This is also a continuation on my post here: http://www.overunity.com/index.php?topic=6836.msg185402#new (http://www.overunity.com/index.php?topic=6836.msg185402#new)
So the process here is actually very simple to understand, no unnecessary parts are added.
Since the mass of the water hanging on the right side (the two pipes) is more than the mass of the water on the left side, and thus its weight is more, an imbalance of the two forces should cause the the water to flow down and pull with it the water existing in the tube all the way down to the bottom.
So Hans Von Lieven (since this is a direct experiment to test your paper), why can't the water flow like proposed, and if it can, then it will continue without stopping till the water has evaporated or until mechanical failure has damaged the construction (which will take some time!).
I am happy to discuss the scenarios which would normally hinder this process in working and why I think this is different. Btw, you could also compeer this to a gravity wheel. It could use the same idea of unbalancing the force of gravity.
Naboo
Edit: To those who don't know what a siphon is, check out these two links as they are handy:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Siphon (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Siphon)
http://www.google.com/#hl=en&q=siphon&aq=f&oq=&aqi=g10&fp=hW_iG4xv4cU (http://www.google.com/#hl=en&q=siphon&aq=f&oq=&aqi=g10&fp=hW_iG4xv4cU)
Here's another picture.
It shows that if you increase the volume of water hanging on the right side you can increase the suction pressure and thus also the hight which the water can be transported to.
Test your theory should be fairly easy to accomplish!
Post results looks like it would be worth a shot all the math and comments in the world do not hold water to a good old fashioned test hands on it is where the most can be learned as well.
This test should be cheap and requires little space so anyone can test it!
Thank you Infringer, and yeah I totally agree!
Theory isn't worth anything if it can't be proven practically! That does also include my idea.
I tried to test it earlier by drilling several holes in a soda-bottle and then connect several tubes to it.
Sadly it never got airtight and wouldn't work at all, I do however have plans to test it later with a better setup.
In the mean time I thought it could be useful to give the idea to several people, maybe someone who has the parts already lying around and can test it.
Here's a more extreme yet possible setup if the principle works:
I was intrigued so i went and tried your idea using a 12ft length of garden hose lying around. its not the same but along similar thoughts. the hose was placed 2 feet up from point of siphon and 10 ft out. I was only able to get flow about 2inches above point of siphon and it was slow. but it was a continuous flow. thawt it was interesting enough to post.
Hmmm, you just took a normal garden hose and connected it from the bottom to the top, without several outputs (it isn't thicker there maybe?)?
But wow! Are you saying that you actually have water flowing from it, without any external pressure added?!?
Please describe more!
Naboo
Capillary Action.
yes you got me thinking about the added weight of water pulling the siphon. a 12 foot hose was all i had. but yes it flowed from the hose 2 inches above water intake. try it!!! a longer hose might get a better result. i hope someone else tries. id like to see what they get. if it stands true, with alot of pipes and long trofts for holding the water you mite hypothetically be able to build a water wheel self powered.
@onthecuttingedge2005
Yes I know, capillary structures is really cool stuff, they move liquids against gravity!
But, you don't think capillary action is one of natures many laws which now will stop me from making my free energy with siphons? Hmm, I know a common garden hose works perfectly as a siphon, I used it many times, and there isn't much capillary action in those I think...
Quote from: craZy on July 18, 2009, 07:53:10 PM
yes you got me thinking about the added weight of water pulling the siphon. a 12 foot hose was all i had. but yes it flowed from the hose 2 inches above water intake. try it!!! a longer hose might get a better result. i hope someone else tries. id like to see what they get. if it stands true, with alot of pipes and long trofts for holding the water you mite hypothetically be able to build a water wheel self powered.
Sorry for sounding like a skeptic, but you aren't just making this up are you?
I mean, you are using just one hose, how could that work????
Sorry, I really want to understand this!
Naboo
I think a Capillary mass will be better than a single tube.
by Capillary mass I mean lots of Capillary tubes massed together to act as a single siphon system.
you can either make the mass capillary cable by lots of tubes 'or' you can take a bundle of fishing line or fibre optic lines in a mass and the water will climb the space between the lines.
Jerry ;)
@Jerry, I would say both yes and no. I actually also suggested to Hansvonlieven that using capillary structures could be a good idea. But they like to absorb liquid, and once filled they tend to hold it in place.
In addition too much chaotic surface would pose a certain resistance to flowing water.
But it was also what I was thinking of expanding this into. For example, how about rolling a long plastic sheet or any other material into a cylinder with a small distance between each layer shaped like a spiral? I could be an effective and cheap way to make a capillary structure which can also absorb large amounts of water.
Btw, do you know of any good method to make the water leave the structure at a given location, for example far above from where it was absorbed???
@craZy
I'm sorry if I didn't appreciate the information you gave me sufficiently. But it makes little sense in relationship to the way I thought it would work...
Hmm, if you could please repeat your experiment and check the following: Does it matter if more of the hose is on one side than on the other of the highest point? This could mean that you simply need more hose on the drain side to increase its effect.
Naboo
Quote from: Nabo00o on July 18, 2009, 08:55:52 PM
Btw, do you know of any good method to make the water leave the structure at a given location, for example far above from where it was absorbed???
Hi Nabo.
can you draw up the example of how you want it to work?
Jerry :)
Quote from: onthecuttingedge2005 on July 18, 2009, 09:16:22 PM
Hi Nabo.
can you draw up the example of how you want it to work?
Jerry :)
;D
Hi Nabo.
the Capillary mass cable that the Russians used was simply layed on its side at the end of its destination and it just dripped out. so long as the mass at the end was large enough.
I heard stories about them using these to carry up Water out of the rivers to houses into a roof top reservoir which is then gravity fed to faucets and tanks below in the house.
Jerry ;)
Unlimited power in other words....
This is one of the things that I have been searching for a lot, if it in fact could be possible.
It is of course something quite different from the siphoning process, which only requires an asymmetrical relationship of its masses. However I think both methods should be covered in this tread, and then we could see which could be most the most practical, giving the most water at the lowest cost.
What I had envisioned in order to create practical power when needed was to fill small dam or a container with the water pumped, allowing much larger amounts of power to be used when needed.
This is of course the big problem about solar as well as wind energy. If you want a reliable source of energy then you need a huge battery bank (which is REALLY expensive), while in this case we can easily and efficiently pump water into a container at a certain height, and it doesn't need to cost that much either.
So why do you think the Russian method worked? Could it be because the momentum of the already moving water pushed it through its last passage through the surface-tension border? Maybe you need a special material or at least a specially designed structure?
Naboo
Quote from: Nabo00o on July 18, 2009, 09:56:08 PM
So why do you think the Russian method worked? Could it be because the momentum of the already moving water pushed it through its last passage through the surface-tension border? Maybe you need a special material or at least a specially designed structure?
Naboo
you might have a correct assumsion there about the river pressure inflow helping the water push out.
there may be substances/particles that can help break water tension at its surface but I would have to do some research because I don't have an answer yet.
magnetohydrodynamics comes to mind but even that is a passing thought.
Jerry :)
Does it matter if more of the hose is on one side than on the other of the highest point? This could mean that you simply need more hose on the drain side to increase its effect.
Naboo
[/quote]yes i believe that a longer hose may increase flow, but i dont have a longer hose at the moment to prove it
http://drspark.com/idea001.php
Group,
The container must be sealed so there is no evaperation or very very little.
I could not get mine to drip. BUT a droplet would form at the bottom of the
wick and hang there. My cap-tube was not tiny enough to raise the alcohol
far enough, for the alcohol on the wick to become heavy enough, to break the
surface tension. What i did was raise the lower surface until the droplet as
it was forming contacted it and it oscillated like that for years. Sitting on a
window sill and the disturbance was reflected on the wall or ceiling.
The droplet would form, grow, make contact drain away repeat...
it slowly evaporated thru the unsealed lid and staopped after a few years..
@drspark
That is quite a useful experiment to do, you see then what it takes to both extract and condense the liquid.
I can't find the paper at this moment, but I know read an article in Alexander Frolov's magazine "New Energy Technologies" in which an experiment was described where water was first absorbed in into a type of wick, it would then because of its large surface against the air evaporate the water making small amounts of steam which would travel down to the cool side. It was cool because as the top of the unit cooled as water did evaporate, the coolness did transfer down and caused the steam to condense again and repeat its process.
It was fairly small amounts though.
Nabo00o, I had some time going over your thread and it's quite an interesting one. There are so many promising ideas lately that aren't getting enough attention. This one seems also very easy to perform.
As for the theory, I never had a good grasp of siphons. They seemed to work in mysterious ways. I never gave the molecular bonding any thought really but your thread forced me to. It's very odd for water to pull on its neighbor for no apparent reason. The most interesting part is what wikipedia mentions at the end...
QuoteSurprisingly, experiments have indeed shown that siphons can operate in a vacuum, provided that the liquids are pure and degassed and surfaces are very clean.
So the only explanation left is that there is some sort of molecular bond that causes the flow to maintain. Their train analogy is a good one for a single tube. But it breaks apart when the tube either has a bigger volume on the outlet side or multiple paths like yours.
Nabo00o this project is very cheap.
I recently read on a forums about a proposed setup of consecutive cilinders with aboven them vacume chambers.
I don't know if this is possible, but even if it should require a complex system of one-way valves and air-removers, it would be very significant if a single "body" of vacume could be used to continiously pump up water, any amount.
My country is for a great part situation below sea level, so I can about water pump culture and technology, and I think it's vital to come up with a low-cost scalable pump technology to irrigate the Sahara. There's enough food in the world for all of mankind, if we conquer back land lost to climate change, in part do man's own wrongdoing (over-grazing). To some extent, water in the Sahara is water not in the ocean. Saves my country raising the water defense structures further.
So, is vacume driven pumping possible?
Else, I'm breaking my head to somehow turn the proven greater mass in those shorter tubes into accumulated pressure difference over the inlet tube. Cone shape tubes, short cut connections, throwing in the power of the sun, anything goes.
Heh, I wouldn't want to sit on that train! Even worse than a roller-coaster!
And yeah I've been thinking the same thing, too many topics here and in other forums should have been investigated by more people which aren't, especially by those who have enough credentials to actually conduct serious and good quality experiments, we need this in order to prove a point to the scientific community!
But as I've read on wikipedia ::) and of course on other sources, it is really quite easy to explain this phenomena. You know air right, its very easy to compress and also to expand, or at least "easy" compeered to a liquid like water and even solids like stone :D
The thing is that if you have a tube filled with water and both sides point down, they can't both flow down at the same time, this would have meant that some space was left over in the tube as PURE VACUUM, which needs incredible forces to be created, it would probably even collapse the entire tube if attempted.
So instead of making this vacuum, and also because water unlike air cannot be compressed (or expanded) to any considerable degree, in a pipe it will tend to act more like a long strong string than water out in free space.
Naboo
@Cloxxki
Well of course we can use vacuum to pump water, I think it is even the most common way to pump water on the planet! The problem is of course that once the water begins to fill the space previously being vacuum, its pressure will change and eventually reach normal atmospheric pressure. But you talked about a design which maybe didn't have these problems? Also so you know, there is a very cheap way to create a great vacuum, and it is the venturi vacuum pump. It is completely solid-state and uses the venturi-effect of accelerating liquid to create a powerful suction. If you search on youtube you can find a guy who "boils" water by creating a vacuum inside a bottle. Since the evaporation point of a liquid is decided both by its temperature and its pressure you can just as easily boil something by changing its pressure.
Btw, here's another picture. It shows that by changing the surface area and thus the volume of a pipe, it can also be used to increase the water mass flowing in it.
Edit: Also if we increase the surface-area of a pipe too much we will approach the limit to where air bubbles will enter and ruin the process, I guess that this is caused by the lack of surface tension.
Naboo
@craZy
If it works like I think it is then you don't need any longer hose, you just need to portion more of the hose on the drain side than one the intake side, if this is what does it then it should work like that, although I really didn't believe that siphon could work like that....
Also here is kinda the ultimate way I figured this pump could work, with many small tubes fitted together you can increase the suction power without risking air-bubbles to enter:
Cheap stab at testing your theory ...
And I think broli explained away why this may not work with the best explanation the molecular bond because there will be a firing order of sorts there will be a point if the tube is pushing more then it is pulling there will be a back fire if you will to maintain the equal state that is required for a siphon.
But a cheap way is a tube a bucket of water some tube and a t splitter with some hose clamps.
Very cheap and easy...
But my question is this why cant you continue to siphon something (regular one tube) out of a tank and put it back into a tank while dripping on to a turbine unless the movement on the surface of the water would cause a problem less the fact that evaporation would eventually occur I can not think of any reasons why such a thing would not work...
Cheap test computer fan and a tube and a bucket of water with some rubber gloves for safety.
At worst case this may win the overunity prize depending upon the definition of sustained ... More power out then in for a period of x time the time was never discussed after all I thought over unity by definition means more power out then in and a sustained over unity would be perpetual motion so is it the perpetual motion prize or the over unity prize?
I would love for heartiberlin to clarify this one for us.
Thanks for sharing guys good post.
Naboo the more outlets you make the harder it would be to keep the molecular bond. I think it is safe to say that broli has brought to us a very valid scientific point but by all means please do test.
-infringer-
Thanks infringer but I do actually disagree. It might be that the molecular bond is stronger at smaller dimensions, but as I have understood it by reading on siphons it is definitely suction by pressure which causes the flow to start and maintains it.
Okey as we commonly know siphons, if you have a U shaped pipe pointing down, fill it with liquid (water) and open up both ends nothing will happen. This is because the forces of gravity on both sides is just as strong. However if one side is longer than the other and you open both sides it will flow down the longest one. This is because gravity has more mass to push on that side than on the other side, thus causing the balance to brake and begins to accelerate water in that direction.
As I said earlier, to create perfect vacuum requires very large amounts of energy, but that is what would have happened if water only flowed down on one side without the other side moving, or if both sides flowed in opposite directions.
So because of that a low pressure will instead force the remaining water in the tube to follow the first water. Also if you make the U pipe too thick air will enter and cause the water to fall out on both sides.
The standard and limiting theory (if it is true) is that only height decides how much flow there will be, it is very much like incorporating the already existing hydrostatic law to siphons. In hydrostatics shape will not change anything, even if it seems counterintuitive. The question is if that is truly the way a siphon works, or if it maybe can work in a "hydrodynamic" manner as well. But at any rate I know the experiments will ultimately teach us what that works and what that doesn't. I hope this works though ;D
Naboo
Edit: I'm not interested in the overunity price, he can save that one for someone else :D
Neither perpetual motion or even overunity was required to win the price I think, only that you had a unit which could produce energy with the following specifications. For example if the fuel was water it shouldn't more than 10 liter a day or something like that.
Also just to make my view about the matter clear: Perpetual motion IS impossible, over unit means about the same thing and is therefore also impossible. What isn't impossible however is to find a source of energy which can power everything we need, in a cheap and abundant way, this is called 'free energy'.
It might be that this free energy will not be found with its basis in the physical world, but instead in the time dimension, although that is a completely different subject ;)
Perhaps we should find a way to let the water do more than just lose gravity potential energy on its downflow. It forming a good vector might somehow be used to obtain a positive pressure difference, to keep the flow going.
I have posted before about the Messaih machien, which is like a point-down traffic cone spinning to pump up water. It's supposed to be way efficient at down this, perhaps because the water doesn't have leverage against the cone. Had it not spun and had a a bit of friction, the water would just fall down. Once over the top though, the water might be used in an efficient turbine to create more energy than is needed to run the pumping cone. Or just stay high, to get the darn water to the desert.
If the downward tubes would be spirals with tapered diamter, suction could be generated. But would this stop the downflow, or speed up the up flow?
Another idea to play with is a fine Archemes' screw. Large diameter. Screw material and color are vastly different from point to point, to get the Sun to help a hand.
Yet another idea. A bladder that is light or heat sensitive, and respond with expansion or schrinkage. With a closed water system, this created pressure. Let out on top at max schrinkage, let in at bottom at max expansion. The pump might run a "light switch", being some sort of sun block. If the inside of the bladder is insulated, the outside could be the active skin. Easily manipulated by altering cold and warm water current over it. No idea if such bladder could be powerful enough to be useful to gain real height in real volumes.
The idea was that no external power source except for the fluid interaction would be necessary, the point is that the imbalance of mass causes a force to drag it in the path where the gravitation is strongest, just like in a gravitation wheel.
Almost all of your suggestions but maybe one requires some other source of energy. The exception is the cone pump which I think utilizes the centrifugal force of water to push it further up. This is not a direct way of pushing the water like the Archimedes screw for instance.
Naboo
I just hope that if any of you have tried to build this and didn't get it to work, please post your results here!
It is better to know it now than later if this concept cannot work, also it might help to show if some ways of building it works better than others. I will post my findings both good and bad as soon as I find the time and parts necessary make it.
Nab
Quote from: Nabo00o on July 20, 2009, 08:55:42 PM
I just hope that if any of you have tried to build this and didn't get it to work, please post your results here!
It is better to know it now than later if this concept cannot work, also it might help to show if some ways of building it works better than others. I will post my findings both good and bad as soon as I find the time and parts necessary make it.
Nab
The reason it does not work and cannot work is that water pressure is not related to how much water is in the funnel, but rather only on how much water is directly over the opening. It is called the hydrostatic paradox.
The following explains it pretty well:
http://scubageek.com/articles/wwwparad.html (http://scubageek.com/articles/wwwparad.html)
I know that utilitarian, hydrostatics is weird (but it must be like that). But what I showed in the sketches was not like in the example you showed. The biggest point with this experiment on siphons is that the weight of water on the drain side doesn't rest on anything, so that there is nothing to hold back the weight of water and thus removes this from the normal hydrostatic scenario. Maybe you don't agree with this but that water has real weight, and the only thing holding it back is the counterweight on the suction side of the siphon.
This is the theory I am using.
Naboo
utilitarian, this isn't very related to hydrostatics. It's all about hydrodynamics. The big question here is would more volume at a slower rate cause the same suction for the same volume at the same rate. We know that siphons work regardless of flow rate difference between inlet and outlet. So why would multiple heads not work?
Nabo00o, you have to start building one of those setups. I might try this out as well seeing how simple it is.
This design will work but what you would accomplish is increasing the flow rate of the water. If you were moving the water a negative distance then you would accomplish something useful, without the negative distance it will do nothing useful because gravity will have no potential to work.
Quote from: Nabo00o on July 20, 2009, 09:16:01 PM
I know that utilitarian, hydrostatics is weird (but it must be like that). But what I showed in the sketches was not like in the example you showed. The biggest point with this experiment on siphons is that the weight of water on the drain side doesn't rest on anything, so that there is nothing to hold back the weight of water and thus removes this from the normal hydrostatic scenario. Maybe you don't agree with this but that water has real weight, and the only thing holding it back is the counterweight on the suction side of the siphon.
This is the theory I am using.
Naboo
Oh you are right. I did not see the image because I did not go back far enough in the thread. This is not a funnel situation like I assumed.
This actually looks fiendishly clever. But I think I know why it would not work. The multiple pipes have to pull water from each other as well as from the main tank, and so you lose the presumed unbalanced effect, and water does not flow.
@Alien509
Hmm, what is important here is that in order to increase the flow you need stronger suction, thus either flow could be increased or you could trade it of for a higher outlet, this is what I am doing and I think it is useful.
For one if this works the water would never stop running, secondly, a large container could be filled with water from a source further down.
@Utilitarian
Well you might have a point there, but I do not think it is impossible to overcome this problem.
If the design is made in such a way that all the negative pressure meets in one end and works together to pull the water intake I think it would work. Also, what about the scenario where you only use one pipe in and out, being wider on the outtake than on the intake? I'll see if I can't make some new sketches to eliminate the possible problems...
@broli
Yep. I was thinking of trying it seriously today, we got more than enough parts lying around here ;)
Okey this was done quite fast.
Still when I think about it, it only seem to be a problem in the beginning when the water doesn't know which way to flow. What if we had a pump connected to intake which forced water and through and made it flow through all the other outlets? If we then quickly put the intake below the water-level again the momentum of the flowing water could possibly keep on the flow, and keep it in the right direction? The pump could of course also be a normal garden hose with water coming out. I am not sure, but maybe....
Until then here is a change which will most probably work:
Quote from: utilitarian on July 21, 2009, 12:22:18 AM
Oh you are right. I did not see the image because I did not go back far enough in the thread. This is not a funnel situation like I assumed.
This actually looks fiendishly clever. But I think I know why it would not work. The multiple pipes have to pull water from each other as well as from the main tank, and so you lose the presumed unbalanced effect, and water does not flow.
If that's the case aren't you then dealing with newtons third law. Both will be trying to suck each other off,(oh my what a sentence) so the suction cancels.
To get to the train analogy it would mean that the train would have equal amounts of carts on both sides of the hill and thus be in equilibrium, But it could get tipped over easily, in this case that can't happen as water is continuously being fed so the equilibrium state remains indefinitely.
Quote from: Nabo00o on July 21, 2009, 07:37:55 AM
Okey this was done quite fast.
Still when I think about it, it only seem to be a problem in the beginning when the water doesn't know which way to flow. What if we had a pump connected to intake which forced water and through and made it flow through all the other outlets? If we then quickly put the intake below the water-level again the momentum of the flowing water could possibly keep on the flow, and keep it in the right direction? The pump could of course also be a normal garden hose with water coming out. I am not sure, but maybe....
Until then here is a change which will most probably work:
You could get a siphon;
http://www.germes-online.com/direct/dbimage/50314745/Siphon_Pumps.jpg (http://www.germes-online.com/direct/dbimage/50314745/Siphon_Pumps.jpg)
And either attach a bigger tube on the outlet or attach one or more y-pieces to increase the amount of outlet tubes. The advantage is that you would have a means to pump the water to get it flowing instead of having to suck on it with your mouth or perform some other trick.
What about a same-diameter, but really long spiraled tube for the (shorter) downflow? Lots of weight behind it, 1-dimensionally down the tube. If it's really long and heavy but low-friction, it might overcome the required vacume power to let water flow up otherwise?
The spiral would need a pre-fill, and afterwards the water would be flowing as long as air free water was fed from the source.
Pure theory, which usually fails due to some smart law of nature.
Quote from: Cloxxki on July 21, 2009, 08:05:44 AM
What about a same-diameter, but really long spiraled tube for the (shorter) downflow? Lots of weight behind it, 1-dimensionally down the tube. If it's really long and heavy but low-friction, it might overcome the required vacume power to let water flow up otherwise?
Hmm, I am not sure, but I think this is when utilitarian's argument of hydrostatics comes into play.
Even though it may not seem like it, the water in the spiraling tube is resting on the tube itself, and most probably hydrostatic pressure is the only thing that will remain in the end of the tube. But, I know from having read a bit of Schauberger's work that spiraling tubes can posses the ability of lowering the resistance even more than a straight tube, even if there is more tube to travel through!
He did also find that copper tubes had the least resistance to flowing water, even less than glass.
Naboo
Quote from: Cloxxki on July 21, 2009, 08:05:44 AM
What about a same-diameter, but really long spiraled tube for the (shorter) downflow? Lots of weight behind it, 1-dimensionally down the tube. If it's really long and heavy but low-friction, it might overcome the required vacume power to let water flow up otherwise?
I don't think this will work. It will be the same as a straight tube with the same height. Mathematically you can show this, intuitively you can feel that most of the weight would be canceled by the horizontal parts of the tube the water "sits" on.
Again you can use some sort of gravity analogy like you see below.
Hmm, you have something there.
And spinning the whole system around the vertical inlet pipe exis, the output pointing out, will probably not help much either.
Quote from: Cloxxki on July 21, 2009, 08:28:33 AM
Hmm, you have something there.
And spinning the whole system around the vertical inlet pipe exis, the output pointing out, will probably not help much either.
Hehe. Oh that will help, but that is a completely different subject! You are then using the centrifugal force of rotating water to push it, and to say the least it is interesting. Check this out:
http://www.energeticforum.com/renewable-energy/4202-bernoulli-principal-vortex.html (http://www.energeticforum.com/renewable-energy/4202-bernoulli-principal-vortex.html)
Nab
Coincidently I had two types of tubes laying around. One is double the diameter of the other. I stuck the small one in the big one and started the experiment.
Unfortunately the results aren't positive. It will siphon when the outlet is below the water level in the reservoir but once it's above it the siphon action stops and the water rushes back to the tank. There's no question about being more water on the down side. As I made sure the connection of the tubes is at the highest point.
Below you see the setup and the position of the outlet where the siphon action takes place.
Bah, oh well I was afraid it would be like that, even if I don't know what is causing it!
You are sure that the thickness of the outlet pipe didn't allow air bubbles to go in?
Probably this isn't the case, so there is something else going on here, but I wonder what...
Btw, in that picture the outlet pipe isn't perfectly vertical, this could at least cause minor problems...
Naboo
Quote from: Nabo00o on July 21, 2009, 09:39:19 AM
Bah, oh well I was afraid it would be like that, even if I don't know what is causing it!
You are sure that the thickness of the outlet pipe didn't allow air bubbles to go in?
Probably this isn't the case, so there is something else going on here, but I wonder what...
Btw, in that picture the outlet pipe isn't perfectly vertical, this could at least cause minor problems...
Naboo
The experiment was pretty controlled. The pipe on one side held at least 190+% more water, so there's no question about more water in the bigger tube. And There was no air since I started from a siphon location and gradually moved the pipes up so the outlet was above the water level. But once I reached the water level the siphon action stopped and the remaining water rushed back to the reservoir.
I encourage you to perform this experiment yourself as its simple and you can see what happens for yourself.
Well I have tried it now and got the same results as you, actually I also tried a while ago before I started this tread but I believed that something else was giving the bad results. Seem like the idea of disproportional weights in a siphon isn't that easy after all to initiate. So, as best we can tell hydrostatics seems to be all-prevailing law in siphoning as well, but maybe we can learn from this.
I'm not ready to give up this topic yet because we also discussed capillary action here, and maybe it does have the potential to unlock the secrets of unlimited flow, against gravity. Maybe there could be a way to combine siphoning with capillary action, maybe that was the secret the Russians used. I want to know more about that! :D
Also, the user craZy reported some very interesting results with his experimentation. If this actually happened I do believe this needs to be investigated more throughly...
Naboo
hmm......
Quote from: sm0ky2 on July 22, 2009, 12:43:15 AM
hmm......
I wish that would work. The top outlet is an air inlet, though.
Quote from: sm0ky2 on July 22, 2009, 12:43:15 AM
hmm......
It will not work: water in the pipe on the right will be sucked up and siphoned into the pipe at the center. There will be no water in the right container.
A pycnometer or specific gravity bottle is a flask with a stopper that has a capillary tube through it, which allows air bubbles to escape. The pycnometer is used to obtain accurate measurements of density.
lowering the boiling point of liquids always helps.
if that was Liquid Nitrogen in the pycnometer is would come out with a violent pressure reaction.
Jerry ;)
Quote from: exnihiloest on July 22, 2009, 04:33:42 AM
It will not work: water in the pipe on the right will be sucked up and siphoned into the pipe at the center. There will be no water in the right container.
Hi exnih.
you are right, it will act like this Robinair High Vacuum Valve.
Jerry
@all
Even though that setup smokey showed probably doesn't work you shouldn't dismiss it so fast.
To see if it really works or what it does you need to see both how the momentum of the water could affect it and also how the vectors work, if the different vectors add together or if they work against each other.
@onthecuttingedge2005
In your opinion, what would the best available structure or material be for a homemade capillary tube?
I ask because I want to do some serious experimentation in this area, as I've already seen, it seems like slightly different materials have very different properties. As you surely agree the biggest nut to crack then is how to make the water flow out of it again.
Do you have any ideas or suggestions? Thanks!
Naboo
Oh damn, I got the best Idea in I've had in a while now!!!!
This can get interesting....
Edit: Siphons in most (probably all setups) are governed by hydrostatics.
What I did in those drawing was to reverse the place the water's weight rested on, now they instead hanged in the roof, but then all that weight/suction power got absorbed (just like in normal hydrostatics).
But, what if that water hanged directly from the output of a capillary tube????
(think before you speak :D)
Naboo
Edit yet again: This is damn interesting!
Quote from: Nabo00o on July 22, 2009, 10:57:26 AM
@onthecuttingedge2005
In your opinion, what would the best available structure or material be for a homemade capillary tube?
I ask because I want to do some serious experimentation in this area, as I've already seen, it seems like slightly different materials have very different properties. As you surely agree the biggest nut to crack then is how to make the water flow out of it again.
Do you have any ideas or suggestions? Thanks!
Naboo
try researching it with low boiling point Alcohol instead of water. I think the solution is the boiling point of the liquid medium breaking the capillary surface tension via pressure.
here is a Mercury fountain that uses Mercury's low boiling point.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B1FnF5zUPEE
Jerry ;)
Quote from: onthecuttingedge2005 on July 22, 2009, 11:12:52 AM
I think the solution is the boiling point of the liquid medium "breaking the capillary surface tension via pressure."
Dead on!
I'll try to show some sketches soon. It will also show just why my setup didn't work and why we can overcome that problem!
Julian
You might try something like this.
Jerry ;)
I'm not sure exactly how that works, well I'm not yet that experienced with capillary structures.
Anyway here's my idea to why my previous theory didn't work. Basically it was all the time a hydrostatic system, it had just been reversed. Instead of making the fluid rest on the ground and thus making its weight equally compensated for, it now hanged from the roof so to say, and thus its weight will be compensated for by the structure it is hanging from. It is is really just like turning the a normal hydrostatic example upside down, and then you are working with negative pressures instead of positive ones.
I made these examples just to show my thinking, the ones to the left are the purely theoretical ones, while the ones to the right are made to handle the air-bubble problem when you increases the surface of a pipe or container too much. I think this also explains siphoning pretty well, you are working hydrostatic pressures as in any normal container with an outlet, but instead of working with positive pressures you are working with negative ones. (if that makes sense):
you could try something like this.
you might have to prime the tank to get the pressure flowing.
Jerry ;)
Okey so the thing I learned when it didn't work was that the weight was absorbed by the structure it was hanging from, just like the structure it is resting on. So therefore you cannot make use of the weight in a reversed U turn like I first though, there is only hydrostatic pressure then.
But the weight of the water is still exerting its force on the surface which keeps it from falling down.
So, if that surface was chosen to be some kind of wick or capillary structure which was also connected to the bottom for the intake of water, we should not loose the force of the water's weight as when we only used a reversed U turned siphon. Does this idea sound plausible?
I didn't use too much time to make this, the brown pipe is the capillary structure which will absorb water until filled. The smaller gray pipe is where the water will be hanging, and thus exerting its direct weight on the pressure inside the wick. It could of course only be one pipe, or it could be many small ones, even a capillary structure but it should be able to hold more water.
Any suggestions are welcome!
Julian
Edit: It should probably 'not' be a capillary structure, nothing must block its weight from hanging.
Sorry for not responding, have been away for a bit, and no I've haven't made the "perpetual motion machine" yet :D
Even if it isn't its purpose, your sketch makes me think that you are using the mineral oil as a piston, and are thus using the weight of the above-resting fluid to push the water up, but then it could just as well have been water, hmm... Kinda like Hero's fountain!
But, it seem like it is perfectly possible both theoretically and practically to make the capillary structure absorb liquid at a lower point and loose it at a higher point. If we imagine a thin pipe which by its capillary action absorbs water to a certain hight. Then we make the pipe go down again before the equilibrium between the force of gravity and surface-tension arises and then slowly, while going down again increases its diameter. This would cause the force of surface-tension to weaken and possibly allow the gravity to "win" before it reaches below the bottom level as before.
This can seem a bit like a mix between both capillary structures and siphoning :)
But, is it possible? Is there anyone here who knows enough about surface tension to tell me this?
Bye, Julian.
Wanting a better and faster way to calculate the hight which a capillary fluid can travel, I made this simple spreadsheet, it makes the calculations using the SI units. Of course there is nothing that keeps any of you from changing it into using the American standards if you feel like it, then you could even have posted it here afterwards with the new changes!
Also Jerry, it definitely seems like you are using the mineral oil as a piston to pump the water. Since the oil is lighter than water you need something lighter than it again if you want the third fluid to stay on the top.
If not then what does it do!?!?!? :D
Julian
Hi Naboo.
the Minerial oil acts like a piston and a medium to keep the Alcohol separated from the Water so they dont mix, since the Alcohol has a lower boiling point it will create a higher pressure zone to help push the water into and out of the capillary tube.
it was just a thought that might help you find what you are looking for but I am more interested in Super Solar Cells at the moment.
Good luck.
Jerry ;)
:o
hi all
maybe you need to take a look at a ram pump they were popular in the 1800's for pumping water up hill and need very little head pressure but it is required
a tank a few feet up with a large pipe out a check valve for the large pipe a tee to a small tank another tee for the large pipe with a small pipe out the tee and a gate valve that can be closed and opened very rapidly
when the gate valve opens the water flows at high velocity in the large pipe for some distance gaining mass velocity and when the gate valve is slammed shut the water pressurizes the space in the tank and the small tube that raises the water but at a reduced rate as it is much smaller when the air in the tank is fully compressed it begins to push back and closes the check valve to the head pressure tank and stops this loss of pressure forcing water up the small tube to a higher elevation due to volume pressure difference until it equalizes at which time if the gate valve is opened and the water flows the process begins again.each time there is a reduction of flow due to the water that must be waisted to get the flow volume up to speed again for the next lift but they are very efficient as pumps go
Martin
hi all,
i found an information on a website showing a diagram that can be a very simple demo of a perpetual motion.
the basic principle is lifting water to a higher level from the source, by using force/power from gravity alone.
This design is very similar with the diagram in reply #37 and reply #61
some pictures of a replication attempts can be found here
http://saracens.wordpress.com/2011/04/03/pompa-air-tenaga-gravitasi/
do you guys think that this simple device/principle will work?
i haven't tried to replicate it yet
Hi Octo I am so sorry that i haven't replied to your message before now! I believe i have understood the operation of the machine you show here, and it is extremely interesting! What i wanted from the beginning was something that was constructed as simple as possible in regards to its working principle, and this is exactly that.
However I believe this siphon pump will not work at all, because it actually does the opposite of its thought operation.
The key to everything here relies on the forces on the piston you have between the water intake/air surface and the air surface/water drain.
These two are disproportional, so the forces between them will be unbalanced, however in the wrong direction in my opinion.
Since the intake surface is small while the drain surface is large, the force of gravity acting on the intake water will get magnified compared to the force on the drain water; thus it will pull on the drain water, emptying the air and therefore removing the piston all together.
I tried in my head to construct the opposite ratio, but I found it hard. However I see now that it CAN be done, so i want to make a drawing of it. You basically just need to reverse the ratio between the intake and drain surface, then the water piston will work to your advantage. The best part is even though i call it a piston it shouldn't even move at all!
I hope all the best and also that you didn't take any offense in my observations or opinions.
Julian
Edit: Here is a basic sketch of what I think could work, please try to see the similarity between this and your image.
This is in 2D, so of course to get a 1:2 or 1:4 ratio etc. in 3D you would have to take into account pi squared if you made a cylinder for example. But I think the higher surface ratio the better, until you limited the actual flow of water.
And please reply!
I could be wrong, but my guess is you would get more horsepower hooking a harness up to a ant than any of these machine will ever produce.
I'll admit ants are very strong compared to their weight, but unless you have something useful to say like "this is the reason it won't work etc." then maybe the option of not commenting is a better one?
Here is a great video about water.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XVBEwn6iWOo&list=FLRupjSpUsMEGphgXelQO-7A&index=14&feature=plpp_video (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XVBEwn6iWOo&list=FLRupjSpUsMEGphgXelQO-7A&index=14&feature=plpp_video)