Gravity Mill - any comments to this idea?

[prajna]

I'm too busy with this to check your calculations there, Stefan.  My gut feeling is that the physics will be much the same with a diver system as with ELSA.  Parts of it may be easier to impliment and other parts more difficult.  We shal have to see as it develops.

By the way, I have updated my ELSA page.  It seems to produce more energy than I had anticipated.

http://declarepeace.org.uk/elsa/

[tbird]

@TBird, any news about  your experiment ?
Did you try to setit already up ?

hi stefan,  i have been working all afternoon (just quit) on the test.  sure am glad i don't have to work for a living.  nobody in their right mind would pay me for the work i have done on the setup.  to prove my point, piston i made was too big to fit the pipe.  i couldn't believe it.  it's plastic pipe, so sanding it down to fit is very slow.  as soon as a little friction (sanding) builds up, the pipe gets soft and the sandpaper gets stuck on it.  not all is my fault.  the pipe is not perfect either.  looks good, but with a close fit like i have, the imperfections show up.  if tomorrow morning things don't look up, i'll build a different design (try to incorporate styrofoam).  nobody hates this delay more than me, but i'm not giving up.

tbird

[hartiberlin]

I'm too busy with this to check your calculations there, Stefan.  My gut feeling is that the physics will be much the same with a diver system as with ELSA.  Parts of it may be easier to impliment and other parts more difficult.  We shal have to see as it develops.

By the way, I have updated my ELSA page.  It seems to produce more energy than I had anticipated.

http://declarepeace.org.uk/elsa/

Hi Pranja, good work,
but the problem I see is, if we really get the water 2 Meters up.
If you look at your old drawing with the header pipe above the main tube
you can see, that the upwards forces are "compensated" at the top of the main tube
and there only push against the main tube walls !
Only the small area of the exit header pipe will get the upwards
pressure of the lifting water...
so it is clear that the hydrostatic paradoxon is at work and
we can only lift the water as high in the exit header tube as high
as the shuttle itsself is high...
So you will never get 2 Meters of height !

ONLY IF YOU MAKE THE MAIN TUBE STATIC !
But what happens, if you close the main tube and make
the main tube able to move upwards together with the shuttle ?
Then we are are to move all water upwards over the shuttle I guess
as the sealevel airpressure can not come into the main tube and
we are able to lift it all up until we compensate the air pressure
with the water weight.

Make an experiment and use a cylinder that is closed at the top and
fill it with water and then turn it by 180 degrees and put in in a big water bassin,
so that no air will come into the cylinder.
Now how far can you pulk up the cylinder, until all the water will flow
out of the cylinder ?
If you do this right, it could probably be a few meters and you could
design the cylinder this way, that if you open the top,
most of the water could then flow out into
a higher reservoir, if you let air again come into the lifted cylinder.

Maybe this is a better method to get the water up ?

Regards, Stefan.

[hartiberlin]

Hmm, I just tried a 180 degrees turned 1,5 Liter coke bottle full of water
to put this way upside down into a water reservoir.
No air inside the coke bottle.
If you pull out the bottle up to the height, that the opening
is still a bit under water and no air comes into the bottle,
then you have about 1,5 Lieter of water above the water surface,
but the bottle weights about 1,5 Kg then...
So our shuttle would only push so much weight up, what volume
it displaces, so that does also not work.
So, it the shuttle would be 1 Meter high and its own
weight would be almost zero then we could just push the whole
main tube also only 1 Meter high above sealevel. So that is also no option...

[hartiberlin]

Hmm, I just had a good idea, how to explain the negative impact of the hydrostatic
paradoxon in our case.

The whole ELSA setup works as a hydraulic press in reverse !

In a closed water container the pressure onto the walls is
all over case the same !

So that is also the case in the hydraulic press.
There we have for the pressure in every point onto the walls,
if we use the formula:

P1 = F1 / A1 = P2 = F2 / A2  so we can write:

F1/A1 = F2/A2

which means:
Force1 / Area1 = Force2 / Area2

So if we divide both  sides by Area2 we get:

(Force1 x Area2) / Area1 = Force 2

Now we use in the ELSA main tube for instance a   1m^2
surface shuttle, that generates for instance 100 Newton upwards force.
Now we want to look, what force it generates onto the
1 cm^2 upper exit header pipe area.

So we have:

Area1=10000cm^2 = 1 m^2
Area2= 1 cm^2
Force1= 100 Newton

So if we put this in the upper forumula we have:


Force2= 100 Newton x 1 cm^2  / 10000 cm^2= 1/100 Newton.


So we have only a force of 1/100 Newton acting onto our upper
surface of the exit tube.

As F = mass x g
we get
mass= F / g= 1 /100 Netwon  x 9,81= 0,0981 Kg
we can therefore only put 0,0981 Liter of water into the exit header tube
to compensate this force, If we put more water into the exit tube,
the shuttle will be pressed down again !

So you see, this is a very small amount of water, that can be lifted
and our ELSA system works backwards as a hydraulic press unfortunately
and the hydrostatic paradoxon is at full work here... too bad...

The only thing, which might still work is to calculate,
how much energy one would need to evacuate the exit tube and
the upper reservoir and see how much energy one would need to do this to pump
the air out there to around 0,5 bar pressure only and thus suck up all the water
via the pressure difference. Maybe one needs less pumping energy to evacuate the
upper reservoir than one gains in potential water energy ?
Then we maybe also need no shuttle and just can use the always available air outdoor
pressure of 1 bar to do the work all in all...

Regards, Stefan.