,000 kg mass falling 10 ft, with various interpretations of the results and units used.
  • There is a debate about the correct interpretation of energy and power units, with some participants correcting others on the use of kilowatt-hours versus kilowatts.
  • One participant expresses frustration at the perceived lack of understanding of physics among younger generations, emphasizing the importance of the subject.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants do not reach a consensus on the best approach to the problem, with multiple competing views on the calculations and practical applications of the discussed concepts. Disagreements arise regarding the interpretation of energy output and the efficiency of different systems.

Contextual Notes

There are unresolved issues regarding the assumptions made in calculations, particularly concerning the definitions of energy and power. The discussion also highlights the complexity of real-world applications and the need for clarity in mathematical expressions.

Who May Find This Useful

This discussion may be of interest to those involved in engineering, energy systems, and physics, particularly individuals exploring practical applications of gravitational energy and efficiency in energy conversion systems.

  • #31
jeff jones said:
small scalable unit of my design
How did you complete a design without knowledge if the formula you asked about in post #1?
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: russ_watters
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #32
jeff jones said:
its been proven impractical for general consumption/
i have no need or use for general consumption since i want an on demand power system unlike the standard power system which uses a wasteful way of producing and distributing energy
This is almost never true; usually it is more energy, cost, land etc efficient to have centralized, large power stations, even when you account for transmition/distribution loss.
yes i am working on the engineering and i have several quotes from engineers to make a set of ready to go plans for a small scalable unit of my design
the 35k price tag for a set of plans to submit to county is a little out of reach
but building a working scale model for less then a 1000 with counties blessing is possible
Building a working scale model is a good approach. You may also want to consider speaking to a lawyer about patents and IP issues, if you haven't already.

And not for nothing, but you should work on presenting yourself better, specifically with your writing. Even if you don't think we at PF matter enough to be worthy of your best effort, it's good practice and you really never do know when you might be talking to someone who can really help.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Bystander and berkeman
  • #33
Twenty years ago I was working in coastal Maine, and an older friend showed me an old factory or mill along one of the rivers that, back in its day had had a waterwheel arrangement that turned with the tidal flow thus powering the mill. He had been around as a youngster when the mill was operating, and told me they took lunch at slack tide. There had been an electric light above the wheel that would come back on when the wheel began turning again, signaling "everyone get back inside, lunch break is over."

These things can work, but they do hearken to simpler times when life was lived at a slower pace.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: berkeman, russ_watters, DaveE and 1 other person
  • #34
anorlunda said:
How did you complete a design without knowledge if the formula you asked about in post #1?
I started w wanting to capture tidal change w large masses and small falls
I got hung up on how to transfer enormous weights to a usable form of motion
As I was watching a YouTube video on alternate storage for power I found beacon power
As I didn't have a clear path for transferring motions but I did know that energy can be produced I figured I would see what it would cost to store the power since it's intermittent
They actually called me back while I was working and I sat 40 feet in the air describing what I envision should happen
5 engineers on a teleconference listened to what I had
They said no
Do it this way
This will work way better
I said
Cool
They proceeded to tell me that they can take any voltage and amperage and store it to be drawn out as needed
They also said that a lineal alternator was the way to go
I said
Cool
They then proceeded to tell me that in 2 weeks I can have plans drawn up and since everything is off the shelf it would be fairly easy
I said
Cool
At no point did I ask how much wattage or energy would be made
At that point I cried a little
Gosh darn engineers
God's gift to humanity
The plans cost 35k
The off the shelf items start at 75k
I need a working prototype that cost less than 1000
And is scalable
My brother works on solar farms
If I can sell him on the project w accurate numbers and a small working or even non working but viable prototype
I will get the funding
Now
I have figured out the mass to energy ratio
It will need some mechanical workarounds and possibly 2 or more fixed points
But
It works
And it works well
And I do thank u folks for the assist
 
  • #35
The OP question has been adequately answered.

@jeff jones , when you finish your prototype and test it, please post here again. Until then, I suggest that face-to-face questions with that panel of five engineers you have on call would be better than asking strangers on PF.

Thread closed.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Vanadium 50 and berkeman

Similar threads

Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
Replies
8
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
Replies
3
Views
1K
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
2K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K