My theory for energy production

[Jason Lickliter]

I'm sorry for my website. I have just started it to get some feed back and new ideas about my theory.

My site is a bootstrap template. I got the code online from a tutorial online. The slide show was made with PowerPoint online. The basic phpbb forums are working.

Http://www.selfenergygroup.org

After looking at the 26 slides some questions to ask are could you use water pressure to spin a turbine style fan attached to a wind power motor to produce energy? There is a water resistant generator called the water cannon. At $500 a piece there not cheap. So could water pressure spin this motor at or close to 3600 rpms that would produce 2500 watts?

Lowe's sells a electric pressure washer that has 1600psi at 15 amps. for $100. So even if we use 400 psi and per motor and 4 motors could we reach 3600 rpm with 400psi? That would be 10,000 watts at a cost of 15 amps or so. Would that power a home? Could a pressure washer or something run 24/7 without breaking in a week? Or at least long enough to make this usable?

I don't know but be fun to find out.

[Rob Beckers]

Jason, welcome to the Green Power Talk forums!

I've moved your message to its own thread. Hijacking someone else's topic with something entirely different is frowned upon online.

Clearly you spent time setting up a new Web site, making the slides, and thinking about your energy production system. That's to be applauded, and I would like to see more people show as much initiative!

I read and watched your slides: If I understand things correctly what you propose is to run a pump to pressurize water, use that water to spin a water turbine, use the energy from that turbine to feed back to the grid or run the pump, etc.

Trouble is that it won't work, or rather, you will get less energy out than you have to put in. A really good pump, if I remember the numbers right, is about 60% efficient. So, if you put 10,000 Watt in, the water stream will end up with 6,000 Watt in power. That water turbine will be no more than 40% efficient either, so now 6,000 Watt is turned into 2,400 Watt. The machine only produces 2,400 Watt while gobbling up 10,000 Watt, and you will make the power company very happy!

As a general class, these are called "over-unity" or "perpetual motion" machines (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Perpetual_motion) because the expectation is that they produce more energy than is put in. People come up with very convoluted schemes, yours is a relatively simple one in comparison, but at the end of the day they all violate the laws of thermodynamics (if they worked).

As Heinlein put it, "There Aint No Such Thing As A Free Lunch" (TANSTAAFL). Nobody has yet managed to make energy out of thin air, or make more energy out of less. The best we've managed is to use the 'free' sources of energy nature provides, and I use that loosely since the energy may be free, but turning it into a form that is useful for us sure isn't. That is wind, solar, and tidal energy, as you noted in your slides.

-RoB-

[Jason Lickliter]

I didn't even know I was hijacking sorry about that.

Yeah I didn't know really if this would work at all. Seems like a sound theory but I didn't really know much about the science behind it?

So you think 400psi of water pressure can't work do too using to much energy to make it useable? I have also the idea to use a electric pressure washer that needs 15amps and produces 1600psi. So would 15 amps be to much to produce power for 4 wind turbine motors? How about 6 or 8? If all I'm going to get is 2400 watts then yes this is bust and fail.

I do understand to make energy you have to use energy. Like nuclear uses energy to make a chain reaction to produce tons of energy. That's a good example of low cost energy use to supply tons of electricity.

[Jason Lickliter]

The funny thing is about this system you would need a way to start it and a power source would be needed until its up to full speed and can produce on its own.

[Jason Lickliter]

How fast could 400psi spin a generator that has a turbine style fan? Could it do 3600 rpms? How fast is it?

[Jason Lickliter]

I need some smart people that reply with it won't work. I am glad you responded. I am really sorry about that hi Jack thing. I don't spend a lot of time on forums at all. When I do i tend to break the rules as some I have no Idea what they are until I break them.

You understand this better than me. I already mention that I could be blind to simple facts of why this won't work in the slide show you watched, so it should have been understood as well that I would also be blind to more difficult or scientific terms and facts.

[Jason Lickliter]

So 110 volt at 10,000 watts is around something like 86amps. So right of the bat you lose 15amps. 5 more you lost a room in your home. Most around 20amps from what I seen in breaker boxes.

Sure would have been nice if 400psi would melt that wind turbine motor that dose that energy production. I would pop in Lowe's website and buy that 1600psi pressure washer to build say the prototype and cut that pressure 6 or 8 ways using the sprayer that's used in them. Then spray 6 or 8 motors and see how fast I can get them running.

Man I hate thermodynamics.

[Jason Lickliter]

So how about a dc/a.c. converter. I know you messed with them and maybe even build one of those. How effective are they? Would I have energy loss in the conversion as well?

[Jason Lickliter]

Sorry for all the questions I would just like to know the answers. I prefer in a way that's easy to understand. I don't know them either but that's why I'm going thru the trouble before me or really anyone should attempt this. I just never heard of such a thing so has it been tried? Hell even on paper with math formulas or like what you said about thermodynamics.

All I know for sure I have not seen anything like this at all even attempted and could it be done and how?

[Jason Lickliter]

I still don't understand this.

Heinlein put it, "There Aint No Such Thing As A Free Lunch" (TANSTAAFL). Nobody has yet managed to make energy out of thin air, or make more energy out of less. The best we've managed is to use the 'free' sources of energy nature provides, and I use that loosely since the energy may be free, but turning it into a form that is useful for us sure isn't. That is wind, solar, and tidal energy, as you noted in your slides.

Free lunch and energy out of nothing? I have 15amp cost to produce energy? That's not free.

[Jason Lickliter]

Ok maybe your never going to respond idk. I may be to simple minded for you. Oh well this is open to anyone who can answer one simple question for me. How fast can 400psi of water spin a wind turbine gerenator. The generator used need the 3 simple rules used in wind power. 1. High output with low rpms. 2. Shaft needs to be easy to turn. 3. Low cost to be affordable. Attach a turbine style fan like what is used in hydro electric systems. Maybe a 5" or 10" not sure on size. See how many rpms there are. That's all I want to know.

Someone out there has to have some type of pressure washer and a wind turbine generator and some crafty way to spin it with water but don't get any in the generator. Or just spin a shaft without the motor with the same friction on it.

How many rpms is it?

[Jason Lickliter]

Oh crap. Just dawn on me. This is a diy forum. Guess I should do it myself and report back. Silly me.

[Rob Beckers]

Hi Jason,

It takes time for people to read and respond. This is not a telephone conversation where the other side hears immediately what you say and responds. Many forum members only check back every couple of days... :nuts:

You're mixing up psi (pressure) with power and/or energy. It's not. On top of that, this is much simpler at its basis: You have to first add the energy you're getting out, and what you get back is LESS than what you put in. That is why it won't work.

At the very, very best you can convert one form of energy into another at 100%. It's never more than that, and 99.99% of the time you get less (of the desired form of) energy than you put in.

So in your case, you convert electrical energy to energy in water pressure and flow (at FAR less than 100% efficiency), then convert that water flow back into electrical energy (again at FAR less than 100%). You don't get back what you put in, only a fraction of it. And so this comes to a grinding halt...

-RoB-

[Jason Lickliter]

Ok fair enough. You got any input on how many rpms it produced with the 400psi? Or a good guess just by thinking about it? Kinda really just looking for data really.

[Jason Lickliter]

Like 300 rpms is a fail. I'm man enough to admit if this is the data I get.

[Jason Lickliter]

Without this data I can not judge my theory with generic answers and text book science. I can judge it by data. Real data that was done in the real world.

[Jason Lickliter]

Ok sorry. This is the data I need. I just think someone else can get to it before me. If it's high rpms is it a failure yet? Maybe. If it's low rpms it's a total disaster. You have to agree with that right.

[Jason Lickliter]

You mentioned a good pump with 60% efficiency if you remember the numbers correctly. What was the spec. On that. Like voltage it ran on, amps to power it, psi created, and so on.

[Jason Lickliter]

Well yeah I understand I won't receive 100% There are forces and laws in nature that will make sure I receive a fraction of that. I just want to know for sure before moving forward what is that number? Data is the only real way to be sure we don't apply wrong information here. 400psi (and yes I won't actually have 400psi no matter how I split it up) sound like a lot. Maybe enough to reach 3600 rpm. I don't have a lot of experience using water pressure as I used a lot of air pressure before and understand what 400psi of that might be like.

I did use a pressure washer before on a job and it sure dose have a lot of pressure out one sprayer I know that.

[Jason Lickliter]

If I put a hand crank on a wind power generator and spin it that I'm using force to do so. That would be measured in hp but it still relates to science of applied force.

Pressure washer would need 15amps sure but it still applies 400 pounds per square inch of force.

I thought thermodynamics is related to thermal energy so not really seeing where this applies. You use it as an example that this will consume more than it can generate but no body has ever done this.

If they have please speak up.

So if 400psi can spin the turbine at 3600rpm then that's one of many bridges crossed.

In a way I hope it dosnt cause taking 1600psi and splitting 4 or 6 or 8 ways sound extremely dangerous to me.

15 amps burnt off the bat really seems low cost amps to use but I'm not at that bridge now am i.

[Jason Lickliter]

What if we find out that 400psi of water can go faster or maybe we need 2000psi divide by 4 so 500psi per motor was needed?

If it does go faster than 3600rpms we can add more motors
6 is 15,000watts 8 is 20,000 so 15amps don't sound like much with these numbers. Just thought it might be a good idea to find out for sure cause nobody has as far as I know.

[Jason Lickliter]

There are other energy systems based on the science of applied force. So why this so crazy?

[Jason Lickliter]

As I mentioned in the slides I did get one positive response and yes it don't hold a lot of weight but that man was a nuclear engineer. In the military. I don't know his skill level but he did prove a photographic memory to me so I thought this was my best chance to get an answer from someone with smarts and some background with some form of huge energy sources. He said it might work.

Notice he didn't say it would. Neither am I.

But anyway what's your background. I figure it's easier to ask as I know it's more than mine. But I like to use my time wisely.

[Jason Lickliter]

I hate doing this kind of stuff but look at this link and you should be able to see at lease one type of science here in that list when you scroll down. I see more than one type of science here that applies to my theory.

http://www.physicsclassroom.com/class/newtlaws/Lesson-2/Types-of-Forces

7 years of homework. Wow someone else could of caught on sooner faster and already proved or disproved this by now if I said something sooner.

But we still sit here with no data and no answers.

[Jason Lickliter]

I love science and building things. I don't always like building things that everyone does or already has unless it fills a need that I have.

Ever use a space flight simulator? Not real easy to learn how to move around in space. It puts things in more perspective.
Took me awhile to reach mars orbit and I had instruction on how to do so from the internet. It was the 2- 3 correction burns I had to make that I didn't quite understand. Even in zero gravity gravity can still effect you. It throws your space ship off course and the entire time your weight less. You travel in arcs while spinning around in orbit. Sure a lot different then how most people travel on earth.

[Jason Lickliter]

Well the sun Joe 2000 psi model looks attractive to apply higher force but price point is $150 but using 14.5 might as well say still 15 amps.

Are they listing false information? The other model had 1600 psi 15 amp. More force but same energy used?

How much force is needed to produce usable energy from a wind turbine motor?

[Jason Lickliter]

I was doing a little surfing on the web and ran across this and it said

"The optimum number of blades for a wind turbine depends on the job the turbine has to do. Turbines for generating electricity need to operate at high speeds, but do not need much turning force. These machines generally have three or two blades. On the other hand, wind pumps need turning force but not much speed and therefore have many blades."

So for electric production you don't need a lot of force but high speeds. 400psi is a lot of force that can create high speeds.

[Jason Lickliter]

So since I don't need a lot of force then what happens when you do apply a lot of force? High speeds of how many rpms?

Sure you don't want to attach something that looks like a water wheel to a wind turbine motor and blast it with a lot of force? It dosnt need a lot but high speed is a must. So use a lot of force. Simple.

[Jason Lickliter]

With a wind turbine with these high blades rotate at 15- 20 rpms. Dosnt sound like much but given the diameter of the circle they create that's high speed at the shaft of the wind turbine gerenator. So it produces good energy to use.

That's real world science that's works.

My nutty ass suggests that if you use a smaller diameter part more designed for water and apply a lot of force to make the speed you could chain generators together to produce lots of electric from a working system that dosnt need much force at all. So slam it with tons of force to produce tons of electric. Any body tried that to see what you get.

Oh yeah a system that fails.

[Jason Lickliter]

Now you can't just keep pounding the system with force and expect the same increase with gain. This system has limits just don't know where. It's like you can't keep adding motors to a car frame and expect it to keep adding 300hp. Just dosnt work that way.

Still a solid question to ask if said system dosnt require much force at all but high speed needs to be achieved then increase force to see if you can reach high speeds until the gain levels off. This is your max. Adding more is pointless at this level.

[Jason Lickliter]

Now using the car frame idea with two motor. Each at 300 hp. If the first motor that produces 300hp and adding the second 300hp motor dosnt produce 600hp then why not.

Well I do know that the first motor makes 300hp using gas sprayed by injectors and added spark creates an explosion with a lot of force. This force creates high speed movement of a piston. There chained together to create v4, v6, v8 and v12. Notice how the motor works? High force creates high speed. Chain together pistons to create energy. Adding the second motor yields in smaller gains cause system is using high force and high speed already so system gain levels off and 1 motor is close to max already. So little gain with second motor.

See how I suggest something new but only cause it does work in other systems that produce energy and power in abundance to solve a need.

[Jason Lickliter]

Using science of applied force to get the most out of a system always seem to be high force creating high speed. Once achivied then adding more will yield little gain cause said system is at almost max anyway.

Wind power uses low force to achieve high speed so do what to the system and sending gain to almost max? Try increasing force to reach high speed then chain generators together to reach almost max gain.

[Jason Lickliter]

You always need to reinvent the wheel if the wheel dosnt reach max gain. Wind power dosnt reach max gain. It uses low force with high speed. We want high force with high speed. Like the energy system we use everyday. If you find one not reaching max gain like I did. Then do something to reach max gain.

[Jason Lickliter]

In mid September I will have my prototype. I will be working some overtime during the texas a&m games. I will get my data unless someone beats me too it before then.

Your basic. It's not hard to look at a gas car motor to understand how force creates high speed and chain this reaction together and you get energy. How dose thermodynamics make the car motor work? We don't need gas for high force and high speed and chain pistons together to make energy. Use the wind turbine motors. High force and high speed chain them together.

It works in other energy systems but some magical thermo whatever will somehow suck up 10,000 watts leaving me dead in the water.

Have fun with your low force high speed energy production you seem to know so much about. I'm done with you. I have to build a high force high speed chainable plenty of power system that no one has tried or even thought of based on real world working energy systems. Have fun learning all types of stuff people tell you. I on the other hand want to do something new and try to address a system to make it better so it can achieve its max. I do see a solid solution to a problem in the wind system that can be improved. You don't want to move forward cause your to busy learning what everyone else already figured out.

You just shouldn't tell someone it fails when no one has answers or never address the problem or you never did it yourself. You just throw around generic figures with no data and slap some hoaky examples at me with math figures about watts and effective percent of some crap and expect me to say your right what was I thinking?

Later.

[Dave Schwartz]

The fundamental flaw in your reasoning is that you are confusing the units you are measuring, and it doesn't help when the errors compound through multiple conversions that don't recognize this. To calculate the available energy at each stage, you have to include all the factors and also be using and converting them correctly.

For example, PSI is a static quantity and doesn't tell you anything about the energy content (a dynamic quantity). To calculate the energy of a flowing medium you need the pressure, rate of flow and density (and probably a few others) in order to calculate the energy content. A pressure washer trades one of these (increase of pressure) for another (decreased rate of flow) and, combining that with the energy loss in the heat and noise of the electrical motor and water pump, guarantees that the energy content of the output stream is less than the energy you consumed to create it.

Similarly, the speed of rotation of a turbine says nothing about the quantity of energy that could be extracted. You can spin up a mylar pinwheel with a puff of your breath but there isn't a lot of power in it. An easy way to think about that is that you can stop the pinwheel by sticking your finger in with little damage to your finger. If there was a lot of power there it would have sliced off your finger and kept going. The ability to overcome this resistance is essentially the torque that the medium flowing through the turbine imparts to the shaft.

If the resistance presented by the generator (the output power, which is volts times amps, plus some internal losses) requires more torque to overcome than the flowing medium can impart via the turbine then the whole thing will grind to a halt. This is the principle some wind turbines use to prevent overspeed of the blades in high wind... they either add a large 'dump load' to the output or simply short the output (an infinite dump load) to cause the generator's torque requirement to exceed that which the blades are giving thus causing the blades to turn very slowly or stop).

It seems that someone comes along every few weeks with one of these 'over-unity' schemes which they have deceived themselves into believing is viable because they don't have the scientific background to recognize these errors.

[Jason Lickliter]

Thanks for reply. So do you have any idea how fast that turbine I suggest will spin using 400 psi of water pressure? Even a good guess off the top of your head will work. I won't hold you too it just want your input on this question.

[Jason Lickliter]

You see I'm looking for some data that supports the science you throw at me. So when I have this data I'm in better position to decide if it's a fail or not. With out real world doing something and then show it. It dosnt hold any weight we still sit here debating.

[Jason Lickliter]

It's not I don't want to believe you I just want you to prove yourself. I do get your response from tons of people that can't prove it dosnt work. Like I said I'll get the data but it's going to take me a month or two where I know someone can deliver it faster.

[Jason Lickliter]

I just need someone that could show me why it dosnt work with proof. Or just find out how fast 400psi of water could spine the generator and if it's enough rpms I'll show you how to keep building on this theory until we find a major fail like cost it too high so it's a fail, or the durability isn't any good so it's not usable so fail.


Where the proof? What data do you have?

[Jason Lickliter]

How many rpms could I get? 20, 50, 100?

[Jason Lickliter]

Are you saying this isn't important? Rpm or speed of the motor dosnt matter?

[Jason Lickliter]

Or your saying what I suggest won't be enough to get usable electrity with a lot better systems already in place so it's a fail.

[Jason Lickliter]

So it's like me blowing on it to rotate it but produce almost no electric. So that's what my theory suggests. Compared to a wind turbine that's doing the job way better. I think I understand you better now if this is what your getting at?

[Jason Lickliter]

That's what Rob was telling me. I won't produce better or even close to what is already in place and working. Bottom line.

[Jason Lickliter]

I understand the wind power braking system. High winds slow it down. That's cause you using 1 motor.

[Dave Schwartz]

Slow down buddy.

I don't think you understood anything I said.

You could build a small, light turbine that you could probably spin up to 20,000 or 30,000 rpm with a high-pressure (low volume) water jet. You could probably stop that with your finger without too much damage. Now, build one large and heavy enough to be capable of withstanding the energy it would have to convert from flowing water (a lot more than one 1600-psi jet) to the shaft torque required to turn a generator producing 10,000 watts. With just the same water jet you used to spin up the little turbine, it will probably take you many minutes to spin up the big turbine (overcoming its rotational inertia) to a much lower speed (10's of RPM maybe). Over that time, you will have stored enough rotational energy in the turbine that if you tried to stop it with your finger it would probably take off your whole hand to the wrist.

Yes, you could probably get an instantaneous 10,000 watts out of a generator applied to the shaft of the big turbine but the tiny amount of torque being added by the water jet won't be nearly sufficient to keep the shaft turning at the rate the generator would need to put out that 10,000 watts - it will stop very quickly (like when you jammed your arm in the blades). Now you have to disconnect the load, wait for the water jet to spin up the turbine again and then reconnect your generator to get another burst of energy. Over an hour, you'll probably end up getting a few hundred watt-HOURS (if you're lucky) meanwhile, you've paid your power company for 1700 watt-HOURS to run your pressure washer.

Its power x time (watt-hours) that you pay your power company for not instantaneous power (watts).

You asked me to prove a negative, which is not possible and is the way nearly anyone who doesn't understand their own argument deceives themselves. What I can do is stand on the shoulders of great scientists and well-established theories with real mathematics which have never been proven incorrect to have the utmost confidence to say that your scheme cannot possibly work.

Man's got to know his limitations.

[Jason Lickliter]

Low force with high speed and 1 motor needs a braking system. High force with high speed needs more than 1 motor chained together and that is it's braking system but it's not slowing any thing down it's adding.

[Jason Lickliter]

Ok good point.

[Jason Lickliter]

We don't understand each other. I think it can be proven wrong. I think you already did with facts. So there you go.

[Jason Lickliter]

Is there a way to close topic?

[Jason Lickliter]

https://www.physicsforums.com/threads/force-needed-to-turn-a-windmill-generator.540966/

That's the math answer I was looking for. Btw if you still think his or yours still applies to my theory that's fine cause some of it does but I'm not building what any of this suggests now am i.

[Joe Blake]

Is there a way to close topic?

Just stop posting.