11:12:45 AM Hey, all you electrical / mechanical engineering, business types. Ever notice how difficult anything new can be to bring to light?  Well, I am finally beginning to get some motion on this project, and I am hoping to get as many people up to speed on this as possible in order to protect it from subversive obscurity.  The more people who know about this, talk about this, and expect to see this become operational the more likely it is to serve everyone on the planet.  And I can use your help.  Please follow what we are doing here by letting me know your email contact address and lets see if we can bring this to fruition.  Ahh, but I suppose you want to know why you would do that?

We are in process of installing a newly developed hydro power generation system on a local dam in Western NY.  The dam is located on Rushford lake, in Rushford NY, and you can see it and the dam that created it from Mapquest satalite images.

This dam was built in the mid 1900s by Rochester Gas and Electric as a turbine installation, but it was decided that the dam could not generate enough electricity, so no turbines were ever installed.  As a result, it was sold years ago to the community for use as a community recreational lake.  And they have done a magnificent job with that.  We have been talking with the Rushford Recreational District group about the possibility of doing a demonstration installation at the dam as long as we guarantee there will be no effect on the water levels in the lake or the dam installation.  As you can imagine, a very difficult promise to keep with a turbine.  But we will not use turbines.  We are in process of building this demonstration  device, and we are targeting its launch in the spring, April or May.  And we will only use the water they release in order to keep lake levels they require.

With that, let me elaborate on the advantages of this device and you will begin to see why this thing will replace every hydro turbine on the planet.  First of all, turbines require large amounts of water traveling in great amounts at high rates of speed in order to generate electricity.  A large mass enters at a great rate of speed, and because you can not compress water, must exit at the same speed.  If accelerated mass like a truck traveling at 60 miles per hour would smash every bone in your body, does mass in motion have energy?  Ever try to break a soup bone in half with your bare hands?  How much energy does it take to smash every bone in your carcass?  And a truck has much less mass than 50,000 gallons of water.  Mass in motion has energy, and the larger the mass and the faster it moves the more energy it possesses.  And turbines release huge amounts of water at  high rates of speed.  Our device will release this water at the lower elevation at such a calm state you and your children could stand in it as it left our machine, because all of its elevated mass energy was removed and convereted to useable energy.  That means in the same installation, we would produce 15 times as much electricity as the Niagara Power system.  But believe it or not, it gets much better than that, and if you choose to become educated on this new science, you will see that Mankinds future is very very bright!.  Send me an email and I will keep you up to speed on the project.  Tim Gard [email protected]

Given your unwillingness to do even the napkin-math on earth mass heat storage systems, why am I less than confident in your 100% efficiency claims where hydro is concerned?

Given that many generations of very smart people who can (and do) do the math on hydro power systems come up with a dramatically different number, I'm bettin' whatever "new science" you're cooking will fall short of expectations (sort of like "100mpg carburetor" claims in the 1970s).

Please don't spend a lot of money on it.

Dana1? Excellent! You are the man dude! You really still working with napkins? I have found great advantages to computers. But if you are so absolutely sure of my error, I challenge you to immerse yourself into this and prove you are right. You are not, but what the hell. No money smart guy, just your tiny little brain. If the fear of being proven wrong scares you, I understand. Loudmouths hide when challenged. What are you Dana? However, if you do get up off your fat kiester and do a bit of work, and you find there is substance to what I present, your world will open up. But openness also scares some. So, here it is Dana1, put up or shut up.

By the way Dana1, did your great grandfather ever give up that horse? I didn't think so ...

even if you'd have something here - with this kind of attitude it is going to be hard to bring people on your side and looking at this

http://forum.allaboutcircuits.com/newsgroups/viewtopic.php?t=57598&postdays=0&postorder=asc&start=0

you've been trying for sometime. you already have 53 posts here.....you should know by now that Dana is one of the smartest people around here......man, dude, loudmouths, tiny little brain, shut up, fat kiester..... is no way to communicate on these matters.

clean up your act and maybe people will listen.

good luck
adi

I'm not that smart, but I know that perpetual motion machines don't really exist. (Maybe it's just an attitude problem on my part, but I don't think so.)

Having worked in both hard-sciences & engineering for a few decades I trust the math more than some "great idea". If the simple model calculated in lipstick on the mirror shows it plain won't work, more refined numerical models run on supercomputers will confirm that as a rule, (with somewhat higher precision.) No matter how much compute power you have, the facts don't change. Every good design starts with a simpler model to assess what's possible or reasonable. (FWIW: On of my first paid projects in physics was modeling interstellar gases using the supercomputers of the 1970s. I know it's not as powerful as a modern laptop, but it was way beyond what could be done on a slide rule. But it confirmed much of the lunch-time conjectures & napkin sketches we were having about what might fit the data. :-) )

A conversion rate of 100% of gravitational potential energy into electricity or mechanical power may not violate Newtonian mechanics, but it flies in the face of the second law of thermodynamics. To be 15x Niagara Power's turbine efficiency you would need more like a 1000% conversion rate. (Somehow immersing my self in a proof of that seems like a waste of time.) Pull that napkin or laptop out and check your math- you're at least an order of magnitude off. Even some fairly lo-tech hydro turbines will hit 70%. I don't know what they have at Niagara, but I'd be stunned if they averaged anywhere near that low at their as-operated flow rates. They're probably running somewhere in the mid-high 80s. (cood b rong, offen am)

As for the mid-20th century reservoir that was never exploited for it's hydro potential, what was uneconomic then (per Rochester Gas and Electric's assessment) may in fact be economic today, with more current turbine technology, higher fossil-fuel power costs, and higher market demand, but I'd have more faith in the project if the claim for 100%-1000% efficiency weren't on the table.

I don't know if he ever rode a horse, but according to family lore my great grandfather was once arrested for stealing a car. Why do you ask?

Dude!! Who the hell said *anything* about perpetual motion?? Are you a seventh grade science teacher or something?? Drop that crap and start over!!

Hi Adi!

Don't need no luck, got skill!!

I could care less about your little triads of misunderstandings or the 'insults' you have so much trouble dealing with. That is a lack of security problem your mama left you with. Besides this is the tack of your buddy Dana1, not me, I was just returning the lack of respect he emanated. Now, if Adi spends all of his / her time worshiping others then Adi is doomed to follow the rest of the sheep right over the cliff. I'll watch that though, I love mutton!

But I have an offer for you. If you can step back from your love affair with Dana1 for a moment, you might learn something even he does not know adi43d. Imagine how 'impotent' you would be then! But the reward of spending a little time and a little gray matter will be worth it. I'd be happy to exchange information and *reasonable* discussions with you, or Dana1 for that matter. But you can expect acidic comments will be responded to in the like. At least until you convince me that you are really a fool, and I will then leave you alone with your sheep friends.

Now, did your mama name you Adi, or are you afraid to use your real name like Dana1? Get some courage boy, use them nads! (Thats just a figure of speech in case you are of the female realm.) I'll talk engineering with you any day ... but if your skin is too thin to be challenged you may want to stay on the sidelines!

Posted By dragmit on 07 Dec 2010 03:23 PM
Dude!! Who the hell said *anything* about perpetual motion?? Are you a seventh grade science teacher or something?? Drop that crap and start over!!

'Twas you  claiming 15x more output than those cheap old-school soon-to-be-obsolete turbine technology they're running over at Niagara Power, which is MORE than perpetual motion machine efficiency.  (I was giving you the benefit of the doubt!)

As previously stated, I make my living in engineering, and have for decades, after a relatively brief career in physics.  (I'm not cut out for the "publish or perish" game- weak, I know...)  I'm not saving the world with inspired design genius, but my stuff generally works (pretty much the way it does on paper or in simulation.)  Seventh grade science might be fun though...

Thanks for the entertainment value- but leave my great-grandfather out of it, eh? ;-)

Mr. Gard,

Why are you telling us about this newly developed hydro power generation system before it is operational? 

I think a working model would be a more effective way of illustrating this new power system.  Why expend your energy now trying to convince anyone of anything when a working model would do it for you with less grief.

Alton- he's trying to find some engineers to help implement this beast, which may be very difficult, since most engineers can do the math.

If the production claims weren't so off the charts it would be a lot easier (but still difficult, without paying them) to find technical & business assistance to develop a hydro project- even a small demo project. This is stuff that's VERY well understood, with generations of smart people applying whole careers to the subject. Sure, there's always room for further technical innovation, but violating the laws of physics (x 10) just isn't in the cards- not possible even if you wanted to. (And claiming to doesn't buy you much cred in the engineering community.)

The very best hydro turbine technology operated at optimal flow rates is already north of 90% efficient (80% at the output of the generator would be a more typical number for a large hydro plant). Were there a way to get 90% efficiency over a wide range of flow rates & head, that would be GREAT- a real BREAKTHROUGH, but still nothing like a 15x multiplier of average output (but still a ~15% improvement.) I'll buy dragmit all the beer he can handle in one sitting if he could pull that off, even though it would be still well short of his claim.

Independent of turbine type, typical performance curves for hydro turbines look something akin to Figure 2, p.3 of this document:

http://www.ighem.org/Paper2004/3BrandtDoering.pdf

Some are a bit higher, some a bit lower, but generally have a peak, with a band higher & lower output around that peak where the efficiency is still "pretty good". Getting a wideset flattest peak near or above the 0.9 line is something like the Holy Grail of turbine design. (See: http://www.esru.strath.ac.uk/EandE/Web_sites/05-06/small_hydro/turbineeff_img.gif ) Kaplan type propeller turbines have a high flat curve, but are mechanically quite complex, involving variable-pitch impellers and vanes. If dragmit's contraption can hit 0.9 or higher over all the way down to 10% of the peak-efficiency output using any non-turbine technology I'll be truly impressed. Until then, I'm still a skeptic. Cred in my book placed in those who actually measure stuff, and show the math. YMMV.

for whoever wants to know more about this:

http://www.google.com/patents?id=o66NAAAAEBAJ&dq=Tim+gard

Adi
(my real name)

Excellent Adi! What are your thoughts?

Ahhh Yes!  Love a good fight eh?  Cut from the same cloth are we O'bion ...

Well, if you only read the parts you understand I can see where you would make that mistake. I will recap where your error is. Again. Gawd I wish you would read this stuff.

When hydro scientists looked at the function of turbines they immediately understood that there were elements of energy that would never become recoverable due to the accelerated mass issue in water. If you are hunting wolves, and you know you will only ever see 10% of the entire pack, 10% becomes your operative figure. Now, if you shoot 10 wolves, you have just reached 100% of your perceived attainable number. You didn't shoot 100 wolves, yet you claim 100%.  But thats 100% of your attainable goal. And that claim is correct. But an outsider with interest (me) would look at tracks of 90 wolves in the woods and say you math is goofy. Thats me ... energy efficiencies of 90% are *goofy* (incorrect) if you consider accelerated mass math, but yes, your turbine efficiencies of 90% are true because you negate the accelerated mass part. Get it? Remember me saying that liars make numbers and numbers make liars? That was what that was all about. Hydro claims 90% efficiency because that represents what they can get with a turbine. Why deal with the unattainable?  Its an engineer thing, no?

Did you not understand that whole goofy science thing called accelerated mass? Apparently not, so your answer was to ignore what you didn't get. Bad science Sarge. The only bad true data is true data ignored.  That is some pretty basic stuff for a guy of your stature Dana1, shame on you!

Don't think that not knowing something in a field you consider yourself to be an expert in is something new, Columbus encountered many people with the same attitude towards their 'knowledge'. Ever heard of the 'Flat Earth Society'? You should apply for membership! (Sorry, I could not resist that!)

OK on the Grandpa thing. I would bet you both of our Pas are sitting on a cloud with silly grins on their faces! I'll wrastle with you any time Dana, you got 'nads dude'! But you sure rile easily!

Seriously Dana, call me. This would be a much better conversation on the phone. Better yet my email is [email protected]. Send me a phone number and a time to call and I'll call you on my nickel.
You are really going to kick yourself when you find I was right all along and you blew it off!  We're talking about replacing all fossil fuels here forever.  A big job. 

There is a working model Alton.  We do not need to set off a huge bomb to demonstrate an atom splitting, do we?  A bad assumption on your part.  How about next time asking if I did something instead of assuming.  Do not assume.  It makes an 'ass' out of 'u' and 'me'.  And why do you 'assume' I do not like grief??

Mr. Gard,

Based on your post on 06 Dec 2010 I understand that this newly developed hydro power generation system is being installed on a local dam in Western NY.  Since it is not operational yet, I mentioned that a working model would be a more effective way to illustrate this new power system.  I meant this as a suggestion.  I did not say you did not have a model.  I just think seeing a working model would be more effective in convincing people.

Question:  Do you have a video to show us this newly developed hydro power generation system working or a scaled down model to demonstrate how it functions.  I looked at the patent drawings but still not sure how it will operate.  I am asking to see a video, I am not saying you do not have a video of a working model.

http://forum.allaboutcircuits.com/newsgroups/viewtopic.php?t=57598&postdays=0&postorder=asc&start=0

same same snake oil spiel as 3 years ago
if tim actually had something even close to reality? he wouldn't have to sound like a gypsy trying to sell it
no offense intended to actual gypsies
as my mom would say: good gawd, the crap you see on the internet

ko

Sorry Alton.  I have become defensive ... its the nature of a warrior. 

I am going to try to get this video on You Tube.  I have not done this yet, (the You Tube thing) and just got my Droid yesterday, but I will let you know when it is ready.  I started a service entrance for a fella last week, and the weather here in Buffalo has been raising hell with that project, and it looks like today will be no different, so I will work on this probably today.  I already have this video on this computer, now I have to do the homework.  I'll get it out ASAP.

Ha! Snake oil.  I love that term!

Wait!! Wait !! wait!! Stop the presses! Damn! Wrong patent!!
http://www.google.com/patents?id=o66NAAAAEBAJ&dq=Tim+gard

Sorry guys, no wonder some of you are confused. I stupidly assumed my latest patent (this month) was the one everyone was looking at. I should have looked. Thats that 'never ass-u-me' thing.

This tidal patent has different apps than what I was talking about, but this tidal generator would eliminate the problems ocean based units would have. This design was meant to be installed in Fundy Bay Canada, and with underground inlets dug on shore would be impervious to weather. But the ground surface there is as hard as, well, rock, because I understand it is rock. Get the dynamite George! But, if you look at the statistics as well as the operating parameters of Gods Fundy Bay, she alone could generate enough electricity to power the world. But ... she wouldn't be Fundy Bay anymore, my primary reason for abandoning this design. I have previous experience as a NY State hunter safety educator, so I guess that kinda makes me a tree hugger of sorts. But I do love venison! ~;-P (My pet name for this design was 'moon power')

If anyone would like to see the Hydro Pneumatic Power Generator I've been referring to, send me an email and I will forward it to you. And yes, I have taken into account the impact on the fish population and it appears to have little or no impact, but there is much more research to do in that aspect.

Sorry all, I'm a dolt. I Got ecited ...
[email protected]

Posted By kotero on 07 Dec 2010 11:12 PM

as my mom would say: good gawd, the crap you see on the internet

ko

yeah, like accelerated-mass noo syence

The velocity & torsional velocity of the goods comin' out the tailrace  doesn't represent anything like 90% or more of the energy of dropping that mass the vertical distance of the penstock, which it would have to be in order to meet dragmit's claims.

Wow....I've seen some sales pitches before....looks like this guy dragmit is doing his best impression of Ron Popeil, Billy Mays, and any other "As seen on TV" personality. Except, these guys would never tell a potential client that the potential client were full of crap. Dragmit is instantly combative when someone doesn't see how it could work, and instead of trying to convince others with proof, he just goes into a tirade like a 4th grader, calling names and making innuendo's as to how these other naysayers might be in love with one another. And by the way, questioning if one's screen name is their real name as a way to discredit them is very hypocritical....unless "Dragmit" is on your birth certificate. I have to say, if I acted the way Dragmit has, particularly towards people I want to help me, I would imagine it would be a cold day in hell before someone actually helped me. Finally, having patents does not mean your idea will work. Heck, the patent office can't even be sure that they didn't already approve a patent for a the same concept (which is why we see so many companies sue each other over various, similar patents, particularly in the computer technology realm), much less prove or disprove a design.

I most likely will not be checking back to see what crude, rude, over the top insanity dragmit might bestow upon me, or how he will try to assassinate my character, however, that does not mean that I can't think of any come backs or replies, but rather I don't want to waste my time arguing with a combative moron. If the engineering thing doesn't work out, Dragmit, you know, because of those necessary evils known as facts and figures, you could always try becoming a politician.