# Just had on a new idea that seems crazy.



## Micahn (Nov 19, 2005)

Howdy All
I have been looking around online tonight at Alternative power stuff and came up with a crazy idea.
I was looking at what it would take to build a wind power and hydro power system myself (You know like this site http://otherpower.com/otherpowerfront.shtml)
Anyway I had me a idea and started doing some research on it. tell me if you think this would work.
Now days you can get some high output alternators that put out any where from 300 amps and up. What would happen if you got yourself a DC motor that was run that 300 amp alternator that only used lets say 50 amps. The way I see it you would be building up 250 extra amp a hour with that set up. I found where I can get a 1/4 horse 12V motor that draws 21 amps. It turns at 1800 rpm and that is more then enough to run a alternator. This is not some toy motor but a industrial type one.
Now what do you all think about that type of idea ? The way I figure it a system like that one would be adding 279 amp at 12V into the system. You could even get a bigger motor say a 1 horse one that draws 80 amps and run 2 or 3 alternators with the right type of pulley system set up. You could also jump up to a 24V motor and run at over 3000 RPM if you needed it.
Anyway am I crazy or could a system like that make more power then it uses ?
The way I figure it a system like that could be set up for just a few hundred. You would need more then that for things like battery bank and voltage regulators and transformers and all but I am talking about just making the extra power for the system here.


----------



## wy_white_wolf (Oct 14, 2004)

Try all you want, but the motor is not powerful enough to turn the alternator at full power. Your alternator will only be able to put out the same amount of power that the electric motor takes minus friction losses.


----------



## Micahn (Nov 19, 2005)

Well them 12V or 20V motors can go to to a few HP I would think they would run a alternator just fine. Why do you think they would not be able to run them full speed ? I will see if I can find how much Torque they put out and how much say a 300amp alternator needs to turn. If it is as you say it would be a torque problem but if that is not a problem then I am not seeing what is.


----------



## Guy_Incognito (Jul 4, 2006)

The problem is that you're making energy out of thin air.

I'll give an example :

(Now, I've used kW because it's easy to interchange electrical and mechanical power with them, but it works just the same in horsepower as well.)

A 300 amp alternator at 12V requires at the very least 3.6kW of mechanical power to drive it. (12V x 300A = 3600W). It's actually more than that due to losses in the alternator (friction from bearings, the cooling fan, diode effeciency, etc). So, we'll say you need 3.8 kW of mechanical power in to get 300A out.

A 12V motor putting out 3.8kW of mechanical energy needs at least 3.8 kw of electrical energy in to drive it at that power output. Not including losses due to friction, commutator and field current. So I'll say that it needs at least 4.0kW of electrical energy in to get 3.8kW of mechanical energy out. 

4.0kW at 12V is 333 amps - 33 more amps than what you get out of the alternator.

See the problem now?


But don't sweat it. Everyone gets one of these ideas sooner or later. It can be very hard sometimes figuring out where the loss is in some designs (eg, permanent magnet arrangements swinging back and forth forever) - but the loss is always there.


----------



## wy_white_wolf (Oct 14, 2004)

I do like thinking outside the box. Just there is no way to bring this box into reality. 

Google "first law energy" and do a little reading.

"First Law of Thermodynamics: Energy can be changed from one form to another, but it cannot be created or destroyed. The total amount of energy and matter in the Universe remains constant, merely changing from one form to another. The First Law of Thermodynamics (Conservation) states that energy is always conserved, it cannot be created or destroyed. In essence, energy can be converted from one form into another."

http://www.emc.maricopa.edu/faculty/farabee/biobk/BioBookEner1.html

So in you idea you need an energy input that is at least equal to the energy you plan to get out (300amps). 

"The Second Law of Thermodynamics states that "in all energy exchanges, if no energy enters or leaves the system, the potential energy of the state will always be less than that of the initial state." This is also commonly referred to as entropy. A watchspring-driven watch will run until the potential energy in the spring is converted, and not again until energy is reapplied to the spring to rewind it. A car that has run out of gas will not run again until you walk 10 miles to a gas station and refuel the car. Once the potential energy locked in carbohydrates is converted into kinetic energy (energy in use or motion), the organism will get no more until energy is input again. In the process of energy transfer, some energy will dissipate as heat."

So by this you actually need more than the 300amp.


This is a very basic explaination of the energy rules:

http://www.uwsp.edu/cnr/wcee/keep/Mod1/Rules/ThermoLaws.htm


----------



## bob clark (Nov 3, 2005)

( shakes head ,and finds another thread to read)


----------



## mightybooboo (Feb 10, 2004)

What you are proposing is a perpetual motion machine,wont work.

BooBoo


----------



## Ross (May 9, 2002)

It's not going to work because the assumption is an alternator spins easily by hand and a running motor is impossible to stop with your hand. Add a 300 amp load to the alternator and you won't spin it by hand, you'd really need almost 4 hp (guessing) to spin the altenator.


----------



## Fire-Man (Apr 30, 2005)

Hello Micahn
I too had that same Idea back in the early 80's, but think about it-----If this was possible, we could build some cars with several alternators and motors and battery banks and close down ALL the gas stations------Cool Idea, but it just don't work or does it--In a way--Technology that the goverment might have that is top secret-----Hmmmmmmm Something to think about!!! Randy






Micahn said:


> Howdy All
> I have been looking around online tonight at Alternative power stuff and came up with a crazy idea.
> I was looking at what it would take to build a wind power and hydro power system myself (You know like this site http://otherpower.com/otherpowerfront.shtml)
> Anyway I had me a idea and started doing some research on it. tell me if you think this would work.
> ...


----------



## Dahc (Feb 14, 2006)

Micahn,
You should do searches thru a few different search engines on "over unity machines" or just "over unity".


----------



## Micahn (Nov 19, 2005)

I see what you all are saying, However with the advances in both alternators and small electric motors this should work some day if not today.
After I posted this last night I started trying to find out just how much force it takes to spin a alternator at what speeds. So far I have not been able to find that out.
Lets look at a home made generator for example.
On this site they have a 1 1/2 hp gas engine running a tractor alternator putting out 55 amps and turning at 300rpm about they say.
Now they say if someone is going to make their own they should use a 8 to 10 hp engine as it would do better they feel. but their 1 1/2 hp one is working on for them. Here is the site link
http://www.otherpower.com/witte.html
Now if someone used lets say a 4 hp electric motor running at say 4150 rpm they could gear it down or up a little with pulleys and change the speed if need be. This motor would run off of 48V and pull 72 amps. Here is a link to this motor.
http://www.emotorstore.com/productd...CatID_E_354_A_productID_E_583_A_skuID_E_30698
Now a 4 hp motor I know will run a alternator if not 2 or 3 of them at one time as long as it is not having to dive something like most others motors would be like some sort of equipment or what ever. I almost would say that a 1 hp one would do the job but I am going bigger just to see what happens i with this idea 
I will spend some more time tonight trying to find just how much torque it takes to run a alternator as that would be the only thing that could hold this system up. Does anyone know of any sites that talk about this sort of thing ?
If a motor like that one could drive say 3 300amp alternators then this system would be one nice deal for anyone wanting to invest in it.

To bad that I can not buy the stuff and try it out right now or I would. Hopefully some day I will be able to work on this idea in real life instead of just messing with the idea like this. Add in the fact that they are making advances in technology every day and some day a idea like this will go from ideas to a working system


----------



## Fire-Man (Apr 30, 2005)

I understand what you are saying and can see why you feel the way you do, but to turn a 300 amp alternator or a 65 amp takes doesn't take hardly any HP to do so, BUT when you put a load on it---draw 65 amps for example--it takes some HP to turn it under load. A 300 amp---mercy serious HP for it under a 300 amp draw load. You ever jumped another vehicle off--when you hook the jumper cables to the other running car----notice the motor drops down in rpm---because the draw of the alternator causes the motor to "Strain" some--more than one or two HP lost to do this. It takes alot of HP to handle a big alt. Example--I know of people in the CB Key Downs that run 8 (or more)300 amp alt to give their big amplifiers alot of AMPS when keyed down. These Guys Build 454 engines with STEEL cranks to turn these 8 Alt---For only 10 seconds at a time---and still snap the crankshafts on some of the motors. A Stock crank just can't handle the Load that the 8--300 amp Alt put on the engine when The Big Amplifiers are drawing the full 2400+ amps for only 10 seconds. Keep up your search--Its good Food For The Brain--To Study. Randy




Micahn said:


> I see what you all are saying, However with the advances in both alternators and small electric motors this should work some day if not today.
> After I posted this last night I started trying to find out just how much force it takes to spin a alternator at what speeds. So far I have not been able to find that out.
> Lets look at a home made generator for example.
> On this site they have a 1 1/2 hp gas engine running a tractor alternator putting out 55 amps and turning at 300rpm about they say.
> ...


----------



## Guy_Incognito (Jul 4, 2006)

I bring your attention to this site, which sell a typical high-output alternator.

http://www.eco-techalternators.com

From their specs at http://www.eco-techalternators.com/pdf/Specificationsheet-28VR1.1.pdf

A 24V 150A alternator pulls 10HP and about 6ft-lb of torque at that output.
A 48V 75A alternator would draw a similar load.

That motor you specify makes less than half of that - 4HP , with 72A input.

I know you have your heart set on it  but it's not going to work.


----------



## Micahn (Nov 19, 2005)

That is sort of what I was looking for as it shows how much torque is needed to spin a alternator at what speeds. Not 100% what I was looking for as them are not 12V alternators.
Looks like it needs about 14 lbs of torque at around 3000 rpm to work right. The hp does not matter near as much as the torque. You can get a low hp engine that has high torque that can move much more then a high hp engine with low torque. Yes torque and hp does sort of work hand in hand but they also can work alone. Basically is in the moving mass that says how much torque a motor has.
Anyway thanks for the links. I am not done with this yet as it should be able to work I just have to find the right combo of parts to make it so 
A low rpm high amp alternator is what would work best. for example here is a guy who made one out of wood that works well even off of a drill lol.
http://www.otherpower.com/pmg2.html


----------



## Guy_Incognito (Jul 4, 2006)

I'll point out for future reference that power generated by a 12V 100A alternator is exactly the same as a 24V 50A alternator - all other things being generally equal, the horsepower/torque input will remain the same for both.

I don't think you'll get very far, and you're likely to waste a lot of your money and time. But do post if you get your over-unity system going. A lot of people would like to hear about it if you do!


----------



## Dubai Vol (Mar 22, 2006)

Dude, you're trying to violate the first law of thermodynamics. You can't get something for nothing. The energy you get out can't exceed the energy you put in. Period.

Not only that, the second law of thermodynamics says you can't even break even. Friction and such means you always have to put in MORE than you get out.

What you're suggesting just plain won't work. No amount of "advances" in technology will make you able to violate the laws of thermodynamics. Sorry.


----------



## wy_white_wolf (Oct 14, 2004)

Micahn said:


> That is sort of what I was looking for as it shows how much torque is needed to spin a alternator at what speeds. Not 100% what I was looking for as them are not 12V alternators.
> Looks like it needs about 14 lbs of torque at around 3000 rpm to work right. The hp does not matter near as much as the torque. You can get a low hp engine that has high torque that can move much more then a high hp engine with low torque. Yes torque and hp does sort of work hand in hand but they also can work alone. Basically is in the moving mass that says how much torque a motor has.
> Anyway thanks for the links. I am not done with this yet as it should be able to work I just have to find the right combo of parts to make it so
> A low rpm high amp alternator is what would work best. for example here is a guy who made one out of wood that works well even off of a drill lol.
> http://www.otherpower.com/pmg2.html


Ok that produces 500 watts. Take a look at the drill it uses 120volts at about 6 amps. Thats 720 watts used to turn it. Looks like a loser to me.


----------



## rambler (Jan 20, 2004)

Perpetual Motion Machine.

Too funny.

I'd think it was April 1st today. 

--->Paul


----------



## Jim-mi (May 15, 2002)

Some thing about "There ain't no free lunches"

Or if it sounds too good to be true than it probably is.


----------



## ace admirer (Oct 5, 2005)

that pesky first law of thermodynamics?!?!?! many a man has bumped heads against it,,,no matter how hard the head may be....the first law always wins. always will.....the good thing about beating your head against a wall? the more you do it, the better it feels when you stop.


----------



## 12vman (Feb 17, 2004)

Everyone thinks small, compact, elaborate..

Mother nature gives you some of the best tools to work with if you can figure out how to put them togather..

Gravity, leverage, weight..

Example: From a fulcrum at a distance of 10' applying 8lbs. of weight will produce approximmately 400 ft. lbs. of torque. That's more than a Chevy 350 V-8!

The laws of thermodynamics do not apply in this situation. The flaws can be adjusted in a physical manner..

There IS a machine that produces more energy than it needs to operate itself..

I am not at liberty to discuss this subject in detail. I have signed a disclaimer..


----------



## JAK (Oct 15, 2005)

10 ft x 8 lbs = 80 ft.lbs


----------



## Jim-mi (May 15, 2002)

I too have signed that there disclaimer.

And I ain't gonna tell...........


----------



## Jim-mi (May 15, 2002)

Remember the signed disclaimer.....????

Mum's the word


----------



## Guy_Incognito (Jul 4, 2006)

12vman said:


> Gravity, leverage, weight..
> Example: From a fulcrum at a distance of 10' applying 8lbs. of weight will produce approximmately 400 ft. lbs. of torque. That's more than a Chevy 350 V-8!


Until you actually move something, that all that torque does diddly. And I'll point out that the Chevy 350 V8 can put out that kind of torque continuously for a full revolution. What happens when you reach 90 degrees straight down with your fulcrum? Another weight takes over? How do you get those two weights off the ground up in position again? With another weight?
Wait - I know, you can't explain. You've signed a NDA, haven't you. 



12vman said:


> The laws of thermodynamics do not apply in this situation. The flaws can be adjusted in a physical manner..


Those pesky laws of physical motion and conservation of inertia take over instead. But they're really a subset of the general law of thermodynamics. Which basically states that, "There is no such thing as a free lunch."

Alright. I swore I wouldn't post in this thread again, but I'll make it clear now : 

There are basic fundamental laws of physics and energy. Know why they call them laws? Because for every single test case that we've pitted them against, they've held true. Every single one. There's no "well, heck, Newtons third law works ok here, but this other widget seems to violate that." Every single physical thing in this world can have a law of physics used to effectively and accurately predict what it will do when forces are applied. Your life depends on thorough understanding (by someone - maybe not you  ) of these basic laws of physics. Planes fly, nuclear reactors react, buildings and bridges stay up - they all confirm and reinforce the existence of these laws. 

So, extraordinary claims such as a perpetual motion machine requires rigourous investigation and proof before anyone in the scientific community will even give your inventions a second thought.


----------



## 12vman (Feb 17, 2004)

WOW!! That was fun..


----------



## Jim-mi (May 15, 2002)

Yup......I like the way Guy Incog pontificates.

Kinda reminds me of an interview I had with Albert Eienstine a few years ago.


----------



## Dubai Vol (Mar 22, 2006)

12vman said:


> WOW!! That was fun..


Ahh, you got me! But you owe me a new keyboard! :nana:  

I have to say I liked one feature of that wood motor. A lack of iron cores makes it very inefficient, but it will turn in light winds. That's worth looking into I think. May make windmills feasible in areas that supposedly don't have strong enough winds?



> One immediate benifit of having "air coils" is obviously the complete lack of cogging, which, if used in a windmill should result in a machine that starts very easily.


----------



## Jim-mi (May 15, 2002)

Now your onto something really big.
WOW
A wooden windmill that will turn in 2mph winds.........

This should set the industry backwards to the future in a quantum leap.


----------



## Ross (May 9, 2002)

Let's keep it civil guys. I don't mind some good natured ribbing but if this thread is going to slide so far off topic that it belongs on GC, I'll clip it's wings.


----------



## cruiser3006 (May 10, 2005)

Here is an article from spring 1980 Science and mechanics magazine. It deals with a 'perpetual motion machine' . A patent was issued and working models were made and demonstrated the theories and actualities. 

QUOTE"
But because, inventor Howard Johnson is not the sort of man to be intimidated by such seemingly authoritative pronouncements, he now owns U.S. Patent No. 4,151,431 which describes how it is possible to generate motive power, as in a motor, using only the energy contained in the atoms of permanent magnets. That's right. Johnson has discovered how to build motors that run without an input of electricity or any other kind of external energy! "UNQUOTE

Here is a link to the Information and article! free energy

Check it out! Many things were impossible and worked.


----------



## MELOC (Sep 26, 2005)

that was 1980. what is the hold-up, lol. did he die and the patent was sold to exxon?


----------



## WisJim (Jan 14, 2004)

http://patft.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-...50&s1=4151431.PN.&OS=PN/4151431&RS=PN/4151431
(clig on the "images" link to see the actual patent documents including drawings.)

Take a look at the patent and the drawings, try it yourself! <G>


----------



## MELOC (Sep 26, 2005)

i cannot get the images. i get nothing but text and blank image pages.


----------



## mightybooboo (Feb 10, 2004)

I like those Dutch windmills,must take a lot of energy.
My favorite power source,the wooden water wheel,not much tech and simple materials,just poetry in motion.

BooBoo


----------



## Unregistered (Aug 27, 2004)

Wasn't Howard Johnson the one caught with the hidden power source when test were being run on his machine?


----------



## Dubai Vol (Mar 22, 2006)

> Howard Johnson wasn't a scam artist but a kind of bumbler who fooled himself. His motor worked if, and only if, he was holding the "pusher" magnet in his hand. He tried a couple times to mount that magnet but couldn't seem to position it correctly. It turned out, of course, that he was providing the motive power himself by moving the magnet he was holding back and forth. He was fully aware his hand was moving back and forth but he thought the rotor magnets were pushing his hand away and all he was doing is putting it back into position. Someone had to explain to him what was going on and why he couldn't get it to work when he mounted the magnet. Once he realized his mistake, he stopped work on it.


From here


----------



## cruiser3006 (May 10, 2005)

"From Dubai Voi
Quote:
Howard Johnson wasn't a scam artist but a kind of bumbler who fooled himself. His motor worked if, and only if, he was holding the "pusher" magnet in his hand. He tried a couple times to mount that magnet but couldn't seem to position it correctly. It turned out, of course, that he was providing the motive power himself by moving the magnet he was holding back and forth. He was fully aware his hand was moving back and forth but he thought the rotor magnets were pushing his hand away and all he was doing is putting it back into position. Someone had to explain to him what was going on and why he couldn't get it to work when he mounted the magnet. Once he realized his mistake, he stopped work on it. " 





I haven't seen what you are referencing anywhere else, and there are extensive links and info on the site I have a included a link to, below.

Here is another link with more extensive and newer info.
HJ motor


----------



## dennisjp (Mar 3, 2006)

wy_white_wolf said:


> I do like thinking outside the box. Just there is no way to bring this box into reality.
> 
> Google "first law energy" and do a little reading.
> 
> ...


You seem like you know what you are talking about so here goes a good question you may be able to help me with, or maybe someone else out there.

Lets say I want to build a waterwheel to make electricity, and I don't want to make 12 volt and convert it to 120/240 volt, because I don't want the high priced 12 volt cables, convertor, batteries etc. 

Lets say the wheel produces somewhere between 20 and 30 horsepower acording to the rain fall. 

Concidering one HP is supposed to make 743 watts, (I think, if I remember correct, which would be a change, lol) this would be somewhere between 15 and 22 KW's, give or take a few. 

Ok, now lets say I only need a max of 6 to 8 KW's and want to sell the extra to the power company. Could I use lets say a 10 or 12 HP motor to keep the generator turning at the correct 3600 RPM and use it's surplus power to run the motor?????????????????????????????

What I am getting at, is keeping the generator turning at the correct speed. 
The motor wouldn't be pulling the full power when the water was up, but it would keep the speed up when the water wasn't enough to make the wheel turn the correct speed. 
Could I put a disconnect and an electric clutch set up in, so when the water flow was correct so the motor wouldn't be running??????

Does this sound like it would work, or does any one know why it wouldn't work.


----------



## dennisjp (Mar 3, 2006)

wy_white_wolf said:


> I do like thinking outside the box. Just there is no way to bring this box into reality.
> 
> Google "first law energy" and do a little reading.
> 
> ...


You seem like you know what you are talking about so here goes a good question you may be able to help me with, or maybe someone else out there.

Lets say I want to build a waterwheel to make electricity, and I don't want to make 12 volt and convert it to 120/240 volt, because I don't want the high priced 12 volt cables, convertor, batteries etc. 

Lets say the wheel produces somewhere between 20 and 30 horsepower acording to the rain fall. 

Concidering one HP is supposed to make 743 watts, (I think, if I remember correct, which would be a change, lol) this would be somewhere between 15 and 22 KW's, give or take a few. 

Ok, now lets say I only need a max of 6 to 8 KW's and want to sell the extra to the power company. Could I use lets say a 10 or 12 HP motor to keep the generator turning at the correct 3600 RPM and use it's surplus power to run the motor?????????????????????????????

What I am getting at, is keeping the generator turning at the correct speed. 
The motor wouldn't be pulling the full power when the water was up, but it would keep the speed up when the water wasn't enough to make the wheel turn the correct speed. 
Could I put a disconnect and an electric clutch set up in, so when the water flow was correct so the motor wouldn't be running??????

Does this sound like it would work, or does any one know why it wouldn't work.


----------



## wy_white_wolf (Oct 14, 2004)

dennisjp said:


> You seem like you know what you are talking about so here goes a good question you may be able to help me with, or maybe someone else out there.
> 
> Lets say I want to build a waterwheel to make electricity, and I don't want to make 12 volt and convert it to 120/240 volt, because I don't want the high priced 12 volt cables, convertor, batteries etc.
> 
> ...


Sounds real close to how some of the big wind turbines work. They generate AC and need to be kept in phase (60hz) with the power grid. This is something that has to be monitored very closely. Power companies use computers to monitor them now. How would you keep it from turning to fast in high flow times? Power companies can put more load (pull more electricity) on them to keep the speed down to match the 60 hz.

For a small unit like you talk about (though big by home terms) I feel this monitoring would be to costly for the system. I think you would be better off generating DC but at a higher voltage. At least 48VDC if not 120VDC. Many companies build grid-tie inverters that work at the higher voltages. You could also step down the dc to 12 volts if that is what you wanted to use.

What state are you in? Have you checked on the net metering laws for you state?


----------



## wy_white_wolf (Oct 14, 2004)

Dennisjp

After I made my post I was able to see you are from Virgina. Here's a link to that states net metering law:

http://www.dsireusa.org/library/inc...=TableType&type=Net&CurrentPageID=7&EE=0&RE=1

Kind of bad that for residential you're limited to 10kw. So no since in building a system any bigger than that. If you place is zoned right you could fall into the 500kw for nonresidential. 

The real problem comes from how it treats the excess. Carrired over to the next month or granted to the utility company. Sorry to say there's no money to be made generating any more than you use.


----------



## dennisjp (Mar 3, 2006)

wy_white_wolf said:


> Dennisjp
> 
> After I made my post I was able to see you are from Virgina. Here's a link to that states net metering law:
> 
> ...


Thanks for the URL. 

But lets just say it less than 10 KW's? would my idea work?


----------



## wy_white_wolf (Oct 14, 2004)

dennisjp said:


> Thanks for the URL.
> 
> But lets just say it less than 10 KW's? would my idea work?


In concept yes. What I'm missing and don't really know is what controlls are going to be required for safety and power quality with AC generation. Working them out could really be a nightmare. 

For starters, Like you described you'd have to work out some way of controlling the electric motor. It's going to take more power when the water isn't available and less when it is. 

How are you going to slow it down if you get a little cloudbust that overpowers the electric motor? You'll need somekind of breaking system then.

You'll also have to match voltage, Hertz, and phase of the grid. This is what grid tie inverters do on a DC system. I'm not sure what they make for a small AC system? 

Thanks for pushing my knowledge. It keeps the grey matter functioning!


----------



## Ross (May 9, 2002)

Been a long time since I looked at water wheels but if memory serves me at all they usually include a mechanical govener that opens the sluce gate if the wheel slows under load, and closes it as the amp draw comes off the generator, conserving water (power) So you get a steady service . The wheels maximum output is the hp produced under load at it's required RPM. If I can find that artical (although I think it was in a MEN book or ????) I'll post it or a source.


----------



## ace admirer (Oct 5, 2005)

the law of thermo says everytime you convert energy, you loose some to heat....so it does not pay to run a motor (electricity to magnetic ) then run through a drive system (belts or gears) mechanical energy, then a generator (mechanical to magnetic to electricity) figure a motor at maybe 93%, a belt or gear drive 75-80% a generator 93% you're down to loosing 49% of power.

the best that could be done in the example is to use water directly on waterwheel to a generator to electricity,,,even if the wheel has to be stopped to build up water... even so if i remember correctly the most efficient water wheel (overshot) is about 76% effecient...then the drive system another 75% then the generator maybe 93% so even in a pure water to electricity example the overall eff. is what 54% 

by winding the generator to produce at a lower rpm, it may be directly connected to the wheel,,,,that gets rid of the friction of a drive system...help some...thats why the new generation?(third) of wind generators use direct drive...just like the old generation(first ) dc wind generators. 1 mechanical hp = 746 watts - efficiency


----------



## wy_white_wolf (Oct 14, 2004)

ace admirer said:


> the law of thermo says everytime you convert energy, you loose some to heat....so it does not pay to run a motor (electricity to magnetic ) then run through a drive system (belts or gears) mechanical energy, then a generator (mechanical to magnetic to electricity) figure a motor at maybe 93%, a belt or gear drive 75-80% a generator 93% you're down to loosing 49% of power.
> 
> the best that could be done in the example is to use water directly on waterwheel to a generator to electricity,,,even if the wheel has to be stopped to build up water... even so if i remember correctly the most efficient water wheel (overshot) is about 76% effecient...then the drive system another 75% then the generator maybe 93% so even in a pure water to electricity example the overall eff. is what 54%
> 
> by winding the generator to produce at a lower rpm, it may be directly connected to the wheel,,,,that gets rid of the friction of a drive system...help some...thats why the new generation?(third) of wind generators use direct drive...just like the old generation(first ) dc wind generators. 1 mechanical hp = 746 watts - efficiency


Yes this is why I suggested that he generate DC in the first responce. But he wants AC generation which means he needs someway of turning a constant rpm at the generater (3600rpm).

I am answering only if want he wants to do is possible , not if it is feasable. That he will have to determine.


----------



## WisJim (Jan 14, 2004)

I had written:
http://patft.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-...1&RS=PN/4151431
(clig on the "images" link to see the actual patent documents including drawings.)



MELOC said:


> i cannot get the images. i get nothing but text and blank image pages.


Intersting. I'm at a diffferent computer and I don't get the images now, either. I know that at home I had to download a TIF reader program to view the images.


----------



## rambler (Jan 20, 2004)

dennisjp said:


> Thanks for the URL.
> 
> But lets just say it less than 10 KW's? would my idea work?


It can be made to work, but it is not feasable to actually do. Would lose money.

You are better to govern the water, and use a smaller plant that will run with water all the time at constant speed.

--->Paul


----------



## WisJim (Jan 14, 2004)

dennisjp said:


> Lets say I want to build a waterwheel to make electricity, and I don't want to make 12 volt and convert it to 120/240 volt, because I don't want the high priced 12 volt cables, convertor, batteries etc.
> <text snipped>
> What I am getting at, is keeping the generator turning at the correct speed.
> The motor wouldn't be pulling the full power when the water was up, but it would keep the speed up when the water wasn't enough to make the wheel turn the correct speed.
> ...


Years ago there was a wind generator (was it Enertech? I remember on in Door County, WI) that used an induction motor as a generator. Grid power was supplied to the motor fields and when the motor turned faster than its normal rated RPM, it generated AC power in phase with the grid power that fed the fields. This kind of set up would work with a simple control system (by simple I mean not overly complex, not simple to build out of junk in my workbench). A system like this would work for what you are describing, I think.


----------



## dennisjp (Mar 3, 2006)

Thanks WisJim,
It has been about 12 or 15 years sense I started doing some reserch on this, (I got side tracted by illness and then several other projects) and I had forgotten about using an induction motor. It seems to me that it has to be turned atleast 60 RPM faster than what it is rated for and after that, the faster it is turned the more amperage it will produce until it fries itself from being over heated.
There was a set up in Maine that was in a book that used one but it was hooked up to a pump that was used in reverse as a turbine. It used 1 CFS of water and had 225' of head and produced between ten and eleven KW and he had it set up so that it used electric heaters to do away with the excess juice. It seems to me he had a small battery bank that was charged with a trickle charger, and an inverter to excite the motor to make it produce the 60 Hz., etc. 
I got many many library books on the subject back then (I studied everything I could find at the time) and they all said that a turbine was more efficient than a water but many of them would say something like this, " A turbine is more efficient than a water wheel even though a water wheel will not need as much water as the turbine will to make the same amount of power." Now what kind of sentence is that?? That's contradictory if ever I heard it. 
I would never attempt to build one this big, but if the system I just spoke about with one cubic foot per second and 225 head had of been a 225' water
wheel, my calculations back then said it should make better than twice that much power, and while I was in the U.VA. hospital I talked to several of the professors there and gave them my calculations and all but one said I was right. The one said he hadn't had the time to look at it. 
As far as the efficiency for the drive goes, a 1725 rpm generator or a motor being turned 1785 to 1800 rpm wouldn't need to be geared much if any at all if you used a 6" wide flat belt and ran it on the perimeter of the wheel and back to a six inch wheel at the generator if you have a fairly large wheel. (20 - 24 feet).
Lets say you had a 24' wheel. 24 x .5 = 48 to one x 10rpm = 3.59 to one, and that would be the only real gearing needed and less than 4 to one isn't that much even for sprokets and chain running on pillow block bearings.. 
I drill wells for years and the drive coming off the engine (power unit as they are called on a well machine) has a flat pulley for the belt and then it goes to a wheel that is about 30" in diameter and we had to turn it when we were greasing the machine. When I was younger, (10 or 12 years old) I would try turning it as fast as I could get it to go when my father was doing something else such as trying to get the greese gun to work, LOL, and as small as I was I could get it to turning fairly fast so it can't loose that much effeciency running at the rpm's it would be running at. IMHO anyway.


----------



## Unregistered (Aug 27, 2004)

I have a question. Where are you going to get a 225' head? That is quite a drop.


----------



## Jim-mi (May 15, 2002)

Theres a bunch of availabe off the shelf--track record proven--hydroelectric generator equipment, for those who are fortunate enough to have that much head.


----------



## dennisjp (Mar 3, 2006)

Unregistered said:


> I have a question. Where are you going to get a 225' head? That is quite a drop.


That particular site was in a book about a system that was in a book I got from the library. It was in the mountains and was off the grid system. I don't think the book said how much land the man owned but it seems to me that he had to run somewhere around a half mile of pipe. It was a very informative book and I went back to the lirary to check it out again so that I could order me a copy but they no longer had it and I couldn't figure out which one it was I wanted so I lost out on it. I wpuld be happy with a tenth of that much head and still have land flat enough for a log home.


----------



## Oregonsparkie (Sep 3, 2003)

I was'nt going to add a post... but I can not help myself in this case. Almost all comments are based on our "CURRENT" understanding of physics. If Im not mistaken several ideas have been updated since their inception hundreds of years ago. Even einsteins law are now being questioned and thought to be inaccurate.

I always laugh when I hear someone with "formal" learning state that something will not work because it goes against what they have been taught.

Please dont destroy someones dream and ideas just because its the way you were taught. Who know, someone just might make that next techological step because they think just alittle different then traditional.


----------



## ace admirer (Oct 5, 2005)

Might I ask which of Einsteinâs theories (not laws yet) are being found to be inaccurate?


----------



## poorboy (Apr 15, 2006)

If it's conceivable it's possible. It's just the "how" that has to be figured out.
Travel from New York to LA in just 3-4 hrs. you naysayers would've laughed at anyone who said this was possible 150 yrs. ago. if everyone paid attention to the "can't be dones" we'd still be living in caves...:-}


----------



## DrippingSprings (Sep 22, 2004)

Ross said:


> It's not going to work because the assumption is an alternator spins easily by hand and a running motor is impossible to stop with your hand. Add a 300 amp load to the alternator and you won't spin it by hand, you'd really need almost 4 hp (guessing) to spin the altenator.


probably more. I know I made a homemade lawn mower based generator for the heck of it using a alternator off a 92 crown vic rated at 120 amp. I had to start the motor and get it redlined before it would pull that alternator.it was a 5 hp briggs


----------



## Ross (May 9, 2002)

I guess the dire warnings all have an underlying message, don't max out the credit cards trying. Perpetual motion machines aren't the worst hobby I've ever heard of, it would be fun to build a machine that defies current thinking wouldn't it! Not to mention very profitable! BTW I don't think Einsteins laws have been proven wrong but they have been proven incomplete, in some areas. A small niche left open? Well I still kinda doubt it but have fun!


----------



## dennisjp (Mar 3, 2006)

DrippingSprings said:


> probably more. I know I made a homemade lawn mower based generator for the heck of it using a alternator off a 92 crown vic rated at 120 amp. I had to start the motor and get it redlined before it would pull that alternator.it was a 5 hp briggs


Your alt. was rated at 120 amps but unless you had a 120 amp load on it, you wouldn't need that much to pull it. It sounds to me like you had a load on it that took all of the 5 hp to pull, if it was wired correctly. 
The amps or watts should match the hp out put, minus the friction. Sounds like all you had was a V-belt conection, which doesn't loose that much IMHO.


----------

