negative drag



"Vince Morgan" <vinharAtHereoptusnet.com.au> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> "Clive George" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
>> "Vince Morgan" <vinharAtHereoptusnet.com.au> wrote in message
>> news:[email protected]...
>> >> >> The vehical would not go backwards under any ratio regardless of
>> >> >> efficiency, with adequate traction, but will only move forward if
> the
>
> Yes, I believed that was true when I wrote it. However, now that I've
> given
> it some closer attention I can see a point at which it could go backwards.
> However, I should say that the turbine would need to be very inneficient
> indeed for that to occur.
> Worm gears tend to be of such low ratio, in one direction, that friction
> within the gears is of little importance, but significant if used to step
> a
> ratio up, so I see this more as a property of the worm gear more than
> anything else.
> Either way, it is of little importance. You would have to make a very
> inneficient turbine for it to go backwards.

Stick a worm gear on it, and it won't go backwards - they will only transmit
power one way, ie the wheels won't be able to drive the windmill. That's why
I mentioned it. Similarly if you stick low enough conventional gearing on
it, you'll be able to cope with an insanely inefficient turbine, even with
the wheels being able to drive the blades.

(though talk of efficiency here still indicates you're suffering from power
vs force confusion)

> Initialy I saw that such a device would tend to accelerate against the
> wind
> indefinately. But, that is actualy not the case.

Indeed - Zeno's paradox.

> The fact that it requires
> a ratio range to work also strongly indicates that it's forward motion is
> limited by the same arrangement. Without that caveat it would be
> impossible.

cheers,
clive
 
"Clive George" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> "Vince Morgan" <vinharAtHereoptusnet.com.au> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
> > "Clive George" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> > news:[email protected]...
> >> "Vince Morgan" <vinharAtHereoptusnet.com.au> wrote in message
> >> news:[email protected]...

> (though talk of efficiency here still indicates you're suffering from
power
> vs force confusion)
Yes I do that often apparently. ;) I'm seeing it staticaly, so as to see
the relationship more easily.
Vince
 
"Vince Morgan" <vinharAtHereoptusnet.com.au> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> "Clive George" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
>> "Vince Morgan" <vinharAtHereoptusnet.com.au> wrote in message
>> news:[email protected]...
>> > "Clive George" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>> > news:[email protected]...
>> >> "Vince Morgan" <vinharAtHereoptusnet.com.au> wrote in message
>> >> news:[email protected]...
>
>> (though talk of efficiency here still indicates you're suffering from
> power
>> vs force confusion)
> Yes I do that often apparently. ;) I'm seeing it staticaly, so as to see
> the relationship more easily.

Good :) - so you can deal entirely in forces. That's how I handle it too.
So you need to think about what you mean by efficiency in this context,
since the normal efficiency = input power / output power doesn't count when
you're thinking about just the forces.

I'm guessing you're trying to think about forward force on the wheels vs
backward force on the turbine - except this is of course forward force at
the wheels vs backward force on the entire thing (stick a sail on the
platform and it has the same effect as making the windmill really bad). And
then you can simply bring in a couple of gears to bring the force at the
wheels up, and you very quickly discover that it's trivially easy to cope
with pretty much any wind force. Ie the "turbine efficiency" is irrelevant
for the purposes of discovering if it'll work or not. (making it work well
is a different problem...)

cheers,
clive
 
"Dan Bloomquist" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> Vince Morgan wrote:
> > "Dan Bloomquist" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> > news:[email protected]...
> >> Vince Morgan wrote:
> >>> "CWatters" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> >>> news:[email protected]...
> >>>> "Vince Morgan" <vinharAtHereoptusnet.com.au> wrote in message
> >>>> news:[email protected]...
> >>>>> "CWatters" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> >>>>> news:[email protected]...
> >
> >> How can you possibly equate glide ratio to turbine efficiency? By
> >> putting two 150 pound folks in the same glider as one 100 pound guy you
> >> dramatically affect the glide ratio. And it had nothing to do with the
> >> lift to drag of the air foils.
> >
> > Not on airfoils designed to carry a load that includes a single one
hundred
> > pound person. That would put the airfoil outside of it's design
parameters.
> > With different parameters the airfoil could require the extra weight
though.
>

I was refering to adding water to wing tanks to increase the glide speed.
But I don't know enough about it realy so I shouldn't have commented.
>

> >> Do you think that modern turbines are not built to approach the Betz
> >> limit as best as possible?
> >
> > Yes, I beleive they would.

Sorry, I wrote this badly. What I meant to say was "Yes I beleive they
would aproach the Bentz limit".

> > This indicates immediately that if wheels were connected and the
> > gear ratio were correct the vehical cannot move backwards against that
> > torgue, and further indicates there is still some torgue to spare.
>
> As has been pointed out several times, as long as efficiency is greater
> than zero, it will work...
[snip]
> Please, do show your numbers. As for it working with traction, it is
> simple. It works.

I can see I haven't made myself very clear Dan. It's only in the case where
traction is involved that I beleive it works. If I gave the impression I
thought otherwise I apologise to all. The case with the turbine driving a
proppeller on a boat I still have trouble with, and the free wheeler is not
at all possible I think.
To calculate what it would do I simply assumed a turbine where the turbine
blades are finely pitched, and would approach the Bentz limit as closely as
possible. I assigned a simple ratio of 4 to 1 to the torque/drag forces
which is well and truly within reaonable limits I believe. Before I got any
further it became apparent that applying the torque to the rear wheels was
going to overcome the drag. It was at that point I realized that anything
more than a 1.5 to 1, or thereabouts, ratio was going to move it forward.
It seems I was the only one that didn't realize the traction model would
acutaly work. Perhaps you assumed more intelligence that I actualy have
Dan, but if so I hope it was my fault ; )

Highest regards,
Vince
 
"Clive George" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> I'm guessing you're trying to think about forward force on the wheels vs
> backward force on the turbine - except this is of course forward force at
> the wheels vs backward force on the entire thing (stick a sail on the
> platform and it has the same effect as making the windmill really bad).
And
> then you can simply bring in a couple of gears to bring the force at the
> wheels up, and you very quickly discover that it's trivially easy to cope
> with pretty much any wind force. Ie the "turbine efficiency" is irrelevant
> for the purposes of discovering if it'll work or not. (making it work well
> is a different problem...)

I often use the term efficiency when I should be speaking ratios. It always
makes sense to me, though it's often not me I'm talking with.
What I was trying to say was that if the torque is greater than the overall
drag it would work, as you guessed.
I have cronic fatigue Clive and it is a real brain killer. I often use
short cuts where I can, and very often inapropriately.
Highest regards,
Vince
 
On Dec 12, 9:59 am, "Vince Morgan" <vinharAtHereoptusnet.com.au>
wrote:
> Perhaps you could extend this to fans blowing onto sails on boats.

I did try to picture exactly this here.

http://gabydewilde.googlepages.com/vortex-recumbent
gabydewilde - vortex recumbent

> Or, a turbine in the water that generates a current to run the boats electric
> motor thus keeping it moving forward to drive the turbine.
>

Your ideas are not as stupid as you make them sound.

If you want to make electricity and use that to power the turbine
again you will suffer much losses converting to electricity but if you
use an anchor and fill up your hydrogen full cell with the electricity
then you can suffer even more advanced losses for a long time and
power the turbine.

I don't know how but if one can tack up the wind one can also tack up
the current. One can absolutely use the current to power a turbine or
a worm. If only we knew how :)

But I want a car that doesn't cost any taxes. Those are called
bicycles. If you put motive electronics on it you disqualify the tax-
free ride.

I mean all we are doing is a bit of innocent recumbent
Ærodynamics? :)

You can have a dynamo and charge your phone, laptop, ipod or what ever
weird gadget.

> I imagine free energy, if it's possible, should take just a tad more
> thought.
>
> Vince

Mah, there are lots of ways already.

Physics does not at all need to be revised (jet) as closed systems
don't exist.

Imagine plugging your house into your bike and powering a few lights
with it. Put a battery in the circuit and you always have enough
current to power some small devices.

An untrained human generates about 200 Watt I read in wikipedia?

With 40mph wind it takes an awfully small windmill to make 200 Watt?

How should we interpret this line here?

"The power available in the wind goes up by a factor of 8 as the
windspeed doubles."
http://www.otherpower.com/otherpower_wind.html

So if we go up wind 3 times the speed of the wind we have roughly 8X8
times as much power available?

*pain from laughter*

I'm sure I'm confusing force and work again here.

Please some one explain it away? lol
 
http://209.85.207.104/search?q=cach...ependent+of+the+mass&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=3&gl=us

beyond what Newton and I ate today and yesterday, layer cake...

"An important note: we don't talk about potential energy associated
with work done against friction. Friction is a nonconservative force:
it's very hard to recover kinetic energy from work that you do against
friction. Gravity, on the other hand, is a conservative force: you can
recover ALL of the work done against gravity back into kinetic energy.
Potential energy is used to keep track of work done against
conservative forces."

there's perpetual and there's PERPETUAL - that's in Science at NYT

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/12/19/e...7aba90b1c9c05c&ei=5088&partner=rssnyt&emc=rss
 
On Dec 13, 4:22 pm, Tim McNamara <[email protected]> wrote:
> In article
> <[email protected]>,
>
> "[email protected]" <[email protected]> wrote:
> > How does this magic of yours work?
>
> That's the question we have been asking you. You haven't answered it in
> any sensible way yet. At this point I can only conclude that you are a
> troll.

move down wind ---> less wind

move up wind ---> more wind

Say there is no wind.

First you pedal to make the vehicle move.

drag happens

We use the drag to spin the prop and we use the energy from that prop
to propel the bike again.

That's obviously not going to do anything right?

Nothing useful happens.

Now lets try add 40 km/hr the wind to the mix.

We cycle at 25 km/hr but we have wind as if we are going 65 !!

Just like when standing still there is enough energy to accelerate
into the wind perpetually.

Of course there will be friction and bad engineering so it will only
remove lots of drag.

Seems great.

What shape should the rotor be? That would be the question.

I figure the only important thing is for the blades to have more
surface area in the length of the boat relative to the width.

A spiral or laminated rotor would also work.

Most conventional windmills are designed to work best at low wind
speeds then turn sidewards if the wind becomes to strong or even stop
all together.

A moving prop would desire one that works best in strong winds
obviously.

http://gabydewilde.googlepages.com/negative-drag
gabydewilde - negative drag
 
On Dec 13, 4:34 pm, NoEinstein <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Dec 12, 1:19 am, "[email protected]" <[email protected]> wrote:
> > Hello all,
>
> > I'm happy to announce that the drag generated by a vehicle may be used
> > by a windmill as if it was wind. This of course creates extra drag but
> > this drag is partially shared with the rider.
>
> > We thus have a free energy situation on our hands here. :)
>
> > Drag is limited by the size of the vehicle. If any amount of this drag
> > is turned into propulsion then that percentage (just) wont be
> > available for slowing the vehicle down. It's not-there anymore.
>
> > I have illustrated the concept here.
>
> >http://gabydewilde.googlepages.com/negative-drag
>
> > Let me think what you hear ok?
>
> > Regards,
>
> > gaby de wilde
>
> Of course, if cars drove on a circular track, one right after the
> other, the "breeze" would be like a very large fan. But why use a gas-
> guzzling fan to power a fan? Where is the energy advantage there?
> But if you happened to live beside a freeway, you could erect a
> windmill and "sap" the wind energy to power your computer, etc. Don't
> brag about it as "science", just do it and laugh! -- NoEinstein --

Roughly, the energy content of 10 mph wind is1/8 of that of 20 mph
wind

So if you pedal 10 mph up the wind you have the drag available as if
going 20 mph

Then when you go 20 you have the drag as if going 30 mph

The difference between 20 and 30 is enormous compared to that between
zero and 10 mph.

Or am I just confused again?

http://gabydewilde.googlepages.com/negative-drag
gabydewilde - negative drag
 
"An important note: we don't talk about potential energy associated
with work done against friction. Friction is a nonconservative force:
it's very hard to recover kinetic energy from work that you do
against
friction. Gravity, on the other hand, is a conservative force: you
can
recover ALL of the work done against gravity back into kinetic
energy.
Potential energy is used to keep track of work done against
conservative forces."
 
move down wind ---> less wind

move up wind ---> more wind

Say there is no wind.

First you pedal to make the vehicle move.

drag happens

We use the drag to spin the prop and we use the energy from that prop
to propel the bike again.

That's obviously not going to do anything right?

Nothing useful happens.

Now lets try add 40 km/hr the wind to the mix.

We cycle at 25 km/hr but we have wind as if we are going 65 !!

Just like when standing still there is enough energy to accelerate
into the wind perpetually.

Of course there will be friction and bad engineering so it will only
remove lots of drag.

Seems great.

What shape should the rotor be? That would be the question.

I figure the only important thing is for the blades to have more
surface area in the length of the boat relative to the width.

A spiral or laminated rotor would also work.

Most conventional windmills are designed to work best at low wind
speeds then turn sidewards if the wind becomes to strong or even stop
all together.

A moving prop would desire one that works best in strong winds
obviously.

http://gabydewilde.googlepages.com/negative-drag
gabydewilde - negative drag
 
On Dec 12, 7:19 am, "[email protected]" <[email protected]> wrote:
> Hello all,
>
> I'm happy to announce that the drag generated by a vehicle may be used
> by a windmill as if it was wind. This of course creates extra drag but
> this drag is partially shared with the rider.
>
> We thus have a free energy situation on our hands here. :)
>
> Drag is limited by the size of the vehicle. If any amount of this drag
> is turned into propulsion then that percentage (just) wont be
> available for slowing the vehicle down. It's not-there anymore.
>
> I have illustrated the concept here.
>
> http://gabydewilde.googlepages.com/negative-drag
>
> Let me think what you hear ok?
>
> Regards,
>
> gaby de wilde

Here is a patent from Anthony Tantalo disclosing a wind powered fuel
saving apparatus that also enhances the aerodynamic profile of the
vehicle.

http://www.google.com/patents?id=Bp43AAAAEBAJ
Abstract
A fuel saving device for increasing the fuel mileage of a moving
vehicle is disclosed. The number of miles per gallon of fuel is
increased by the present invention through a device mounted on top of
a vehicle, which device includes a housing having a length
substantially equal to the width of the vehicle, an air intake at the
front of the housing and a motor driven rotor having blades which are
further driven by the oncoming wind pressure created by the moving
vehicle. The device also includes means for deflecting the air from
the housing over the remaining portion of the vehicle and positioned
in cooperative relationship with the rotor to not only reduce air
friction but also to create a propulsion of air at the rear of the
housing to drive the vehicle forward. A motor means drives the rotor
independently of the forward speed of the moving vehicle.

here is an image from it.
http://www.google.com/patents?id=Bp...tjdDwJdlWwN4wDJMpWY&ci=223,674,628,507&edge=1

Citations

1648505 STREAMLINE POWER VEHICLE
2569983 AIRCRAFT WING FLAP WITH A LEADING EDGE ROLLER
3910623 MEANS AND METHODS FOR REDUCING ONCOMING AIR RESISTANCE AND
ANGLE WIND EFFECTS TO A MOVING VEHICLE
4006931 Device for reducing wind resistance of a vehicle
4353587 Transport vehicle accessory

Referenced by

Patent Number Title Issue date
5791724 Air stabilizer device for bluff road vehicles
5850108 Fluid flow power generation system with foil
6880844 Wind-assisted bicycle


http://gabydewilde.googlepages.com/negative-drag
gabydewilde - negative drag
 
On Fri, 21 Dec 2007 20:36:59 -0800 (PST), "[email protected]"
<[email protected]> wrote:

>On Dec 12, 7:19 am, "[email protected]" <[email protected]> wrote:
>> Hello all,
>>
>> I'm happy to announce that the drag generated by a vehicle may be used
>> by a windmill as if it was wind. This of course creates extra drag but
>> this drag is partially shared with the rider.
>>
>> We thus have a free energy situation on our hands here. :)
>>
>> Drag is limited by the size of the vehicle. If any amount of this drag
>> is turned into propulsion then that percentage (just) wont be
>> available for slowing the vehicle down. It's not-there anymore.
>>
>> I have illustrated the concept here.
>>
>> http://gabydewilde.googlepages.com/negative-drag
>>
>> Let me think what you hear ok?
>>
>> Regards,
>>
>> gaby de wilde
>
>Here is a patent from Anthony Tantalo disclosing a wind powered fuel
>saving apparatus that also enhances the aerodynamic profile of the
>vehicle.
>
>http://www.google.com/patents?id=Bp43AAAAEBAJ
>Abstract
>A fuel saving device for increasing the fuel mileage of a moving
>vehicle is disclosed. The number of miles per gallon of fuel is
>increased by the present invention through a device mounted on top of
>a vehicle, which device includes a housing having a length
>substantially equal to the width of the vehicle, an air intake at the
>front of the housing and a motor driven rotor having blades which are
>further driven by the oncoming wind pressure created by the moving
>vehicle. The device also includes means for deflecting the air from
>the housing over the remaining portion of the vehicle and positioned
>in cooperative relationship with the rotor to not only reduce air
>friction but also to create a propulsion of air at the rear of the
>housing to drive the vehicle forward. A motor means drives the rotor
>independently of the forward speed of the moving vehicle.
>
>here is an image from it.
>http://www.google.com/patents?id=Bp...tjdDwJdlWwN4wDJMpWY&ci=223,674,628,507&edge=1
>
>Citations
>
>1648505 STREAMLINE POWER VEHICLE
>2569983 AIRCRAFT WING FLAP WITH A LEADING EDGE ROLLER
>3910623 MEANS AND METHODS FOR REDUCING ONCOMING AIR RESISTANCE AND
>ANGLE WIND EFFECTS TO A MOVING VEHICLE
>4006931 Device for reducing wind resistance of a vehicle
>4353587 Transport vehicle accessory
>
>Referenced by
>
>Patent Number Title Issue date
>5791724 Air stabilizer device for bluff road vehicles
>5850108 Fluid flow power generation system with foil
>6880844 Wind-assisted bicycle
>
>
>http://gabydewilde.googlepages.com/negative-drag
>gabydewilde - negative drag
Have you riden a bicycle with disk wheels on a day with cross winds?
Ok, forget the front disk and just the back wheel with a disk? Heck
even without disk wheels on a windy day I might need 8 feet of road
width to stay upright as shifting winds blow me all over the road.
Doesn't a sailboat have something under the hull to help keep it from
tippng over? Keel or centerboard? I only have me and my sense of
balance trying to keep me from tipping over. Ok, there is some
centrifical force that helps I think but not enough on windy days to
keep my in a 1 foot road width.
 
On Dec 22, 3:55 pm, Jim Behning
<[email protected]> wrote:
> On Fri, 21 Dec 2007 20:36:59 -0800 (PST), "[email protected]"
>
>
>
> <[email protected]> wrote:
> >On Dec 12, 7:19 am, "[email protected]" <[email protected]> wrote:
> >> Hello all,
>
> >> I'm happy to announce that the drag generated by a vehicle may be used
> >> by a windmill as if it was wind. This of course creates extra drag but
> >> this drag is partially shared with the rider.
>
> >> We thus have a free energy situation on our hands here. :)
>
> >> Drag is limited by the size of the vehicle. If any amount of this drag
> >> is turned into propulsion then that percentage (just) wont be
> >> available for slowing the vehicle down. It's not-there anymore.
>
> >> I have illustrated the concept here.
>
> >>http://gabydewilde.googlepages.com/negative-drag
>
> >> Let me think what you hear ok?
>
> >> Regards,
>
> >> gaby de wilde
>
> >Here is a patent from Anthony Tantalo disclosing a wind powered fuel
> >saving apparatus that also enhances the aerodynamic profile of the
> >vehicle.
>
> >http://www.google.com/patents?id=Bp43AAAAEBAJ
> >Abstract
> >A fuel saving device for increasing the fuel mileage of a moving
> >vehicle is disclosed. The number of miles per gallon of fuel is
> >increased by the present invention through a device mounted on top of
> >a vehicle, which device includes a housing having a length
> >substantially equal to the width of the vehicle, an air intake at the
> >front of the housing and a motor driven rotor having blades which are
> >further driven by the oncoming wind pressure created by the moving
> >vehicle. The device also includes means for deflecting the air from
> >the housing over the remaining portion of the vehicle and positioned
> >in cooperative relationship with the rotor to not only reduce air
> >friction but also to create a propulsion of air at the rear of the
> >housing to drive the vehicle forward. A motor means drives the rotor
> >independently of the forward speed of the moving vehicle.
>
> >here is an image from it.
> >http://www.google.com/patents?id=Bp43AAAAEBAJ&pg=PA61&img=1&zoom=4&hl...
>
> >Citations
>
> >1648505 STREAMLINE POWER VEHICLE
> >2569983 AIRCRAFT WING FLAP WITH A LEADING EDGE ROLLER
> >3910623 MEANS AND METHODS FOR REDUCING ONCOMING AIR RESISTANCE AND
> >ANGLE WIND EFFECTS TO A MOVING VEHICLE
> >4006931 Device for reducing wind resistance of a vehicle
> >4353587 Transport vehicle accessory
>
> >Referenced by
>
> >Patent Number Title Issue date
> >5791724 Air stabilizer device for bluff road vehicles
> >5850108 Fluid flow power generation system with foil
> >6880844 Wind-assisted bicycle
>
> >http://gabydewilde.googlepages.com/negative-drag
> >gabydewilde - negative drag
>
> Have you riden a bicycle with disk wheels on a day with cross winds?
> Ok, forget the front disk and just the back wheel with a disk? Heck
> even without disk wheels on a windy day I might need 8 feet of road
> width to stay upright as shifting winds blow me all over the road.
> Doesn't a sailboat have something under the hull to help keep it from
> tippng over? Keel or centerboard? I only have me and my sense of
> balance trying to keep me from tipping over. Ok, there is some
> centrifical force that helps I think but not enough on windy days to
> keep my in a 1 foot road width.

Well the drag and the wind add up, you are not just increasing drag
but also increasing the wind by moving into it. Imagine the wind is
made of glass plates moving towards you. Would you not break more
glass if you would move straight into it? Air is more smooth as that
but moving into the wind will capture more wind.

I think it should increase so much that disk wheels become unbearable,
and they indeed seem to. But they look like such a good idea at first
sight. At least to me they did.

Closing the wheel around the rim still looks like a good idea to me.

I'm not entirely sure why bicycle wheels have so little mass around
their axle. The flywheel effect of an open wheel is quite bad. One
might as well use just a double rim, and put the chain all the way
around.

Leave the whole space open and make the wheel part of the frame.

Could make egg shapes etc, good fun :)

http://gabydewilde.googlepages.com/negative-drag
gabydewilde - negative drag
 
On Dec 22, 5:57 pm, A Muzi <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> Why don't we see these magic things in traffic?
>

hahaha, are you suggesting I'm not trying hard enough?

This doesn't tell you anything?

one more time:

10 seconds per meter of wind

10 seconds per meter of drag

Each indevidually contains 1 hamster of power or 2 hamsters.

Combined however they produce 8 hamsters of powah.

questions?

found errors?

http://gabydewilde.googlepages.com/negative-drag
gabydewilde - negative drag

here:
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=negative+drag+aerodynamics

http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=negative+drag+sail+up+wind
 
On Sat, 22 Dec 2007 17:39:52 -0800 (PST), "[email protected]"
<[email protected]> wrote:

>On Dec 22, 3:55 pm, Jim Behning
><[email protected]> wrote:
>> On Fri, 21 Dec 2007 20:36:59 -0800 (PST), "[email protected]"
>>
>>
>>
>> <[email protected]> wrote:
>> >On Dec 12, 7:19 am, "[email protected]" <[email protected]> wrote:
>> >> Hello all,
>>
>> >> I'm happy to announce that the drag generated by a vehicle may be used
>> >> by a windmill as if it was wind. This of course creates extra drag but
>> >> this drag is partially shared with the rider.
>>
>> >> We thus have a free energy situation on our hands here. :)
>>
>> >> Drag is limited by the size of the vehicle. If any amount of this drag
>> >> is turned into propulsion then that percentage (just) wont be
>> >> available for slowing the vehicle down. It's not-there anymore.
>>
>> >> I have illustrated the concept here.
>>
>> >>http://gabydewilde.googlepages.com/negative-drag
>>
>> >> Let me think what you hear ok?
>>
>> >> Regards,
>>
>> >> gaby de wilde
>>
>> >Here is a patent from Anthony Tantalo disclosing a wind powered fuel
>> >saving apparatus that also enhances the aerodynamic profile of the
>> >vehicle.
>>
>> >http://www.google.com/patents?id=Bp43AAAAEBAJ
>> >Abstract
>> >A fuel saving device for increasing the fuel mileage of a moving
>> >vehicle is disclosed. The number of miles per gallon of fuel is
>> >increased by the present invention through a device mounted on top of
>> >a vehicle, which device includes a housing having a length
>> >substantially equal to the width of the vehicle, an air intake at the
>> >front of the housing and a motor driven rotor having blades which are
>> >further driven by the oncoming wind pressure created by the moving
>> >vehicle. The device also includes means for deflecting the air from
>> >the housing over the remaining portion of the vehicle and positioned
>> >in cooperative relationship with the rotor to not only reduce air
>> >friction but also to create a propulsion of air at the rear of the
>> >housing to drive the vehicle forward. A motor means drives the rotor
>> >independently of the forward speed of the moving vehicle.
>>
>> >here is an image from it.
>> >http://www.google.com/patents?id=Bp43AAAAEBAJ&pg=PA61&img=1&zoom=4&hl...
>>
>> >Citations
>>
>> >1648505 STREAMLINE POWER VEHICLE
>> >2569983 AIRCRAFT WING FLAP WITH A LEADING EDGE ROLLER
>> >3910623 MEANS AND METHODS FOR REDUCING ONCOMING AIR RESISTANCE AND
>> >ANGLE WIND EFFECTS TO A MOVING VEHICLE
>> >4006931 Device for reducing wind resistance of a vehicle
>> >4353587 Transport vehicle accessory
>>
>> >Referenced by
>>
>> >Patent Number Title Issue date
>> >5791724 Air stabilizer device for bluff road vehicles
>> >5850108 Fluid flow power generation system with foil
>> >6880844 Wind-assisted bicycle
>>
>> >http://gabydewilde.googlepages.com/negative-drag
>> >gabydewilde - negative drag
>>
>> Have you riden a bicycle with disk wheels on a day with cross winds?
>> Ok, forget the front disk and just the back wheel with a disk? Heck
>> even without disk wheels on a windy day I might need 8 feet of road
>> width to stay upright as shifting winds blow me all over the road.
>> Doesn't a sailboat have something under the hull to help keep it from
>> tippng over? Keel or centerboard? I only have me and my sense of
>> balance trying to keep me from tipping over. Ok, there is some
>> centrifical force that helps I think but not enough on windy days to
>> keep my in a 1 foot road width.
>
>Well the drag and the wind add up, you are not just increasing drag
>but also increasing the wind by moving into it. Imagine the wind is
>made of glass plates moving towards you. Would you not break more
>glass if you would move straight into it? Air is more smooth as that
>but moving into the wind will capture more wind.
>
>I think it should increase so much that disk wheels become unbearable,
>and they indeed seem to. But they look like such a good idea at first
>sight. At least to me they did.
>
>Closing the wheel around the rim still looks like a good idea to me.
>
>I'm not entirely sure why bicycle wheels have so little mass around
>their axle. The flywheel effect of an open wheel is quite bad. One
>might as well use just a double rim, and put the chain all the way
>around.
>
>Leave the whole space open and make the wheel part of the frame.
>
>Could make egg shapes etc, good fun :)
>
>http://gabydewilde.googlepages.com/negative-drag
>gabydewilde - negative drag
You increase the wind head on. Hard to capture that energy.

So all this talk. Have you created a video with your invention and a
power meter to demonstrate how effective this concept is? Also a video
of this idea when a flag is blowing straight out in the wind
illustrating a stong wind. An maybe a video of this contraption while
an 18 wheeler rig passed you. Preferably one of those cargo container
rigs as those drivers spook me more on the highway when I am in a car
than any other 18 wheeled vehicle.

That truck fan seems to defy logic. I see trucks that have air
director devices that continue the air flow up and over the towed
trailer. I have never seen a rig equipped with a brick an the tractor
that increases the air drag in an attempt to reduce the air drag. I
think you can get patents on bad ideas.
 
On Dec 23, 2:51 pm, Jim Behning
<[email protected]> wrote:
> You increase the wind head on.

Hello Jim,

A windmill generates energy, we can use this energy to move the base
of the windmill.

We can move it in all directions.

Also straight into the wind.

This will increase the amount of wind available to us which in it's
turn will allow us to displace the base of the windmill faster.

And so on. :)

I have updated my page a bit.

http://gabydewilde.googlepages.com/negative-drag
gabydewilde - negative drag
 
On Sun, 23 Dec 2007 14:33:38 -0800 (PST), "[email protected]"
<[email protected]> wrote:

>On Dec 23, 2:51 pm, Jim Behning
><[email protected]> wrote:
>> You increase the wind head on.
>
>Hello Jim,
>
>A windmill generates energy, we can use this energy to move the base
>of the windmill.
>
>We can move it in all directions.
>
>Also straight into the wind.
>
>This will increase the amount of wind available to us which in it's
>turn will allow us to displace the base of the windmill faster.
>
>And so on. :)
>
>I have updated my page a bit.
>
>http://gabydewilde.googlepages.com/negative-drag
>gabydewilde - negative drag
I bet I am not the only person who is waiting for the video with the
power meter. I am not a windmill. I do not know how windmills have
much to do with make a human propelled vehicle go faster. I am not a
sailboat although with a good tailwind I might think I am one. Read a
tailwind makes me faster. Not a headwind and not a crosswind that is
coming at me from my forward direction.

I might be impressed with the fan car if it had no engine and no
batteries. Capacitors to store energy. All it shows is an electric car
driving around on batteries. If they could demonstrate that they can
go farther on a battery charge with the fans than without all that
aerodynamic drag then the video might have some value.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

D
negative drag's sidebar
Replies
0
Views
475
Cycling Equipment
datakoll
D
G
negative drag
Replies
0
Views
553
Cycling Equipment
[email protected]
G
rbtmcardle
Have you experienced any negative attitudes towards ebikes from other cyclists?
Replies
12
Views
108
Cycling Equipment
Warwick2x
Warwick2x
D
upright bikes with negative seat tube angles???.....
Replies
12
Views
493
Cycling Equipment
DougC
D
G
Negative dishing
Replies
2
Views
465
Cycling Equipment
Gonzo Bob
Gonzo Bob
Top Bottom Back