Community > Forum > Technology & Science > A flying saucer design

A flying saucer design

Posted by: klaudio - Tue Mar 13, 2007 7:15 pm
Post new topic Reply to topic
 [ 3 posts ] 
A flying saucer design 
Author Message
Spaceflight Enthusiast
Spaceflight Enthusiast
avatar
Joined: Mon Mar 12, 2007 8:31 pm
Posts: 1
Post A flying saucer design   Posted on: Tue Mar 13, 2007 7:15 pm
Hello, my name is Claudio Bianco, I am an inventor and I have just finished my last work which started as a simple electrical generator and finally turned into a flying saucer. I invite you to see its design in www.cuerdacontinua.com


Back to top
Profile
Spaceflight Participant
Spaceflight Participant
avatar
Joined: Fri Oct 21, 2005 12:42 pm
Posts: 73
Location: Washington DC
Post    Posted on: Tue Mar 13, 2007 9:06 pm
an interesting design! I must confess, however, that I am rather skeptical. Have you done any kind of empirical testing of your system of Figs. 7-9?

It seems to me that you will have several major energy losses: the viscosity of the water, and the inefficiency inherent in your air compressor.

As you are no doubt aware, an object dropped into a body of water sinks at a rate much slower than that of the same object dropped in air. the difference between the densities and viscosities of water and air are the cause. However, you are depending on the density of the water to power your ascent phase.

You will lose massive amounts of potential energy on the descent cycle to water friction, and the same amount again on the ascent cycle.

The problem on the ascent cycle, it seems, is that you are attempting to raise a weight to its original height (and corresponding gravitational potential energy) using only the energy gained from the release of the same gravitational potential energy.

The amount of work you will get from the air you pump into the reservoir during the ascent cycle is the amount of work you have to do to get that same air to the reservoir.

You're moving a weight down and storing its gravitational potential energy. you're then effectively raising the column of water above the weight, giving it gravitational potential energy. then you use the potential energy of the water column to raise the weight again. The problem, it seems, is that the energy you get from the descent of the weight will be insufficient to raise the column of water above the weight. Or, if your weight is heavy enough, the work done to raise the weight is equal to the work done by gravity to lower the weight. or alternatively, the energy required to raise the weight can only come from the energy you gained by lowering the weight. those energies are the same. plus you lose friction energy the while time.

A major problem in your equations is that you don't include the energy required to extract the water from the bell. that amount of energy is the energy required to raise the whole column of water above the bell.

- Jesse


Back to top
Profile
Spaceflight Participant
Spaceflight Participant
avatar
Joined: Mon Feb 26, 2007 7:28 am
Posts: 68
Post    Posted on: Tue Mar 13, 2007 11:21 pm
So you just invented a perpetual motion machine... sure sure. I think perhaps you should brush up on the second law of thermodynamics some time.


Back to top
Profile
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 3 posts ] 
 

Who is online 

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 14 guests


© 2014 The International Space Fellowship, developed by Gabitasoft Interactive. All Rights Reserved.  Privacy Policy | Terms of Use