I don't get it. Where's the hat trick? Does that expression mean something else down under?
Is this not exactly the same as an electric vehicle does when it brakes, return the access energy back into the battery?
Same here, you use the battery to ascend and turn, when you descend or the wind blows the rotors you store the access energy back into the battery prolonging battery life. Should work but not very effective I think?
Is this not exactly the same as an electric vehicle does when it brakes, return the access energy back into the battery?
Same here, you use the battery to ascend and turn, when you descend or the wind blows the rotors you store the access energy back into the battery prolonging battery life. Should work but not very effective I think?
Multirotors rely entirely on the motors to provide lift (and thus, stability), the second you turn them off the thing will just tumble and fall like a brick. Technically yes you could do it, but it'd be so stupidly ineffective it's not even worth thinking about.
Is this not exactly the same as an electric vehicle does when it brakes, return the access energy back into the battery?
Same here, you use the battery to ascend and turn, when you descend or the wind blows the rotors you store the access energy back into the battery prolonging battery life. Should work but not very effective I think?
Well, it's not hard to imagine what happens when you turn off the power to the blades, and to get any energy from the drone dropping down to the earth in a controllable fashion is highly optimistic. But that is not what they claim, look at the pdf.
1) Potential energy is released as electricity from the battery causes blades to revolve.
2) The blades turn producing kinetic energy. A generator in the torque shaft turns to collect the electrical energy.
3-5) And that charges the battery.
Come on...
Can we please ban free energy topics from the forum?
Well, it's not hard to imagine what happens when you turn off the power to the blades, and to get any energy from the drone dropping down to the earth in a controllable fashion is highly optimistic. But that is not what they clame, look at the pdf.
1) Potential energy is released as electricity from the battery causes blades to revolve.
2) The blades turn producing kinetic energy. A generator in the torque shaft turns to collect the electrical energy.
3-5) And that charges the battery.
Come on...
Yeah maybe they still believe in the Pepetuum mobile concept
The Potential energy -> Kinetic energy principle is what the norwegians do with their mountain waterlakes, pump the water up at night and let it flow over a generator down during daytime but only to generate energy when the demand is great and to use energy when there is no demand. I wonder how that would fit on a drone
Can we please ban free energy topics from the forum?
? It's not a free energy thread. It's laughing at a free energy concept so blatantly stupid I don't understand how the government were stupid enough to publish an article on it. You don't have to read it, I thought others would appreciate the laugh.
Can we please ban free energy topics from the forum?
? It's not a free energy thread. It's laughing at a free energy concept so blatantly stupid I don't understand how the government were stupid enough to publish an article on it. You don't have to read it, I thought others would appreciate the laugh.
Your surprised that politicians are stupid or pandering to green nut jobs for votes? You must not watch the news to often. 
If you don't want to read the thread it's simple, don't click on it, no-one is forcing you to. Thats like those parents who can't seem to find the remote to change the channel on the idiot box or turn it off. They thinks it's better to impose censorship on everybody so they don't have to get off their asses.
No, it is like when a bunch of engineers -the glorious master race- sits together, determines that everyone else is a moron, and then they masturbate on it. There is already two dozen thread about this, I would not be surprised, if Dave would start treating them like the global warming discussions.
Can we please ban free energy topics from the forum?
Yes please. All free energy topic should be personally aproved by Dave before going on.
Apparently this guy was on TV tonight for his "breakthrough" technology .. sticking a generator on a motor.
A motor IS a generator.
What he was talking about isn't far fetch. Actually, it isn't fetched at all. Motors, especially steppers, can be used as rotational pulse generators - tons of such videos on the internet.
I suspect what's happening here is that when a motor decelerating, the electronics will convert it into a generator and use that to recharge the battery - many EVs do that in real life.
If you're up for a laugh (or cry.. ) 
Laughing for sure. But may no be laughing at your intended target.
...I don't understand how the government were stupid enough to publish an article on it.
This is the same bunch of people (and I include some of the labor politicians in this) who decided to roll out a sub-standard National Broadband Network or attempt to introduce an internet filter.
Then Malcolm Turnbull comes out in his wisdom and states that bandwidth requirements of households will actually decrease by 2023 so that the average household needs about 15Mbps.
All because some bean counter told them it would be cheaper in the short-term to do it this way, rather than listening to the network engineers or end-users.
I suspect what's happening here is that when a motor decelerating, the electronics will convert it into a generator and use that to recharge the battery - many EVs do that in real life.
How much do you think is the mass of the shaft and the propeller? How much kinetic energy could it store (considering its mass and rotational speed)?
What do you think happens to the propeller (and aerodynamic lift) when you switch off the motor (i.e., switch it into "generator mode")?
Auto-rotation perhaps? How much, or rather little, is the copter worth to let it free-fall (to get significant auto-rotation) so that the batteries can be recharged a little bit?
Mind you, most of the energy you put into accelerating an EV (or electric train) is kinetic energy of the vehicle.
But, a huge amount of the energy you put into keeping a copter in the air is energy you put into moving air. Try getting the air the propeller just pushed around to move the propeller again...
Laughing for sure. But may no be laughing at your intended target.
Yeah, sure. Try again...
rather than listening to the network engineers or end-users.
Not sure why they would let that decision to reside with the network engineers.
Even for end-users, I wouldn't listen to them unless they are paying.
Something like this is going to have multiple stakeholders and engineering is rarely a big / important stakeholder in those decision making processes.
rather than listening to the network engineers or end-users.
Not sure why they would let that decision to reside with the network engineers.
Even for end-users, I wouldn't listen to them unless they are paying.
Are you kidding me? Wait... you're actually serious with that comment!
Because the average end-user can tell the Government morons that 15 Mbps is barely acceptable these days. Even your run-of-the-mill Facebooking, Instagramming, selfie-taking teenage girl can comprehend that! We should be aiming for a minimum of 100 Mbps to most areas with the view of replacing antiquated copper where possible.
And as for the network engineers, I'm sure they know a hell of a lot more about networking and telecommunications than Conroy or Turnbull (and you by the sounds of it).
I'm glad you're not designing our national network out of fear of "not being listened to" which is exactly why we're in the shit we are currently in. <sarcasm> I mean, why listen to subject matter experts at all? What would they know? </sacasm>
Compare ourselves to European countries like Finland where a decent internet connection is just about considered a basic human right.
Even your run-of-the-mill Facebooking, Instagramming, selfie-taking teenage girl can comprehend that!
Yeah, as a country, we don't have any pressing issues to solve, other than to make sure that teenage girls have sufficient bandwidth to upload their selfies to Facebook.
You sure sound like someone who has his priority right.
Compare ourselves to European countries like Finland where a decent internet connection is just about considered a basic human right.
People live in a 3rd world country because they prioritize like a 3rd world person.
Yeah, as a country, we don't have any pressing issues to solve, other than to make sure that teenage girls have sufficient bandwidth to upload their selfies to Facebook.
You sure sound like someone who has his priority right.
I should have foreseen that you would completely miss my point. The point I'm making is that since we are spending billions of dollars on this NBN project, lets get it done properly the first time around so we spend less in the long-term. This is typical of the spending habits of so many state and Federal government organisations: Spend less now, but spend more in the long-run. It's backwards thinking!
Since you don't even appear to be in this country, how about you stick with your dial-up internet while the rest of us with differing requirements argue for better infrastructure? It's really no different to roads, public transport etc...
If we took your logic, we should just scrap the entire thing because there are other more important issues and nothing would ever get done.
Compare ourselves to European countries like Finland where a decent internet connection is just about considered a basic human right.
People live in a 3rd world country because they prioritize like a 3rd world person.
Where are you going with this? Neither Australia or Finland are third world countries. Why apply your third world logic?
-rubbish deleted-
It's backwards thinking!
You sounded frustrated.
Is it because your 1st world NBN is slower than my 3rd world dial-up? Don't worry, you will get there by 2030,
You sounded frustrated.
Is it because your 1st world NBN is slower than my 3rd world dial-up? Don't worry, you will get there by 2030,
Yep!
Got there in the end finally :-)
In our little village we have adsl of max 15Mb/s because the line in the ground is poor quality and distance to the exchange too large.
Waited and waited for commercial parties to offer alternatives.
Now our local tv administrator company which is non profit and partly funded by the community took it upon theirselves to give everybody fiber connection. Then all at a sudden when the infra structure was in place commercial ip provider companies offered the rest.
I can choose between 100Mb or 250Mb or 500Mb ofcourse the price per month increases so 100 ismore than enough.
Moral: don,t wait for the government take action at a municipal level and just get it done.
But then in Australia the distances are much greater even between houses than here so the costs will also be much higher probably. Oh well you can always get a shovel and a rol of fiber and DIY
That the NBN talk somewhere else guys.
Can you recapture kinetic energy of an electric aeroplane, via it's propellor, and return it to a battery. Yes of course.
Should you recapture the KE of an electric aeroplane? No.
Let me explain:
People are familiar with "regenerative" braking in an electric car, where when you brake, instead of using friction brakes to slow the car down, it runs the traction motor as a generator, and re-captures the energy stored as KE in the vehicles mass. On a typical passenger car, this has some advantages, but is by no means 100% useful.
But the Important point is:
Passenger cars have a useage profile that includes very variable speeds. Due to things like traffic lights, bends in the road, other cars, junctions, etc etc generally,soon after accelerating to some speed, the car will need to decelerate, often back to zero. As such, regen braking, can recapture approx 40-50% of the vehicles KE and hence extended range and reduce overall energy consumption.
Now, for a fixed or rotary wing aircraft, in order to remain flying, that wing must keep moving, and in fact, it generally only works across a fairly narrow range of dynamic pressures. As such, an aeroplane (or the rotor on a helicopter) flys at a fairly fixed speed, and without things like traffic lights, or junctions, doesn't have to "stop" (which is of course a good thing, as it's can't stop!! So, what exactly is the regenerative drive system recapturing in this case? The aircraft's speed isn't changing, and so the KE stored in it's mass is constant.
Of course, someone who doesn't actually understand how an aircraft flies, might say "AH HA, but what about the potential energy stored in the planes height!!". Well, there is of course PE, but as anyone with more than 3secs of flight experience will tell you, this is pretty much exchangeable for KE, infact, the phrase "trade height for speed and vise versa" is the first thing you will hear when learning to fly. The ONLY factor that matters for an aeroplane (fixed or rotary wing) is the ratio of Lift to Drag! The L/D ratio sets the efficiency of the craft, nothing else. In effect "Lift" is free, as long as we keep the wing planform moving, we go up, simple as that, so what matters then is the Drag of that planform, ie, how much power does it take to keep it moving through the air. Something like a glider, with an L/D of up to 60:1, doesn't even NEED an engine to stay flying, once the initial KE has been stored (ie the aircraft has been accelerated).
So, the only time recapturing KE in an aircraft would help is for the landing (the only time you descend without then ascending again) and unlike a car, you only every land once per journey. If you've got some spare time, you might like to consider how you would calculate the ratio of energies (total cruise drag, vs PE) for some typical aircraft (hows about a 747 on a 10hr transatlantic flight, or a light aircraft on a 45min sightseeing flight)
It seems very strange to get some energy from spinning aircraft parts. Burden is on designers/creators to show it working.
I wanted to add one point about helicopter and quadrocopters. Real helicopters (and most RC helis) use variable pitch blades to control lift, propeller RPM is ~constant. Simple RC helis and most RC quadrocopters/multicopters use fixed pitch blade design where lift is controlled to by RPM. Variable pitch has various advantages over fixed pitch with only few disadvantages.
Now, to get helicopter/multicopter to autorotate or at least increase head RPM you have to use negative pitch, otherwise it does not work right. Variable pitch helicopters can do that, fixed pitched quadcopters should go inverted to achieve this. Pictures on the site indicate fixed pitch propeller, so I am not sure what are they trying to do.
