This is a well engineered product, they also raised over 3 million dollars crowd funding[/font][/size]
It is a bit expensive but has huge potential
http://revolution-green.com/witt-technology-converts-motion-electricity/
Kind Regards
Very interesting! Thanks for posting it.
Well, I suppose that I can play Darth Vader too just for the psychotic MIB agent role playing fun of it.
Pasting my posting on Revolution Green here:
It is interesting but don't count your chickens yet. It doesn't make sense to put one on a truck because the energy it would harvest would come from the diesel fuel you put into the truck. It's a fancy arrangement of clutches. Making something like that cost-effective and seaworthy that will not need maintenance and will have a decent ROI is a huge challenge. It will have to have moveable seals that have sea water splashing against the seals all the time. I am no mechanical engineer so I can't say but that might be a challenge. Notice there is no demo box driving a small incandescent light bulb because a load would slow down the flywheel and take all of the "fun" out of it. I am smelling a very decent possibility that you are in Solar Freaking Roadways territory here. This is all pure gut feel.
Imagine a building on the seashore. You have solar panels on the roof and a WITT wave power installation on the shore. Which system gives you more bang for your buck? Obviously this is an over simplified example but my nose is leading me towards the solar panel installation on the roof. For example, the solar panel installation, just the installation costs, might be 1/100th the cost of the wave power installation if not more than that. No moving parts vs. these big gyrating floats and huge gears and clutches and power couplings to generators, and on and on. That sounds like very low maintenance vs. high maintenance and relatively low cost to relatively high cost to me (No matter what they are claiming about the low maintenance.)
This complicated gear is a nice technological achievement, but it is a very expensive precision device like a Swiss mechanical watch for 5000.-- Euros.
If something like this is put into seewater also the cable to shore will be a technological chalenge.
I like the alternative ideas http://www.witt-energy.com/future-applications.php more than the wave harvester. Like the mechanical watch that rewinds itself by the motion of the arm carrying it, such a device in a very small version could power a smart phone.
One should go for very small devices with a comperatively small output (e.g. 10 Milliwatt), but it will be an expensive thing like a Swiss mechanical watch.
Greetings, Conrad
Hi Conrad,
One of their videos shows a tennis ball sized device that is able to produce 4 Watts by human walking speeds:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JLdBglIryQk (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JLdBglIryQk)
Yes, precision machining and making the gear wheels have become very expensive, I wonder if the use of 3D printers could reduce the costs somewhat.
PS here is their video channel: https://www.youtube.com/user/wittlimited/videos?shelf_id=0&sort=dd&view=0
Gyula
Quote from: MileHigh on April 23, 2016, 04:27:53 AM
It is interesting but don't count your chickens yet. It doesn't make sense to put one on a truck because the energy it would harvest would come from the diesel fuel you put into the truck. It's a fancy arrangement of clutches.
It makes more sense when you begin the design starting with an electric motor or flywheel driven truck. ;D
and where does the energy come from that goes into the flywheel?
Quote from: gyulasun on April 23, 2016, 06:06:31 AM
One of their videos shows a tennis ball sized device that is able to produce 4 Watts by human walking speeds:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JLdBglIryQk (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JLdBglIryQk)
Yes, precision machining and making the gear wheels have become very expensive, I wonder if the use of 3D printers could reduce the costs somewhat.
PS here is their video channel: https://www.youtube.com/user/wittlimited/videos?shelf_id=0&sort=dd&view=0 (https://www.youtube.com/user/wittlimited/videos?shelf_id=0&sort=dd&view=0)
I read some time ago that the US-Army did some tests with boots which heels were energy harvesters. (I did not find any info on the Internet easily, so I gave up.) A very simple system, at each step the heel moved in a few millimetres pressing on a gear which in turn drove a small dynamo. The output was a few Watts for a smart phone type device which connected via satellite to battle command. The idea was to know the location of each soldier and to command each soldier remotely.
To make the story short, the soldiers wearing such boots tired much more than soldiers with ordinary boots. It is real work to generate a few Watts.
Therefore I have the opinion, that one should design a small device carried in a trouser leg (not bigger than a watch) which generates not more than 100 mW. One will not notice such a load. The power output cable from such a small device should be woven into the pants leading to a smart phone holster or pocket at the waist or hip. But such a device will be expensive because it has to be a mechanical marvel (like a self winding mechanical watch). I think it could be done with a miniature WITT gear, but it will be a novelty item for rich people.
Greetings, Conrad
http://www.gizmag.com/low-cost-large-area-piezoelectric-nanogenerator/22468/?li_source=LI&li_medium=default-widget
Quote from: lancaIV on April 24, 2016, 11:56:59 AM
http://www.gizmag.com/low-cost-large-area-piezoelectric-nanogenerator/22468/?li_source=LI&li_medium=default-widget (http://www.gizmag.com/low-cost-large-area-piezoelectric-nanogenerator/22468/?li_source=LI&li_medium=default-widget)
This is a nice piezoelctric pad. If you read the paper http://fand.kaist.ac.kr/Attach/NCG.pdf (http://fand.kaist.ac.kr/Attach/NCG.pdf) mentioned at the end of the article, you will see that a 5 cm x 7 cm pad tapped every 2.5 seconds can dimly light a red LED. I estimate this means about 1 mW.
It looks like a piezoelectric substrate is a bit brittle and will not last very long if pressed hard. A piezoelectric device is good for a high Voltage burst every now and then, e.g. for a lighter.
WITT is right in believing that the output of a mechanical precision gear can be relatively high in comparison to piezoelectric pads or even solar panels of the same size. A good mechanical self winding watch costs at least 1000.-- Euros, even more. That points to the price range of a small WITT gear.
May be one can build a WIIT gear swinging in the wind instead of a wind wheel. E.g. a multi winged blob with a 1 meter diameter suspended from a bridge like construction. It is hard to estimate the output. If it is about 1 Kilo Watt in gentle winds, it could be useful. A wind wheel is also rather expensive and mechanically challenging.
Greetings, Conrad
Quote from: conradelektro on April 24, 2016, 01:49:57 PM
...
Maybe one can build a WITT gear swinging in the wind instead of a wind wheel. E.g. a multi winged blob with a 1 meter diameter suspended from a bridge like construction. It is hard to estimate the output. If it is about 1 Kilo Watt in gentle winds, it could be useful. A wind wheel is also rather expensive and mechanically challenging.
Yes, it could be feasable (but still expensive I agree) and WITT showed a suspended structure which could receive mechanical input from wind by appropiate wind-boards (or by attached sails): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8Ylzx5_h9UA
From lancaIV's link I have found another energy harvester method, also embedded in shoes, which is able to provide at least 1 Watt nominal (10 W peak) power output. See these links:
http://www.instepnanopower.com/2_Technology/Technology.aspx
and here with videos:
http://news.wisc.edu/power-walk-footsteps-could-charge-mobile-electronics/
A very detailed article on the method is shown here
http://www.nature.com/ncomms/journal/v2/n8/full/ncomms1454.html
Briefly, the method is called reverse electrowetting combined with (nanosized) bubble growth and collapse.
Thanks, Gyula
Quote from: gyulasun on April 24, 2016, 02:40:02 PM
Briefly, the method is called reverse electrowetting combined with (nanosized) bubble growth and collapse.
Electrowetting and reverse-electrowetting are high tech concepts. I do not see a chance to experiment at home with such materials, some complicated manufacturing processes are required.
I do not see the high output, but the required materials are not disclosed. May be there is still some wishful thinking going on to attract investors.
Greetings, Conrad
Quote from: conradelektro on April 24, 2016, 01:49:57 PM
May be one can build a WIIT gear swinging in the wind instead of a wind wheel. E.g. a multi winged blob with a 1 meter diameter suspended from a bridge like construction. It is hard to estimate the output. If it is about 1 Kilo Watt in gentle winds, it could be useful. A wind wheel is also rather expensive and mechanically challenging.
Vortex bladeless turbines wobble to generate energy (http://www.gizmag.com/vortex-bladeless-wind-turbine-generator/37563/?li_source=LI&li_medium=default-widget). The Vortex bladeless turbine supposedly takes advantage of the wind's swirling motion, which generates energy from the repeating pattern of vortices, known as the Kármán vortex street (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/K%C3%A1rm%C3%A1n_vortex_street), and are generated as the air separates to pass by a blunt body, such as the Vortex structure itself (see image below). Incorporate the WITT gear into the bladeless vortex turbine, or into other similar devices.
Gravock
Self Synchronization Of A System.
A trout (vortex structure) positioning itself in a standing wave (between the vortices of air, water, etc.) ensures the trouts (vortex structure) dynamic link through the water (wind) itself. If the standing wave shifts for some reason, the trout (vortex structure) 'mounted' on it will shift as well. If the standing wave linking the trout (vortex structure) can't ensure synchronicity with the vortices, a driving force emerges shifting the standing wave to such speed regime in which there won't be any need to eliminate the phase displacement between the sources. A trout (the vortex structure itself) will open it's gills and turn it's body to induce a phase displacement to break the synchronicity of the system, and the standing wave will move and drag the trout (vortex structure) upstream in its wake with a speed increase until the velocity is reached at which synchronicity of the system is possible.
References: The art of nature (http://theartofnature.org/id20.html) and trout swimming in a vortex street (http://jeb.biologists.org/content/207/20/3495.full).
"Fish don't' swim, they're swum and birds don't fly, they're flown", Viktor Schauberger.
Gravock
The natural vibrations of the grid (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_SDGBCo2dJE) (Video).
The metronomes will sync up through it's natural vibrations and become in phase (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_SDGBCo2dJE) with other metronomes through the vibrations of the whole system. However, the metronomes will not sync up (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e-c6S6SdkPo) with one another and will be out of phase with the other metronomes through the loss of it's natural vibrations.
Gravock
Quote from: MileHigh on April 23, 2016, 04:27:53 AM
Well, I suppose that I can play Darth Vader too just for the psychotic MIB agent role playing fun of it.
Pasting my posting on Revolution Green here:
It is interesting but don't count your chickens yet. It doesn't make sense to put one on a truck because the energy it would harvest would come from the diesel fuel you put into the truck.
...
.......
Tell that to the dead trout that adopted a swaying movement in the vortex street and was drawn upstream while it was tethered on a line to an object flowing in water. Put this concept on a truck, and the truck could be propelled forward by the vortices created by a vortex structure as it encounters an increase in air resistance until the velocity is reached at which synchronicity of the system is possible. The energy it harvests to further propel the truck comes from the creation of vortices as it moves past the air, and not from the diesel fuel put into the truck. The energy to propel the trout upstream didn't come from the dead trout itself. Same thing should be for the truck example. Only a small amount of energy is required for huge accelerations and to maintain a uniform motion or constant velocity. This is almost a self-sustaining system. This phenomenon naturally occurs throughout nature and doesn't break any laws of physics.
Gravock
Quote from: gravityblock on April 25, 2016, 09:55:52 PM
Vortex bladeless turbines wobble to generate energy (http://www.gizmag.com/vortex-bladeless-wind-turbine-generator/37563/?li_source=LI&li_medium=default-widget). The Vortex bladeless turbine supposedly takes advantage of the wind's swirling motion, which generates energy from the repeating pattern of vortices, known as the Kármán vortex street (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/K%C3%A1rm%C3%A1n_vortex_street), and are generated as the air separates to pass by a blunt body, such as the Vortex structure itself (see image below). Incorporate the WITT gear into the bladeless vortex turbine, or into other similar devices.
http://www.vortexbladeless.com/index.php the web site of Vortex Bladeless
May be the blade-less Vortex tube inventors can come up with a special alternator a bit less mechanically involved than the WITT gear.
http://www.vortexbladeless.com/blog.php
From this web page:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
In the last months we have been optimizing Vortex in many different ways:
1.- The tuning system to change the natural frequency of oscillation through magnet repulsion. 2.- We optimized the generation system through different alternator designs... now we have a good one that we can't share it because the IP process. 3.- We changed a bit the geometry to harvest as much energy as possible.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
It looks like the blade-less Vortex inventors need more time to optimise the design of the tube and especially the design of the alternator. Two different skills, one is material science for the tube and the second is electrical engineering for the alternator, are required. Not an easy task.
It is a great idea and could be in the end a wind generator with a reasonable cost. A three meter high tube with an output of 100 Watt would be a great device charging a big 12 V battery (200 Ah) every 24 hours if there is some wind. Enough for a trailer home or a cabin in the wilderness with a few LED lamps, portable (satellite) phone charging and a tablet PC.
Greetings, Conrad
Quote from: MileHigh on April 23, 2016, 04:27:53 AM
Imagine a building on the seashore. You have solar panels on the roof and a WITT wave power installation on the shore. Which system gives you more bang for your buck? Obviously this is an over simplified example but my nose is leading me towards the solar panel installation on the roof. For example, the solar panel installation, just the installation costs, might be 1/100th the cost of the wave power installation if not more than that. No moving parts vs. these big gyrating floats and huge gears and clutches and power couplings to generators, and on and on. That sounds like very low maintenance vs. high maintenance and relatively low cost to relatively high cost to me (No matter what they are claiming about the low maintenance.)
There's no need for big gyrating floats. An array of Vivace converters can be placed on the floor of rivers and oceans. Below is an artist's illustration, by Omar Jamil (http://umich.edu/news/Releases/2008/Dec08/Vivace_illustration.jpg), depicting an array of VIVACE converters on the ocean floor. Vortex power (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vortex_power) is a form of hydro power which generates energy by placing obstacles in rivers/oceans in order to cause the formation of vortices which can then be tapped to a usable form of energy such as electricity. This method is pioneered by a team at the University of Michigan who call the technology VIVACE which stands for Vortex Induced Vibrations Aquatic Clean Energy (patent pending through the University of Michigan). The company Vortex Hydro Power has been created to commercialize the technology. This technology has 10–20 years life span which meets life cycle cost targets. The vortex hydro can generate power 24/7, unlike solar. Integrate WITT into the Vivace converters.
Gravock
.......[/size]It is a great idea and could be in the end a wind generator with a reasonable cost. A three meter high tube with an output of 100 Watt would be a great device charging a big 12 V battery (200 Ah) every 24 hours if there is some wind. Enough for a trailer home or a cabin in the wilderness with a few LED lamps, portable (satellite) phone charging and a tablet PC.[/size]Greetings, Conrad
low-e equipment
LED: http://www.osmatech.net/led.html (http://www.osmatech.net/led.html)
fridge: Kenmore 30 W https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YrHN6iTMtvM (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YrHN6iTMtvM) alternatively: http://mtbest.net/chest_fridge.html (http://mtbest.net/chest_fridge.html)
power saving idea functional : ?
http://worldwide.espacenet.com/publicationDetails/biblio?DB=EPODOC&II=0&ND=3&adjacent=true&locale=en_EP&FT=D&date=20070201&CC=JP&NR=2007028879A&KC=A (http://worldwide.espacenet.com/publicationDetails/biblio?DB=EPODOC&II=0&ND=3&adjacent=true&locale=en_EP&FT=D&date=20070201&CC=JP&NR=2007028879A&KC=A)
warmwater: induction heater/collector
http://worldwide.espacenet.com/publicationDetails/biblio?DB=EPODOC&II=0&ND=3&adjacent=true&locale=en_EP&FT=D&date=20140331&CC=CH&NR=707010A2&KC=A2 (http://worldwide.espacenet.com/publicationDetails/biblio?DB=EPODOC&II=0&ND=3&adjacent=true&locale=en_EP&FT=D&date=20140331&CC=CH&NR=707010A2&KC=A2)
http://worldwide.espacenet.com/publicationDetails/originalDocument?CC=CH&NR=707010A2&KC=A2&FT=D&ND=3&date=20140331&DB=EPODOC&locale=en_EP (http://worldwide.espacenet.com/publicationDetails/originalDocument?CC=CH&NR=707010A2&KC=A2&FT=D&ND=3&date=20140331&DB=EPODOC&locale=en_EP)
page 7/16 LESAR description: ...... input 4,7W output 9,4W
https://es-la.facebook.com/manueljose.baqueromenendez (https://es-la.facebook.com/manueljose.baqueromenendez)
http://www.freepatentsonline.com/EP2144298A2.pdf (http://www.freepatentsonline.com/EP2144298A2.pdf)
real world demonstration ?
http://www.inpama.com/index.php?content=invention&id=660 (http://www.inpama.com/index.php?content=invention&id=660)
In a house of 100 m / 2, fully electrified (hot water, heating, appliances, lighting, air conditioning, etc..) Eight 240 W photovoltaic panels, each producing 1296 Kw., A month, is enough energy to meet the needs of the house described in the example.
The Unit with all its elements, occupies an area of one meter square.
Quote from: gravityblock on April 26, 2016, 05:18:50 AM
There's no need for big gyrating floats. An array of Vivace converters can be placed on the floor of rivers and oceans. Below is an artist's illustration, by Omar Jamil (http://umich.edu/news/Releases/2008/Dec08/Vivace_illustration.jpg), depicting an array of VIVACE converters on the ocean floor. Vortex power (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vortex_power) is a form of hydro power which generates energy by placing obstacles in rivers/oceans in order to cause the formation of vortices which can then be tapped to a usable form of energy such as electricity. This method is pioneered by a team at the University of Michigan who call the technology VIVACE which stands for Vortex Induced Vibrations Aquatic Clean Energy (patent pending through the University of Michigan). The company Vortex Hydro Power has been created to commercialize the technology. This technology has 10–20 years life span which meets life cycle cost targets. The vortex hydro can generate power 24/7, unlike solar. Integrate WITT into the Vivace converters.
Gravock
Are you sure about this? Why don't you try doing some due diligence research and see what results you get.
"In a house of 100 m / 2, fully electrified (hot water, heating, appliances, lighting, air conditioning, etc..) Eight 240 W photovoltaic panels, each producing 1296 Kw., A month, is enough energy to meet the needs of the house described in the example.
The Unit with all its elements, occupies an area of one meter square." check you math.
Quote from: MileHigh on April 26, 2016, 10:30:36 AM
Are you sure about this? Why don't you try doing some due diligence research and see what results you get.
This isn't a scientific or mathematical rebuttal. No references to back up your position. Am I sure about what? Be more specific!
Gravock
Quote from: MileHigh on April 23, 2016, 04:27:53 AM
Well, I suppose that I can play Darth Vader too just for the psychotic MIB agent role playing fun of it.
Pasting my posting on Revolution Green here:
It is interesting but don't count your chickens yet. It doesn't make sense to put one on a truck because the energy it would harvest would come from the diesel fuel you put into the truck. It's a fancy arrangement of clutches. Making something like that cost-effective and seaworthy that will not need maintenance and will have a decent ROI is a huge challenge. It will have to have moveable seals that have sea water splashing against the seals all the time. I am no mechanical engineer so I can't say but that might be a challenge. Notice there is no demo box driving a small incandescent light bulb because a load would slow down the flywheel and take all of the "fun" out of it. I am smelling a very decent possibility that you are in Solar Freaking Roadways territory here. This is all pure gut feel.
Imagine a building on the seashore. You have solar panels on the roof and a WITT wave power installation on the shore. Which system gives you more bang for your buck? Obviously this is an over simplified example but my nose is leading me towards the solar panel installation on the roof. For example, the solar panel installation, just the installation costs, might be 1/100th the cost of the wave power installation if not more than that. No moving parts vs. these big gyrating floats and huge gears and clutches and power couplings to generators, and on and on. That sounds like very low maintenance vs. high maintenance and relatively low cost to relatively high cost to me (No matter what they are claiming about the low maintenance.)
Quote from: gravityblock on April 26, 2016, 02:24:21 AM
Tell that to the dead trout that adopted a swaying movement in the vortex street and was drawn upstream while it was tethered on a line to an object flowing in water. Put this concept on a truck, and the truck could be propelled forward by the vortices created by a vortex structure as it encounters an increase in air resistance until the velocity is reached at which synchronicity of the system is possible. The energy it harvests to further propel the truck comes from the creation of vortices as it moves past the air, and not from the diesel fuel put into the truck. The energy to propel the trout upstream didn't come from the dead trout itself. Same thing should be for the truck example. Only a small amount of energy is required for huge accelerations and to maintain a uniform motion or constant velocity. This is almost a self-sustaining system. This phenomenon naturally occurs throughout nature and doesn't break any laws of physics.
Gravock
No comment MileHigh? No scientific or mathematical rebuttal? No references or empirical evidence showing a dead fish supplies it's own energy to move upstream? Of course not, for your a student of the government's successful disinformation program. If I didn't know better, I would tell you to go blow your on sail. However, I do know better, for blowing your own sail is possible according to empirical evidence. Once again, what is taught is contrary to the empirical evidence.
Gravock
Quote from: memoryman on April 26, 2016, 10:59:45 AM
"In a house of 100 m / 2, fully electrified (hot water, heating, appliances, lighting, air conditioning, etc..) Eight 240 W photovoltaic panels, each producing 1296 Kw., A month, is enough energy to meet the needs of the house described in the example.
The Unit with all its elements, occupies an area of one meter square." check you math.
Checking his math,not mine,I would estimate that the area occupied will become one square meter,but not one cubic meter.
http://www.freepatentsonline.com/EP2144298A2.pdf (http://www.freepatentsonline.com/EP2144298A2.pdf)
8 x 240W= 1920W per hour x (8766/12) = ? KWh
but you quoted it without using cautions about its content. Do you endorse the content?
Quote from: gravityblock on April 26, 2016, 01:12:16 PM
No comment MileHigh? No scientific or mathematical rebuttal? No references or empirical evidence showing a dead fish supplies it's own energy to move upstream? Of course not, for your a student of the government's successful disinformation program. If I didn't know better, I would tell you to go blow your on sail. However, I do know better, for blowing your own sail is possible according to empirical evidence. Once again, what is taught is contrary to the empirical evidence.
Gravock
Stop the silly MIB nonsense.
How about a business rebuttal? Why don't you go take a look, and next time you post a "solution" check the business angle also.
Quote from: memoryman on April 26, 2016, 01:45:27 PM
but you quoted it without using cautions about its content. Do you endorse the content?
The spanish patent office endorsed the content : http://worldwide.espacenet.com/publicationDetails/originalDocument?FT=D&date=20110429&DB=EPODOC&locale=en_EP&CC=ES&NR=2341161B1&KC=B1&ND=4 (http://worldwide.espacenet.com/publicationDetails/originalDocument?FT=D&date=20110429&DB=EPODOC&locale=en_EP&CC=ES&NR=2341161B1&KC=B1&ND=4)
http://worldwide.espacenet.com/publicationDetails/inpadoc?CC=ES&NR=2341161B1&KC=B1&FT=D&ND=4&date=20110429&DB=EPODOC&locale=en_EP (http://worldwide.espacenet.com/publicationDetails/inpadoc?CC=ES&NR=2341161B1&KC=B1&FT=D&ND=4&date=20110429&DB=EPODOC&locale=en_EP)
+ DEFINITIVE PROTECTION
I don't read Spanish; will have Google translate.
Quote from: MileHigh on April 26, 2016, 02:55:02 PM
Stop the silly MIB nonsense.
How about a business rebuttal? Why don't you go take a look, and next time you post a "solution" check the business angle also.
Your reply is a red herring. A business rebuttal has nothing to do with a dead trout moving upstream, and without the dead trout expending any energy to do so. The dead trout is a slap in the face for your proposed solution that the harvested energy would come from the diesel fuel put into the truck. It is you who needs to stop the "so-called" silly MIB agent role playing for the fun of it, and not me. However, as long as you subscribe to the teachings of mankind that is contrary to what really is, then the "so-called" silly MIB nonsense will continue due to your willful ignorance.
Gravock
There is no company and there is no proven technology. All that happened was that they got some government grants to do some small pilot systems. That was already a few years ago. They do not show any credibility for doing the conversion from mechanical energy to electrical energy. The company now consists of a web site and a college professor, that's it. You cannot order a working system, they don't have a working system or the resources to deliver a working system. There is no real product. For all practical intents and purposes, the company exists on paper only.
And that's what due diligence is, making sure that what you are suggesting is real and deliverable, a real working product backed up by a real company, and not just an artist's conception drawing.
You are on an energy research web site, and if you cannot figure out for yourself that putting one of these "on paper only" devices inside a truck will draw its energy from the diesel fuel that makes the truck move forward down the highway then you need to put your thinking cap on.
Quote from: MileHigh on April 26, 2016, 11:56:19 PM
There is no company and there is no proven technology. All that happened was that they got some government grants to do some small pilot systems. That was already a few years ago. They do not show any credibility for doing the conversion from mechanical energy to electrical energy. The company now consists of a web site and a college professor, that's it. You cannot order a working system, they don't have a working system or the resources to deliver a working system. There is no real product. For all practical intents and purposes, the company exists on paper only.
And that's what due diligence is, making sure that what you are suggesting is real and deliverable, a real working product backed up by a real company, and not just an artist's conception drawing.
You are on an energy research web site, and if you cannot figure out for yourself that putting one of these "on paper only" devices inside a truck will draw its energy from the diesel fuel that makes the truck move forward down the highway then you need to put your thinking cap on.
Another red herring!
No, it is you who needs to put your thinking cap on! If a dead trout can move upstream without expending any energy by creating vortices, then a vehicle can be propelled upwind with little to no energy that is based on the same principals of the trout. Birds (bio-technology) were the proof for an airplane to be possible, and trout (bio-technology) is the proof of Vivace, the bladeless vortex wind turbine, etc. Vivace is proven by the bio-technology of trout. The bladeless vortex wind turbine is also based on the same basic principals of creating vortices, just as we find with the trout and Vivace. Are you saying the bladeless vortex wind turbine, the trout, and Vivace are all technology that isn't proven? Yes, trout can be considered bio-technology!
Your first sentence above says there is no company. Then, later in your post, you say the company exists on paper only. Your own thoughts are conflicted against one another, lol. MileHigh, companies are considered by law to be fictitious entities that exist only on paper. No products being offered to the general public by a company, along with government grants, means the government is reaping the benefits and rewards of this technology and research. The government has paid for the research, so what makes you think the general public should reap the benefits and rewards of the technology and research?
Gravock
Quote from: MileHigh on April 26, 2016, 11:56:19 PM
They do not show any credibility for doing the conversion from mechanical energy to electrical energy.
Like I said before, incorporate the WITT gear into the Vivace to do the conversion from mechanical energy to electrical energy.
WITT converts all motion, in any combination of the six degrees of freedom into a single unidirectional rotation of a flywheel to produce electricity! WITT's harvest chaotic motion, fast, slow or erratic, turning it into useable power. No other energy harvesting system can capture this full spectrum, thus the WITT absorbs up to 100% more energy compared to other devices! (reference (http://revolution-green.com/witt-technology-converts-motion-electricity/)).
Gravock
A trout cannot move upstream without expending any energy. That's a fantasy. I will just repeat to you: I did the due diligence and Vortex Hydro Energy is not a viable company. "VIVACE" is just a meaningless buzz word that they invented. They have only one "employee" and they are only a web site sitting on a hard drive. Two of the people in the main corporate video clip are long gone. They have no business activity and I am 99% certain that they never fully developed a viable energy conversion scheme for the concept. You see cases like this all the time and it's a valuable service to yourself to check them out and see if they are real. That's the lesson I am trying to convey to you and the readers.
QuoteYour first sentence above says there is no company. Then, later in your post, you say the company exists on paper only. Your own thoughts are conflicted against one another, lol.
Although I don't think English is your first language your English skills are excellent and I am going to assume you fully understand what I was stating and you fully understand that there is no conflict.
QuoteNo products being offered to the general public by a company, along with government grants, means the government is reaping the benefits and rewards of this technology and research.
No, you are just MIB dreaming again. They got their research grants, they burned through the cash, clearly there are a long list of remaining technical issues, and now they are inactive and unable to deliver a working system to a customer. I don't think it is viable at all, having moving parts under water to generate electricity is subject to too many problems.
QuoteLike I said before, incorporate the WITT gear into the Vivace to do the conversion from mechanical energy to electrical energy.
You are dreaming again. There is no underwater mechanical interface to a WITT gear and there is no large underwater WITT gear that is coupled to an underwater generator. Nothing exists, it's just a far-fetched idea.
Next time you come across an energy generation proposition I am asking you to make your own critical evaluation of the technology. How many solar panel and battery "breakthroughs" do you think have been reported on the Revolution Green web site over the past three years? Perhaps 50? How many of them do you think are in actual volume production today? I am willing to bet you that the answer is zero. However, in five years from now some of them may indeed make it into production and we will get a smartphone battery that lasts three days. A smartphone battery that lasts three days would represent a wonderful advancement in battery technology.
Quote from: MileHigh on April 26, 2016, 11:56:19 PM
And that's what due diligence is, making sure that what you are suggesting is real and deliverable, a real working product backed up by a real company, and not just an artist's conception drawing.
There are a lot of real working devices that are not backed up by a so-called "real" company. A company backing up a product or not has nothing to do with the merits and legitimacy of a product or prototype. Likewise, there are a lot of products backed by companies that don't deliver what is claimed. According to MileHigh, only a fictitious entity (a company) can make a product or prototype real. LOL!!!
Gravock
Quote from: MileHigh on April 27, 2016, 04:40:20 AM
A trout cannot move upstream without expending any energy.
Tell that to the researchers that did an experiment with a dead trout. The dead trout moved upstream while it was tethered on a line to an object flowing in water. Empirical evidence and research beats your false assertions.
Gravock
Have you ever done any salmon fishing MileHigh? There is no way in hell a salmon can maintain it's position in a heavy current while it is nearly motionless (little to no energy expended by the fish).
Gravock
Quote from: MileHigh on April 27, 2016, 04:40:20 AM
They have no business activity and I am 99% certain that they never fully developed a viable energy conversion scheme for the concept. You see cases like this all the time and it's a valuable service to yourself to check them out and see if they are real. That's the lesson I am trying to convey to you and the readers.
MileHigh,
I was fully aware at the time of the original Vivace posting that there was no Vivace product available to the general public, thus the image attachment for an artists rendition of the device. This means absolutely nothing in and of itself. Once again, a viable energy conversion scheme has been developed by WITTS, thus the reason for posting the Vivace information and the information for the vortex bladeless wind turbine. There is no lesson to be learned from you in which you're trying to convey to me and the readers.
Gravock
Quote from: MileHigh on April 27, 2016, 04:40:20 AM
Although I don't think English is your first language your English skills are excellent and I am going to assume you fully understand what I was stating and you fully understand that there is no conflict.
Wrong once again! English is my first and only language. Please show or describe to me how there was no conflict, so I may fully understand what you was stating.
Gravock
Quote from: MileHigh on April 27, 2016, 04:40:20 AM
How many solar panel and battery "breakthroughs" do you think have been reported on the Revolution Green web site over the past three years? Perhaps 50? How many of them do you think are in actual volume production today? I am willing to bet you that the answer is zero. However, in five years from now some of them may indeed make it into production and we will get a smartphone battery that lasts three days. A smartphone battery that lasts three days would represent a wonderful advancement in battery technology.
Another red herring from you! Solar panel and battery "breakthroughs" have nothing to do with the current discussion.
Gravock
Quote from: gravityblock on April 27, 2016, 06:11:20 AM
Another red herring from you! Solar panel and battery "breakthroughs" have nothing to do with the current discussion.
Gravock
There is a direct analogy between pitching a battery technology that never goes into production and pitching an underwater electricity generating technology that never goes into production.
This was your statement:
QuoteThere's no need for big gyrating floats. An array of Vivace converters can be placed on the floor of rivers and oceans. Below is an artist's illustration, by Omar Jamil (http://umich.edu/news/Releases/2008/Dec08/Vivace_illustration.jpg), depicting an array of VIVACE converters on the ocean floor. Vortex power (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vortex_power) is a form of hydro power which generates energy by placing obstacles in rivers/oceans in order to cause the formation of vortices which can then be tapped to a usable form of energy such as electricity. This method is pioneered by a team at the University of Michigan who call the technology VIVACE which stands for Vortex Induced Vibrations Aquatic Clean Energy (patent pending through the University of Michigan). The company Vortex Hydro Power has been created to commercialize the technology. This technology has 10–20 years life span which meets life cycle cost targets. The vortex hydro can generate power 24/7, unlike solar. Integrate WITT into the Vivace converters.
That's a pitch for something that does not exist and it will likely never be commercialized, and that's my point.
Quote from: gravityblock on April 27, 2016, 05:06:30 AM
Tell that to the researchers that did an experiment with a dead trout. The dead trout moved upstream while it was tethered on a line to an object flowing in water. Empirical evidence and research beats your false assertions.
Gravock
Your description is not clear so I can't comment. Common sense tells you that a trout has to expend energy to swim against the current.
Quote from: gravityblock on April 27, 2016, 05:35:02 AM
Wrong once again! English is my first and only language. Please show or describe to me how there was no conflict, so I may fully understand what you was stating.
Gravock
"There is no company and there is no proven technology." - That means there is no functioning company with a full-time staff talking orders and doing installations.
"For all practical intents and purposes, the company exists on paper only." - That means there is no functioning company with a full-time staff talking orders and doing installations.
Hence I thought there was a possibility that English was not your first language.
Quote from: MileHigh on April 27, 2016, 06:30:42 AM
There is a direct analogy between pitching a battery technology that never goes into production and pitching an underwater electricity generating technology that never goes into production.
Another false assertion by you! There is no direct analogy between pitching a battery technology that never goes into production and pitching an underwater electricity generating technology that never goes into production as you falsely assert (see below).
HS300
World's first tidal turbine prototype connected to the grid. The HS300 is Andritz Hydro Hammerfest first prototype installed in Kvalsund in Finnmark, Norway, running from 2003 – 2007 and reinstalled from 2009 – 2011. The turbine a 300kW installed at 50 meters depth with a production capacity over 600MWh per year through a complete deployment, operation, retrieval, maintenance and redeployment cycle, demonstrated more than 16,000 hours, 1.5GWh production track record with more than 9500 hours continuous operation and was proven to be both efficient and reliable.
HS1000
First pre-commercial tidal turbine installed at EMEC (European Marine Energy Centre)
In cooperation with ScottishPower Renewables, Andritz Hydro Hammerfest installed a 1MW pre commercial tidal power turbine on December 2011 at the Falls of Warness, in the Orkney Isles UK, considered one of Europe's roughest waters. Was connected to the grid on February 2012 with a production capacity over 3,1GW per year.
MK1
First commercial array for a tidal power project of 95MW in Pentland Firth, Scotland.
Andritz hydro Hammerfest is developing 3 Turbines 1200-1500 kW each for the first phase of the project. At these moment the project is on the assembling stage.
ARL – AR1500
Atlantis Resources Limited (ARL) has over a decade of experience in development of tidal power devices, culminating in the AR series of turbines for high energy open ocean environments. The first 1MW prototype was deployed at the European Marine Energy Centre in 2011. Further development is currently underway at NAREC to enhance the drive train configuration and control system to ensure that the turbines can survive and perform in an integrated array. More details of ARL can be found at www.atlantisresourcescorporation.com (http://www.atlantisresourcescorporation.com).
AHH – The HS1000
The technology developed by Andritz Hydro Hammerfest (AHH) has received international attention, and it is regarded as one of the leading technologies in its field. The technology is based on experiences from technologies and solutions used in hydro-power, wind energy and offshore oil & gas industries, with focus on sustainable solutions, and have been tested for extended periods to verify its reliability and efficiency. Andritz Hydro Hammerfest is a capable partner for developing and delivering state-of-the-art solutions for reliable and cost effective energy production. The HS1000 is a 1MW pre-commercial demonstrator deployed at the EMEC tidal test site in the Orkney Isles.
The device is essentially a scaled up version of the HS300, with some changes made to accommodate the facilities at the EMEC tidal test site. The turbine is heavily instrumented and will serve as a platform for future research and development activities.
References: MeyGen (http://www.meygen.com/technology/) and Andritz Hydro Hammerfest (http://www.andritzhydrohammerfest.co.uk/references/)
Gravock
False assertion and misdirection!
Quote from: MileHigh on April 27, 2016, 06:32:47 AM
Your description is not clear so I can't comment. Common sense tells you that a trout has to expend energy to swim against the current.
If my description isn't clear, then it's probably because you didn't read the references I provided (snapshot of the reference is below and highlighted in blue for your convenience). Common sense doesn't always rule and condemnation before investigation is foolishness. Sometimes things that appear to be counter intuitive are not.
Gravock
Quote from: MileHigh on April 27, 2016, 06:36:51 AM
"There is no company and there is no proven technology." - That means there is no functioning company with a full-time staff talking orders and doing installations.
"For all practical intents and purposes, the company exists on paper only." - That means there is no functioning company with a full-time staff talking orders and doing installations.
Hence I thought there was a possibility that English was not your first language.
The technology has been proven by nature (bio-technology) and is also based on the same principals as the bladeless vortex wind turbine. "No company" doesn't imply it's a "non-functioning company" as you're trying to infer. However, I'll give you the benefit of the doubt in what you were trying to convey.
Gravock
Quote from: MileHigh on April 27, 2016, 07:21:14 AM
False assertion and misdirection!
Argument by assertion only! Please state what your claiming to be a false assertion and misdirection! Also, please provide a rebuttal to the false assertion and misdirection claims.
Gravock
Quote from: MileHigh on April 27, 2016, 04:40:20 AM
I don't think it is viable at all, having moving parts under water to generate electricity is subject to too many problems.
Tell that to MeyGen and Andritz Hydro Hammerspace!
Gravock
Quote from: MileHigh on April 23, 2016, 04:27:53 AM
Imagine a building on the seashore. You have solar panels on the roof and a WITT wave power installation on the shore. Which system gives you more bang for your buck? Obviously this is an over simplified example but my nose is leading me towards the solar panel installation on the roof. For example, the solar panel installation, just the installation costs, might be 1/100th the cost of the wave power installation if not more than that. No moving parts vs. these big gyrating floats and huge gears and clutches and power couplings to generators, and on and on. That sounds like very low maintenance vs. high maintenance and relatively low cost to relatively high cost to me (No matter what they are claiming about the low maintenance.)
Once again, big gyrating floats aren't necessary with MeyGen and Andritz Hydro Hammerspace and can produce power 24/7 unlike solar. You'll get less bang for your buck with solar power.
Gravock
Quote from: MileHigh on April 27, 2016, 06:32:47 AM
Your description is not clear so I can't comment. Common sense tells you that a trout has to expend energy to swim against the current.
Zombie Fish: Science makes a dead trout swim upstream (http://magazine.fishsens.com/video-shows-how-a-dead-trout-can-swim-upstream.htm) (with video)!
The water swims the fish.
"Fish don't' swim, they're swum and birds don't fly, they're flown", Viktor Schauberger.Like I said, common sense doesn't always rule, so you'll need to put your thinking cap on, assuming of course you have one.
Gravock
Dead trout towed behind a cylinder (https://books.google.com/books?id=2DC5BAAAQBAJ&pg=PA93&lpg=PA93&dq=dead+trout+moves+upstream&source=bl&ots=1Twuv7CM7h&sig=hDPOR5SdJw4wimXYtYqMxdj-Jo8&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwiRl8SPma_MAhWBSCYKHYalDQ0Q6AEINDAF#v=onepage&q=dead%20trout%20moves%20upstream&f=false) can passively generate thrust and move upstream on a slack line when they happen to synchronize with the vortices (see snapshot below). No muscle activity is required to maintain station, or even to move upstream (see snapshot below)! Here's the supporting video (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rKd-Ku__7wA)!
Gravock
Lateral and ventral view of dead trout in flowing water (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_ZBWnhzYvts) (video).
Youtube user, wuweifish3 comment: "Yes, the fish is being "swum" by the vortices, not by muscle activity! The tether is slack when the fish is moving upstream, indicating passive thrust generation due to the intrinsic compliance of the musculoskeletal system" (snapshot below).
Gravock
Quote from: gravityblock on April 27, 2016, 07:11:51 AM
Another false assertion by you! There is no direct analogy between pitching a battery technology that never goes into production and pitching an underwater electricity generating technology that never goes into production as you falsely assert (see below).
.
.
.
The device is essentially a scaled up version of the HS300, with some changes made to accommodate the facilities at the EMEC tidal test site. The turbine is heavily instrumented and will serve as a platform for future research and development activities.
References: MeyGen (http://www.meygen.com/technology/) and Andritz Hydro Hammerfest (http://www.andritzhydrohammerfest.co.uk/references/)
Gravock
Drawing a parallel between two systems that never go into production is perfectly valid - the commonality is that they never go into production.
Then you try to pull off a bait-and-switch by not talking about the company Vortex Hydro Power which has no working systems and switching over to two different European companies that extract power from moving water using 100% conventional turbine blade technology that is by design much simpler and perfectly suited to driving a coaxial generator.
For the trout, there is nothing to get excited about.
1. When the trout wants to expend minimal energy, it will relax all of its muscles. Hence it will be indistinguishable from a dead trout. As they explain, the trout can rest in moving water by positioning itself next to a natural water vortice.
2. A trout can swim upstream by exploiting the natural vortices in the moving water as much as possible. It's like a condor staying aloft without expending any energy by exploiting the upward convection currents in the air.
3. A trout can expend energy and create a small vortice next to it's body, and then swim such that the two factors combine and it can move very quickly.
Without any naturally occurring vorticies in the water to exploit, common sense tells you that a trout has to expend energy to swim against the current.
Quote from: gravityblock on April 27, 2016, 12:17:51 PM
Zombie Fish: Science makes a dead trout swim upstream (http://magazine.fishsens.com/video-shows-how-a-dead-trout-can-swim-upstream.htm) (with video)!
The water swims the fish. "Fish don't' swim, they're swum and birds don't fly, they're flown", Viktor Schauberger.
Like I said, common sense doesn't always rule, so you'll need to put your thinking cap on, assuming of course you have one.
Gravock
No, common sense rules almost all of the time, and here your failure is to not mention any special conditions.
Me: Common sense tells you that a trout has to expend energy to swim against the current.
You: Common sense doesn't always rule, so you'll need to put your thinking cap on, assuming of course you have one.
And there is your fail right there. You are a really lousy debater with all of the bait-and-switch nonsense or making loaded statements like above.
Here is how the discussion should have gone:
Me: Common sense tells you that a trout has to expend energy to swim against the current.
You: With a set of special conditions where there are natural vortices in the water, the trout can exploit these vorticies and swim against the current while expending a bare minimum of energy, or if it is very lucky it can swim against the current expending no energy at all.
I would like to assume that you actually have a thinking cap, and in any future debates you will be honest and express yourself properly and avoid the technique used by the pulp pseudoscience press where they write fake headlines for legitimate articles.
Quote from: gravityblock on April 27, 2016, 07:39:26 AM
The technology has been proven by nature (bio-technology) and is also based on the same principals as the bladeless vortex wind turbine. "No company" doesn't imply it's a "non-functioning company" as you're trying to infer. However, I'll give you the benefit of the doubt in what you were trying to convey.
Gravock
Saying "no company" does indeed imply a non-functioning company when you are clearly discussing a company that has some kind of a presence, even if they are doing nothing. It's just casual everyday business slang that is in common use.
Quote from: gravityblock on April 27, 2016, 12:55:05 AM
Another red herring!
No, it is you who needs to put your thinking cap on! If a dead trout can move upstream without expending any energy by creating vortices...
Not by "creating vortices" but rather by exploiting the existing vortices that are there in the turbulent stream. As you can see, you led yourself down a garden path and next time put your thinking cap on.
Quote from: gravityblock on April 27, 2016, 08:40:00 AM
Once again, big gyrating floats aren't necessary with MeyGen and Andritz Hydro Hammerspace and can produce power 24/7 unlike solar. You'll get less bang for your buck with solar power.
Gravock
When you examine the hypothetical case of a low-rise commercial office building next to the ocean with a large roof surface area, and you compare solar power and some sort of hypothetical system to extract power from the nearby ocean, the first thing that comes to mind for me is the cost of the installation and the associated return on investment.
I am just going to take a guess that with the rapid decrease in the cost of solar panels and the fact that there is now a huge industry with an established ecosystem, the ROI is probably between 10 and 20 years for a typical office building installation like I am describing. In contrast, if you went with some sort of underwater sea power installation for a single building, the ROI would probably be between 100 and 200 years.
So you get more bang for your buck with solar power.
Just from glancing at the two European underwater turbine companies you linked to, I am going to assume it is only economically feasible for large-scale installations where there are regular underwater flows that can be readily harnessed. I did not check if either company has a true working commercial installation at this time.
http://www.borderlands.de/net_pdf/NET0511S30-33.pdf
an undersea hydraulic ram pump,aproved by their own prototype experiment