Buoyancy loop

[Matos de Matos]

Hi Everybody

This is one possible configuration to use buoyancy to restore the force.
The sketch is self explanatory.
Thank you
David

[Harvey]

Valve 4 should connect at the bottom just to the right of the piston. This way the water will fill from the bottom up and push the air out the bleeder valve 7.

If valve 6 were connected to city water pressure then the P-Air in tank A will definitely shuttle the piston but the pressure values need to be worked out along with the velocity of water in riser pipe connecting valve 1 to the micro hydro turbine (or perhaps a Tesla Turbine) to ensure the extra height. Perhaps a vortex tube riser . This suggested configuration would introduce new water into the system however

Otherwise energy must be provided to compress the air in the tank.

Also, there will need to be a fine balance found that allows proper displacement to give buoyancy on the left while affording enough weight to push the entire head of water up the riser.

Very interesting mechanism

[Matos de Matos]

Otherwise energy must be provided to compress the air in the tank.

Also, there will need to be a fine balance found that allows proper displacement to give buoyancy on the left while affording enough weight to push the entire head of water up the riser.

Very interesting mechanism

Hi Harvey:

Thank you for the inputs.

You are right, the size of weight and the size of the air pocket on the piston need a good balancing to ensure that the piston reaches bottom.
Vacuum instead of air in the piston? Probably it will change the pressure of the riser, due to air-vacuum buoyancy on the way down, but will help the piston going up.

The city water is a gain, because we do not have to use part of the pressured water to push the piston in place on the top. A purge to maintain the water level will be need if city water is used.
Yes, the filling on the bottom will facilitate the air bleeding.

It looks promising and probably one way to show free energy using buoyancy.
Thank you
David

[ashtweth]

David your concept works!
Air , water =Pressure gradients according to hidro
Hidro Online

Ash

[Harvey]

Thanks Ash - very nice


I was hoping to see some stats on the required pressure and input energy for that - but I like what I saw

[Harvey]

Recursive Buoyancy Loop

Here is a concept I came up with in 2006 after Ferrofluid became popular.

I never built the prototype or did any testing on the ability of the fluid to pass the movers without losing any of the heavy blue liquid required for a good drive force. But I do think it has a functional feasibility.

Zoom Image

[Matos de Matos]

David your concept works!
Air , water =Pressure gradients according to hidro
Hidro Online

Ash

Hi Ash:

Thank you for the info.
That is a nice setup they have, and with a 400% Net Electrical Energy output / Actual Energy Input.

http://www.hidroonline.com/pdf/1MW-Module.pdf

I am wonder if is considered a perpetual machine, or gravity it will be consider a renewable energy like wind and solar.

Thank you
David

[Matos de Matos]

Here is a concept I came up with in 2006 after Ferrofluid became popular.

Hi Harvey:

I think that your design is better than mine and Hidroīs.
You do not have air transfers or holding time to fill the tank as in my idea.
You only have put a solenoid on the tip of each weight to soften the magnetorheological fluid that is solid due to the permanent magnets.

Your design does not need that much height and you can use a lot of weights in a row.
Congratulations,

David

[Matos de Matos]

I never built the prototype or did any testing on the ability of the fluid to pass the movers without losing any of the heavy blue liquid required for a good drive force. But I do think it has a functional feasibility.

Hi Harvey:
If the friction of the weight crossing the ferrofluid is less than 25% of the total work, you have a machine that shall be developed.
My perception is that a 15 Kw generator will fit on the back yard and can be the support for a parasol.
It seems to me that will be a good fuelless home generator.
Africa needs an electric generator like this, and it seems that can be built very affordable.
Thank you
David

Parasol.JPG

PS. Like Gravity now, do you think that, one day, if free energy is found in heat engines, heat will be consider a renewable energy?

[Matos de Matos]

Hi Harvey:

My apologies to insist, but my country needs a electric generator for single houses like your idea, due to lack of electric grid. 5 to 10 KVA diesel cheap Chinese generators are sold by the thousands.
You should consider enter the GE GE: Ecomagination Challenge: Home because this device has a high possibility to be a winner and be developed.
Again my apologies,

Thank you
David
Parasol1.JPG

[Harvey]

Zoom Info

There is something about this that I read before as to why it cannot work . . .

IIRC, the energy needed to insert the bottle into the bottom is equal to the energy required to move the bottle from the top to the bottom underwater. I just cannot recall it exactly.

Let us say that our water depth is 5 bottles deep. If 5 bottles moves the distance of one bottle, then they will have done the same work as 1 bottle moving the distance of 5. If this is the case, then the system is balanced and will have no advantage

I tried to model this in PHUN and it failed miserably even with zero friction balls and seal. There is something about inserting that low density material at the bottom of the water stack that just doesn't work right. The water will always be trying to escape through that entrance point.

I think we are missing something here in the fluid dynamics, but like my son says - build it and see.


EDIT:
Uh Oh - it is already patented fails to work:
Theory of buoyancy used in perpetual motion

[Matos de Matos]

Uh Oh - it is already patented fails to work:

Hi Harvey:

Yes, the force to break the bottom pressure barrier is significant and will balance out.

I tough about something like the image attached, (the weight is lighter than air) and I wonder if the magnet cancels the pressure inside of the ferrofluid due to the atmospheric pressure, as it cancels gravity.

So, we are back to my idea, and I do not see any drawbacks, yet.

Thank you
David

Parasol2.JPG

[Harvey]

Here is a question:

First the parameters:
Imagine we have a hollow pipe sealed at both ends. The end cap is flat, such that if placed against a flat surface, very little water could get between it and that surface. Let the pipe be of sufficient length that it exceeds the depth of a pool of water. Let the pool of water have a very flat bottom.

Now, insert that pipe into the water such that it is perfectly plumb, vertically. Press it all the way down to the bottom of the pool. Ensure that no water remains between the end cap and the pool bottom.

Now the question:
What will the buoyancy of the pipe be?

According to fluid dynamics the pipe will not be buoyant because it will have equal pressure on all sides and no pressure on the bottom. It would be in a state of equilibrium.

But the slightest upward movement would rush the pressure into the space between the end cap and the pool bottom and all of the force of the pool water pressure would become present on that end cap. The pipe would shoot out of the pool with full force as the pressure accelerates it.

I have been pondering the use of an airlock as well as the difference between a disc on its edge verses a disc that is flat within a pressurized liquid of higher density.

If an airlock were used, and an IRIS type gate used to open and close the airlock, a buoy could be inserted into the airlock at the bottom of a tank, the tank could be flooded and then a top gate opened to allow the buoy to surface. The water loss would be that value of water which fills the differential space between the buoy and the airlock. That waste water could be pumped back to the tank with little effort using a small solar pump or whatever so the waste water is not an issue. The mechanisms to open the gates would have a lateral force, so they would not work against the pressures involved.

I may draw a concept later - unless you grasp it and beat me to it Essentially, a vertical conveyor under water with captures for the buoys. When the buoy has surfaced, then it could easily thrown over the side of the tank with a different mechanism employed using the gravitational fall energy to secure it back in the airlock. It sounds too good to be true . . . where is my mistake?

[Matos de Matos]

[B]

I may draw a concept later - unless you grasp it and beat me to it Essentially, a vertical conveyor under water with captures for the buoys. When the buoy has surfaced, then it could easily thrown over the side of the tank with a different mechanism employed using the gravitational fall energy to secure it back in the airlock. It sounds too good to be true . . . where is my mistake?

Hi Harvey
Is this what you are thinking?
David
Sketch 6.JPG

PS:

I think that wonīt work, unless we prevent the air lock to be flooded, but then we will not have the pressure to push the buoyant up.
The volume of the chamber has to be, to balance, equal to the volume of water displaced, and that water has to weigh the same than the buoyant.
It seems to me that the free fall of the buoyant will not pump the water in the flooded airlock to the top of the tank.
Thank you
David

[Matos de Matos]

Hi Harvey

I am stuck with the time. How long will take the weight (500 Kg) to pressure water by gravity at height of 5m in tank with 0,2827 m2 of area?
In the Hyper Physics analysis Pressure Pressure I assume that the displacement from the hydraulic press is per one second, and takes 1 hour to reach the bottom.
To long, isnīt?
I am assuming that the work done in the curves, on top and bottom to connect to the lift side is for drag, other losses and to push the piston in place on the top.
I would like to hear your opinion on it?
Is it worth to apply it at GE contest?
Thank you
David

Sketch 7.JPG