Open Systems

[tinman]

initially you did some work to raise the pressure in the tank, but conveniently ignore this in your specification of the 'system').

Absolute rubbish.
The work done to raise the pressure in tank A IS the stored energy in tank A. The efficiency of the compressor to perform this work has nothing at all to do with the efficiency of the DUT.

The best you will be able to achieve is that you can extract energy from the system equal to the amount of work performed to pressurise it initially,

Wrong.
The numbers Mark crunched on the DUT fitted with the venturi show's a 10% increase of energy above that of the starting value. This stored energy can now perform more usful work than that of the energy amount we started with.

Of course you can draw in extra energy from the environment by using some or all of the stored potential the cylinder at 40 psi. Then what?

Are you kiding me -->What next
Here you say it is possable to draw in extra energy from the enviroment,and then you ask !!Then what!!
Then we have more energy than what we started with. With this extra energy now avaliable,do you not think it possable that tank A can now be restored to it's original starting pressure,and we still have some stored energy left over in tank B?-->or dose this extra energy just up and vanish?

To be useful you have to be able to recompress that cylinder without using any FURTHER external work

See above statement.

You need to specify a CYCLE and plot temperature vs pressures around the FULL cycle.  The work done per cycle is the area contained within that plot.  To measure just say the expansion phase as you are here is meaningless in terms of determining the overall efficiency.

It's not meaningless at all. There is no point in going further until we have an increase in energy. This is like asking how fast the car go's before you know if the engine run's.

[tinman]

Tinman suffers a mental block in that he claims he can peroform work from the internal energy of a gas volume without losing the commensurate energy from that gas volume.  Tinman insists on his claim in contravention to two hundred years of thermodynamics and numerous patient explanations.  Anyone can suffer a mental block. I tire of tinman's habit of leaving out detail for whatever reason when he asks for opinions or calculations.  It is a waste of everyone's time.  I admire that he does experiments.  For experiments to be meaningful they must be fully and openly described along with the data obtained and the control experiments run.Yes, tinman described one apparatus and an experiment and then offered data from a quite different apparatus.  Then tinman objected when evaluation of the data he offered stated that the data was unreasonable for the apparatus that he had described.  Well, duh, the data did not come from the apparatus he described and so there is no surprise that it was spotted as unreasonable based on what he described.If anyone wants ot conduct experiments and have those experiments reviewed then they need to describe their experiments accurately.  You make an assumption and perhaps tinman did as well that the difference in apparatus did not matter.  Well, obviously it did matter.That's one point of view and there are a number of circumstances under which it would be true in practice.  However, it is also true that the ability of the system to perform useful work decreased as a result of the operation, outside air admission notwithstanding.We have a starting condition of air at 40psi gauge in a 10l tank.  Later we have 16.2psi gauge in 30l.  PV product looks bigger doesn't it?  So, can we now do the same thing again and end up with 50l at 11 or 12psi?  Then 70 at say 9 or 10 psi gauge?  Now for the really big question:    If we can then we have found a way to harvest heat energy from a single temperature reservoir of the outside air, have broken the second law of thermodynamics on a macro scale and can theoretically devise engines that will never need fuel and will combat global warming.  Wouldn't that all be great stuff?  There's just that one little problem:  Entropy.

TinMan disnt suffer any mental block !thank you!
I posted a sketch of the changes to the device. The sole purpose is to draw in energy from the enviroment(the open system),and increase the overall energy within the system.

The mental block is not on my side Mark,as you seem to be missing what was just achieved by adding the venturi to the system. The venturi effect was enabled by the gas flow from tank A. Work was being done due to the fact that the gas from the enviroment was being accelerated from a static point,through the venturi itself. Gas has mass,and work is done to accelerate a mass. The result was we had a situation where X amount of energy was supplied,and we ended up with Y amount of energy-a higher value of stored energy within the two tanks.

Can we then take our higher volume, lower pressure gas and use it to reconstitute the 40psi gauge in the same or another 10l tank with anything left over?

I believe yes,and this is why i asked you to crunch those last numbers for me-->so as i can show how tank A can be lifted back up to the starting pressure with tank B still having some pressurised gas left in it. Remember that tank A dose not have to be filled from scratch,as it still has 18psi of gas within it. Tank B which is twice the volume of tank A also hase 18psi of gas stored within it.
All i needed was those numbers so as i could calculate the needed rams to recompress tank A back to 40 psi from 18 psi. We have gained energy within the system,so there is no reason at all that tank A cannot be lifted back to it's starting pressure. As we now have a lower pressure to opperate any rams,we need to increase the size of the rams efective area to achieve the same force that can be supplied from the ram.

I am sure you want me to post the whole device and it's opperations-->but this just isnt going to happen until we have the completed device. So i ask that you work with the numbers i supply to you ,and that will be as has been-->the temperatures and pressures of each tank. The only energy entering the system will be enviromental energy,and the whole purpose of this project is to turn enviromental energy into usable energy. I know we can do this already with solar pannels,wind generators,and the like's-->but show me one that can do it 24 hours a day regardless of temperature,day/night or wind. We do have one of these already,and that is tidal power,but there seems to be few of these power generating systems being used.

The DUT is now as it was describe to be,consisting of the two tanks and a ram. There are ofcourse hoses,valves and fittings in the setup,but that is it. So as i claimed,i will use that ram to do usful work,and raise the energy level in the two tanks at the same time. I think you would agree that compressing gas is work being done.

[Floor]

@Tinman

Nice work, and thank you for it.

I of course, hope that it continues to pan out well, and have every confidence that
as allways, you will  to let the data tell the story.

@Others

Chill out,  Tinman HAS NOT claimined OU.  but rather he is exploreing a NOVEL approch to
tapping into a potential energy source.  WTF

                       best wishes
                                  floor

[LibreEnergia]

HAS NOT claimined OU.  but rather he is exploreing a NOVEL approch to
tapping into a potential energy source.  WTF
          best wishes
                                  floor

I'm sorry but I don't see anything 'novel' here. It is not doing anything that has not been well understood the science of thermodynamics for two centuries. 

If this system could cycle as he believes it would, then that would be a clear second law violation, and that by definition is 'OU'.

[LibreEnergia]

Are you kiding me -->What next
Here you say it is possable to draw in extra energy from the enviroment,and then you ask !!Then what!!
Then we have more energy than what we started with. With this extra energy now avaliable,do you not think it possable that tank A can now be restored to it's original starting pressure,and we still have some stored energy left over in tank B?-->or dose this extra energy just up and vanish?

Yup that is exactly what I am saying. No matter what you do you will not be able to restore tank A to it's original starting position.

The only situation where you could approach that situation would be if the gas was expanded in a reversible adiabatic manner.

However, IF you did that you could also NOT draw any extra energy into the system.  I know you don't believe it, but such a statement has two hundred years of thermodynamic theory and experimentation to back it up.