Author Topic: Mess with your minds: A wind powered craft going faster than a tail wind speed.  (Read 147220 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline electrodacus

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 1862
  • Country: ca
    • electrodacus
That's still the wrong answer.

If you cannot answer a simple question like this one, which almost anyone else on the planet would know how to answer, then continuing the debate in this thread is rather pointless, wouldn't you agree?

You think it is the wrong answer but that is not the case.  And not sure why you say that I did not answered ?

Offline gnuarm

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 2247
  • Country: pr
Your reply is a red herring. Swimming in a river has nothing to do with my question.

Let me ask you again: what would you say if someone showed you a demonstration of a vehicle moving directly against the wind, powered by the wind, with no energy storage?

It's a very simple question. It doesn't involve rivers, or swimming, or any bullshit like that.

My question is super relevant but you likely do not understand what air is.
And as already answer no vehicle powered only by wind can go directly upwind without energy storage.

This guy reminds me of Andrea Rossi, the cold fusion guy who claims to have a device that will generate more heat than the amount of energy added electrically.  He is never direct with anyone, only giving out the information he wants to give out and never letting anyone actually have access to the device. 

ED never answers a question directly, only answering the parts he wants and trying to steer the discussion away from the points he can't successfully discuss. 

I guess there really is no point in trying to reason with someone who doesn't properly understand that energy is a simple scalar quantity like distance and power is a rate wrt time like speed. 
Rick C.  --  Puerto Rico is not a country... It's part of the USA
  - Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging
  - Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209
 

Offline electrodacus

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 1862
  • Country: ca
    • electrodacus
Can't believe this. Are you afraid that he'll actually produce the goods and show you? Why else wouldn't jump at this and say "Alright, show me then"?

Gosh, he hasn't even asked you to renounce your stated opinion on stuff, just asking what you'd say. Of course, after 1000 posts we know jolly well that if he did manage to demonstrate this you would still deny it in some way, probably by some distraction technique like changing the subject or introducing a strawman or similar :(

Why will I be afraid ? There are many examples he can show and claim they do not use energy storage when they are but he can not understand that.
Is the same like saying the direct upwind version of blackbird is not using energy storage when I know it is using energy storage. What good will a link to the upwind version of blackbird do.

Offline PlainName

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 7508
  • Country: va
Quote
You think it is the wrong answer but that is not the case.  And not sure why you say that I did not answered ?

You stopped answering my questions just when it was leading to something interesting. You're afraid that you might be wrong and wiggle out of things if they look like showing that.
 

Offline PlainName

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 7508
  • Country: va
Can't believe this. Are you afraid that he'll actually produce the goods and show you? Why else wouldn't jump at this and say "Alright, show me then"?

Gosh, he hasn't even asked you to renounce your stated opinion on stuff, just asking what you'd say. Of course, after 1000 posts we know jolly well that if he did manage to demonstrate this you would still deny it in some way, probably by some distraction technique like changing the subject or introducing a strawman or similar :(

Why will I be afraid ? There are many examples he can show and claim they do not use energy storage when they are but he can not understand that.
Is the same like saying the direct upwind version of blackbird is not using energy storage when I know it is using energy storage. What good will a link to the upwind version of blackbird do.

Well what do you have to lose then? Call his bluff, why don't you!
 

Offline electrodacus

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 1862
  • Country: ca
    • electrodacus
This guy reminds me of Andrea Rossi, the cold fusion guy who claims to have a device that will generate more heat than the amount of energy added electrically.  He is never direct with anyone, only giving out the information he wants to give out and never letting anyone actually have access to the device. 

ED never answers a question directly, only answering the parts he wants and trying to steer the discussion away from the points he can't successfully discuss. 

I guess there really is no point in trying to reason with someone who doesn't properly understand that energy is a simple scalar quantity like distance and power is a rate wrt time like speed.

This is the sort of claims you make (overunity) is just that you do not realize you are doing this. The use of energy storage brakes no laws and is how blackbird works.
Why none of you answered the swimming in a river question ? Is that because none of you had the chance to swim in a river ? Or is it that you think swimming in a river against the current is different than a vehicle driving with a headwind ?

Offline electrodacus

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 1862
  • Country: ca
    • electrodacus
I saw a better example but here is one. Notice the non constant vehicle movement ?



and another one a bit better but still not the one I was searching for.



« Last Edit: December 28, 2021, 12:53:10 am by electrodacus »
 

Online IanB

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 12537
  • Country: us
Or is it that you think swimming in a river against the current is different than a vehicle driving with a headwind ?

Oh, no, we don't think that. We know that swimming in a river against the current is different than a vehicle driving with a headwind.

The question is, do you?
 

Offline gnuarm

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 2247
  • Country: pr
Quote
You think it is the wrong answer but that is not the case.  And not sure why you say that I did not answered ?

You stopped answering my questions just when it was leading to something interesting. You're afraid that you might be wrong and wiggle out of things if they look like showing that.

Yes, of course.  He is never going to understand the physics because he is too invested in his position.  There is literally nothing anyone can do to show him he doesn't understand the problem.  Actually, that might not be true.  It is very possible that he knows he is wrong, but wants to save face. 

I know I've been in that position a few times and had to admit I was wrong.  Heck, I think I started out saying (or at least thinking) the downwind vehicle could not exceed the wind speed until I realized the distinction between the wheels on the pavement only at the vehicle speed and the force on the propeller was from the power generated by the wheels (vehicle speed) AND the wind speed together. 

Then I had to rethink again on the vehicle going into the wind.  It was when I saw the blades nearly feathered that I realized again, it is a matter of gearing/prop pitch to get the right forces. 

I had to change my argument in both cases when I saw the light.  This guy wants to deny the light and live in the dark.

It is pretty impressive that he can generate these elaborate constructions to obfuscate the real physics.  Yes, very creative.
Rick C.  --  Puerto Rico is not a country... It's part of the USA
  - Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging
  - Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209
 

Offline electrodacus

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 1862
  • Country: ca
    • electrodacus
Oh, no, we don't think that. We know that swimming in a river against the current is different than a vehicle driving with a headwind.

The question is, do you?

It is not different.  Are you saying air is not a fluid same as water ?

Offline gnuarm

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 2247
  • Country: pr
This guy reminds me of Andrea Rossi, the cold fusion guy who claims to have a device that will generate more heat than the amount of energy added electrically.  He is never direct with anyone, only giving out the information he wants to give out and never letting anyone actually have access to the device. 

ED never answers a question directly, only answering the parts he wants and trying to steer the discussion away from the points he can't successfully discuss. 

I guess there really is no point in trying to reason with someone who doesn't properly understand that energy is a simple scalar quantity like distance and power is a rate wrt time like speed.

This is the sort of claims you make (overunity) is just that you do not realize you are doing this. The use of energy storage brakes no laws and is how blackbird works.
Why none of you answered the swimming in a river question ? Is that because none of you had the chance to swim in a river ? Or is it that you think swimming in a river against the current is different than a vehicle driving with a headwind ?

The river example is irrelevant and hard to create an analogy to the issue at hand.  You have not responded to my previous post where I asked you to acknowledge the equations for the force from the wind and the resulting power required to maintain a vehicle speed against the wind.
Rick C.  --  Puerto Rico is not a country... It's part of the USA
  - Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging
  - Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209
 

Offline gnuarm

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 2247
  • Country: pr
Oh, no, we don't think that. We know that swimming in a river against the current is different than a vehicle driving with a headwind.

The question is, do you?

It is not different.  Are you saying air is not a fluid same as water ?

Swimming in a river is like an airplane in the air, not a car into the wind.
Rick C.  --  Puerto Rico is not a country... It's part of the USA
  - Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging
  - Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209
 

Online IanB

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 12537
  • Country: us
I saw a better example but here is one. Notice the non constant vehicle movement ?

No. Every frame, the vehicle moves forward by the same amount.
 

Offline electrodacus

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 1862
  • Country: ca
    • electrodacus
Yes, of course.  He is never going to understand the physics because he is too invested in his position.  There is literally nothing anyone can do to show him he doesn't understand the problem.  Actually, that might not be true.  It is very possible that he knows he is wrong, but wants to save face. 

I know I've been in that position a few times and had to admit I was wrong.  Heck, I think I started out saying (or at least thinking) the downwind vehicle could not exceed the wind speed until I realized the distinction between the wheels on the pavement only at the vehicle speed and the force on the propeller was from the power generated by the wheels (vehicle speed) AND the wind speed together. 

Then I had to rethink again on the vehicle going into the wind.  It was when I saw the blades nearly feathered that I realized again, it is a matter of gearing/prop pitch to get the right forces. 

I had to change my argument in both cases when I saw the light.  This guy wants to deny the light and live in the dark.

It is pretty impressive that he can generate these elaborate constructions to obfuscate the real physics.  Yes, very creative.

I'm more than happy to admit when I'm wrong. It is just not the case this time.
Have you seen the two videos of a direct upwind toy I just posted. Can you see fairly clearly energy storage charge and discharge ?

Offline electrodacus

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 1862
  • Country: ca
    • electrodacus

Swimming in a river is like an airplane in the air, not a car into the wind.

A vehicle on wheels with no friction (ideal wheels) is not different from an airplane. At least not in the discussion we have here.
But if you are more happy the guy in the river can be on wheels (maybe some of those wheel skates) and then try to move against current

Offline electrodacus

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 1862
  • Country: ca
    • electrodacus
I saw a better example but here is one. Notice the non constant vehicle movement ?

No. Every frame, the vehicle moves forward by the same amount.

Can you not see the vehicle stopping while the propeller still rotates ? Meaning power stored and then released.
If vehicle was to be directly powered by the propeller/wind turbine then there will be a smooth constant movement forward.
 

Offline gnuarm

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 2247
  • Country: pr
I saw a better example but here is one. Notice the non constant vehicle movement ?



and another one a bit better but still not the one I was searching for.



The first video doesn't seem to show much in the way of speed variation.  The second video shows the gear driving the track slipping from time to time and I'm not sure, but I think the fan is being turned on and off so it doesn't blow so hard.  If it blows too hard the gear slips and the vehicle goes nowhere.

Either way, the storage has nothing to do with nothing.  You just provided two examples of vehicles moving INTO the wind being powered by the wind.  The first one even goes up a 30 or 40 degree ramp!

When are you going to respond to my prior post about the power to hold a vehicle stationary?  You've already said the power was zero if the bike rider simply puts his weight on the pedal into a 20 km/s wind.  So doesn't the rest follow, the equations are as I've shown them?


Quote from: electrodacus on Today at 07:33:23 pm
    A rider with sufficient weight standing on the pedal will still be a form of brake. It is a gravitational based one but still a brake.



Let's just deal with one detail at a time.  So do you acknowledge that the correct equation for the power at the wheels to move the vehicle into the wind must contain a factor which is just the velocity of the vehicle relative to the ground the wheel is pushing against?

The force from the wind is

Fd = 1/2 · Cd · A · p · (vw + vo)^2

The power required at the vehicle wheels to maintain a speed into the wind is

Pv = 1/2 · Cd · A · p · (vw + vo)^2 · vo

Correct?
Rick C.  --  Puerto Rico is not a country... It's part of the USA
  - Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging
  - Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209
 

Offline electrodacus

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 1862
  • Country: ca
    • electrodacus

The first video doesn't seem to show much in the way of speed variation.  The second video shows the gear driving the track slipping from time to time and I'm not sure, but I think the fan is being turned on and off so it doesn't blow so hard.  If it blows too hard the gear slips and the vehicle goes nowhere.

Either way, the storage has nothing to do with nothing.  You just provided two examples of vehicles moving INTO the wind being powered by the wind.  The first one even goes up a 30 or 40 degree ramp!

When are you going to respond to my prior post about the power to hold a vehicle stationary?  You've already said the power was zero if the bike rider simply puts his weight on the pedal into a 20 km/s wind.  So doesn't the rest follow, the equations are as I've shown them?


Quote from: electrodacus on Today at 07:33:23 pm
    A rider with sufficient weight standing on the pedal will still be a form of brake. It is a gravitational based one but still a brake.



Let's just deal with one detail at a time.  So do you acknowledge that the correct equation for the power at the wheels to move the vehicle into the wind must contain a factor which is just the velocity of the vehicle relative to the ground the wheel is pushing against?

The force from the wind is

Fd = 1/2 · Cd · A · p · (vw + vo)^2

The power required at the vehicle wheels to maintain a speed into the wind is

Pv = 1/2 · Cd · A · p · (vw + vo)^2 · vo

Correct?

I think is fairly clear to see the stop start movement in both videos while second video is better quality and easier to see. You just try to find some other non existent reasons but the reason it moves that way is due to energy storage charge and discharge.
Like I mentioned even presenting clear evidence you will try to find some other reasons to exclude the energy storage witch is essential.

Evacuation for force is correct for power it is not and correct one is below. 
Pv = 1/2 · Cd · A · p · (vw + vo)^2 · (vo+vw)

Offline gnuarm

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 2247
  • Country: pr
I saw a better example but here is one. Notice the non constant vehicle movement ?

No. Every frame, the vehicle moves forward by the same amount.

Can you not see the vehicle stopping while the propeller still rotates ? Meaning power stored and then released.
If vehicle was to be directly powered by the propeller/wind turbine then there will be a smooth constant movement forward.

The stopping is irrelevant.  It is moving INTO the wind.  You were trying to argue that when moving downwind it was on average moving slower than the wind because of some speed variation that no one else thought was relevant.  Moving into the wind the only requirement is that the speed must be greater than zero. 

The first video clearly shows the vehicle moving with a positive velocity at all times.  So clearly any energy storage is incidental.  The second video clearly shows the gear slipping on the belt rather than energy storage.  Even so, why does that matter?  Both vehicles move INTO the wind.  Energy storage is not relevant.  They do what we are talking about - moving into the wind while powered by the wind.

If you want to use a river example, how about we use a sailboat on the water sailing into the wind?  This happens all the time... literally!
Rick C.  --  Puerto Rico is not a country... It's part of the USA
  - Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging
  - Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209
 

Offline electrodacus

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 1862
  • Country: ca
    • electrodacus

The stopping is irrelevant.  It is moving INTO the wind.  You were trying to argue that when moving downwind it was on average moving slower than the wind because of some speed variation that no one else thought was relevant.  Moving into the wind the only requirement is that the speed must be greater than zero. 

The first video clearly shows the vehicle moving with a positive velocity at all times.  So clearly any energy storage is incidental.  The second video clearly shows the gear slipping on the belt rather than energy storage.  Even so, why does that matter?  Both vehicles move INTO the wind.  Energy storage is not relevant.  They do what we are talking about - moving into the wind while powered by the wind.

If you want to use a river example, how about we use a sailboat on the water sailing into the wind?  This happens all the time... literally!

The stopping is relevant as it confirms my energy storage theory.  The video shows a upwind version not sure why you include the downwind in discussion as that is competently different.
For upwind as shown in the video there is a small capacity energy storage that charges and discharges even a few times a second and that is what allows the vehicle to move against the wind direction for unlimited amount of time.
For the down wind version energy storage is the pressure differential much, much larger energy storage capacity and so the vehicle will move above wind speed for a few minutes before staring to slow down below wind speed.
Without energy storage neither upwind at any speed or down wind at higher than wind speed will be possible.

Offline gnuarm

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 2247
  • Country: pr

The first video doesn't seem to show much in the way of speed variation.  The second video shows the gear driving the track slipping from time to time and I'm not sure, but I think the fan is being turned on and off so it doesn't blow so hard.  If it blows too hard the gear slips and the vehicle goes nowhere.

Either way, the storage has nothing to do with nothing.  You just provided two examples of vehicles moving INTO the wind being powered by the wind.  The first one even goes up a 30 or 40 degree ramp!

When are you going to respond to my prior post about the power to hold a vehicle stationary?  You've already said the power was zero if the bike rider simply puts his weight on the pedal into a 20 km/s wind.  So doesn't the rest follow, the equations are as I've shown them?


Quote from: electrodacus on Today at 07:33:23 pm
    A rider with sufficient weight standing on the pedal will still be a form of brake. It is a gravitational based one but still a brake.



Let's just deal with one detail at a time.  So do you acknowledge that the correct equation for the power at the wheels to move the vehicle into the wind must contain a factor which is just the velocity of the vehicle relative to the ground the wheel is pushing against?

The force from the wind is

Fd = 1/2 · Cd · A · p · (vw + vo)^2

The power required at the vehicle wheels to maintain a speed into the wind is

Pv = 1/2 · Cd · A · p · (vw + vo)^2 · vo

Correct?

I think is fairly clear to see the stop start movement in both videos while second video is better quality and easier to see. You just try to find some other non existent reasons but the reason it moves that way is due to energy storage charge and discharge.
Like I mentioned even presenting clear evidence you will try to find some other reasons to exclude the energy storage witch is essential.

The first video very clearly shows the device moving continuously with no stopping.  However, that is irrelevant.  The device moves into the wind.  Thank you for proving my case.  You are a mensch.  :clap:

Quote
Evacuation for force is correct for power it is not and correct one is below. 
Pv = 1/2 · Cd · A · p · (vw + vo)^2 · (vo+vw)

That equation may be correct for something regarding power in the wind, but it's not the power applied to the vehicle to move into the wind.  That is the force exerted by the wheels which must match the force from the wind, 1/2 · Cd · A · p · (vw + vo)^2.  This force is multiplied by the velocity of this applied force which is vo giving 1/2 · Cd · A · p · (vw + vo)^2 · vo for the power to propel the vehicle.

[mic drop]
Rick C.  --  Puerto Rico is not a country... It's part of the USA
  - Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging
  - Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209
 

Offline gnuarm

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 2247
  • Country: pr

The stopping is irrelevant.  It is moving INTO the wind.  You were trying to argue that when moving downwind it was on average moving slower than the wind because of some speed variation that no one else thought was relevant.  Moving into the wind the only requirement is that the speed must be greater than zero. 

The first video clearly shows the vehicle moving with a positive velocity at all times.  So clearly any energy storage is incidental.  The second video clearly shows the gear slipping on the belt rather than energy storage.  Even so, why does that matter?  Both vehicles move INTO the wind.  Energy storage is not relevant.  They do what we are talking about - moving into the wind while powered by the wind.

If you want to use a river example, how about we use a sailboat on the water sailing into the wind?  This happens all the time... literally!

The stopping is relevant as it confirms my energy storage theory.  The video shows a upwind version not sure why you include the downwind in discussion as that is competently different.
For upwind as shown in the video there is a small capacity energy storage that charges and discharges even a few times a second and that is what allows the vehicle to move against the wind direction for unlimited amount of time.
For the down wind version energy storage is the pressure differential much, much larger energy storage capacity and so the vehicle will move above wind speed for a few minutes before staring to slow down below wind speed.
Without energy storage neither upwind at any speed or down wind at higher than wind speed will be possible.

Ok, tons of energy storage is happening.  Nuclear bombs of energy is being stored and released.  Doesn't matter all the energy is coming from the wind, so the wind is propelling the vehicle upwind, just like the wind propels the vehicle downwind faster than the wind in that case. 

All your energy storage BS is just that, BS and adds nothing to the discussion. 

[another mic drop]
Rick C.  --  Puerto Rico is not a country... It's part of the USA
  - Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging
  - Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209
 

Offline electrodacus

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 1862
  • Country: ca
    • electrodacus

The stopping is relevant as it confirms my energy storage theory.  The video shows a upwind version not sure why you include the downwind in discussion as that is competently different.
For upwind as shown in the video there is a small capacity energy storage that charges and discharges even a few times a second and that is what allows the vehicle to move against the wind direction for unlimited amount of time.
For the down wind version energy storage is the pressure differential much, much larger energy storage capacity and so the vehicle will move above wind speed for a few minutes before staring to slow down below wind speed.
Without energy storage neither upwind at any speed or down wind at higher than wind speed will be possible.

Well it is very relevant as the direct downwind vehicle will not travel indefinitely at 2x or 3x the wind speed but only for a limited amount of time proportional with the amount of stored energy.
Also to store that energy the vehicle will accelerate much slower when below wind speed compared to a sail vehicle that will not store anything other than kinetic energy. So Blackbird direct down wind version spends more time below wind speed to charge the energy storage (pressure differential) then uses that stored energy to accelerate above wind speed and stay a bit above that speed before returning to below wind speed.


The energy storage explanation will not violate the conservation of energy.

Ok, tons of energy storage is happening.  Nuclear bombs of energy is being stored and released.  Doesn't matter all the energy is coming from the wind, so the wind is propelling the vehicle upwind, just like the wind propels the vehicle downwind faster than the wind in that case. 

All your energy storage BS is just that, BS and adds nothing to the discussion. 

[another mic drop]

I hope you keep your microphone on the floor and I'm getting tired to explain the same thing multiple times to someone that will not understand power, energy and conservation of energy.

Offline fourfathom

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 2004
  • Country: us
Also to store that energy the vehicle will accelerate much slower when below wind speed compared to a sail vehicle that will not store anything other than kinetic energy.

I've asked you this before, but why does a sail not store energy when below windspeed, but a propeller does?
We'll search out every place a sick, twisted, solitary misfit might run to! -- I'll start with Radio Shack.
 

Offline electrodacus

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 1862
  • Country: ca
    • electrodacus
Also to store that energy the vehicle will accelerate much slower when below wind speed compared to a sail vehicle that will not store anything other than kinetic energy.

I've asked you this before, but why does a sail not store energy when below windspeed, but a propeller does?

A sail has no mechanism to store energy. It can not increase the pressure differential like a fan can.
So if the brake is applied there is be a presume differential between the front and the back of the sail proportional with the wind speed but as vehicle starts to move this pressure drops to zero by the time vehicle gets to wind speed.
Is sort of similar with a vehicle pushing another and having a spring between them. If the back vehicle starts to push while the front vehicle has the brakes on then spring will compress storing energy but then as the vehicle releases the brakes it accelerates faster because of that super long compressed spring but as the vehicle speeds are equalized the spring is fully relaxed.
On the blackbird you also have that starting pressure differential proportional with wind speed but since part of the energy is taken and put back in to this pressure differential by the propeller the presume differential continues to stay high (higher than on a sail that is at the same speed as sail could not push back to increase the pressure).
All this only works because air is compressible it will just not work if air was replaced with water witch is a non compressible fluid.


Share me

Digg  Facebook  SlashDot  Delicious  Technorati  Twitter  Google  Yahoo
Smf