Last time I introduce a problem of energy efficiency in all elevator, namely that the gravitational potential energy gained by having a balancing weight on the process of elevator going upward is lost on its way back. So I suggests two way to 'resolve' this technicality: First is by making the balancing weight adjustable; Second is to changing how the balancing weight is interacting with the elevator. Needn't me make explicit my design, some intelligent reader may already in the same train of thought as I: To pass the tension generated by the balancing weight, it is not necessary to put the elevator and balancing weight in the same cable.
One we made this conceptual breakthrough, then it follow the logic that we can separate the gravitational force and how that acting on the subject by using a tension transferring system to transfer the tension produce by gravity acting on balancing weight. That system could be as simple as pairing of electromagnet and iron wheel, or more complicate system like magnet and electromagnet using the generator effect. With this system we can now fine tune how the tension produced by the balancing weight affect the cable carrying the elevator, i.e. the timing, quantity and direction of the force.
Suppose we now have this system in place so we turn on and turn off the effect of tension produced by the balancing weight on the cable carrying the elevator. However, we are still one step from using the tension produced by the balancing weight disentangled with the nature gravitational energy because what goes up must goes down. My suggested design is couple the wheel driving the elevator with unidirectional gear and break down the upward/downward motion of it to thousandth. Now imagine when the elevator is going upward,given the balancing weight is ten to hundred times of the expected weight of elevator, then the weight of the elevator is transferred to the balancing weight resulting in minimal downward motion. Suppose we now locked the elevator, turn off the tension transferring system and allow the balancing weight to bounce back using elasticity of the cable or other mechanism. So now the balancing weight is on the same position while the elevator has moved upward.The process is then repeat itself until the elevator reach its uppermost point; and when elevator is going downward, we simply turned off the tension transferring system. Thus we had extract the energy from gravitational field to move the elevator by clever engineering, we could probably saved 70%-80% of the energy cost of the elevator.
2009年6月4日 星期四
2009年6月1日 星期一
靜態重力電梯主意(2)
上次提到,要盡量利用平衡重的重量為電梯上升的動力,但又不想在電梯下降時付回剛賺到重力位能,除了把平衡重的重量改成可變的思路外,還有一個改變平衡重和電梯如何互動的思路,此思路如何具體實現?
首先,一般的設計都是把平衡重和電梯直接連在一起,以便平衡重的重量和電梯的重量直接互動,其實要平衡重的重量可以和電梯的重量發生作用,兩者不一定直接連起來,只要有適當的方法把平衡重的重量傳過去,有這樣一個媒介的好處是我們可以控制兩者的重力如何互動,其中一個媒介/方法是利用發電機發電時產生的阻力效應來把平衡重的重量在有需要時傳到電梯,而當沒有需要時,這個重力傳遞系統可以關掉。但是,雖然可以控制重力的傳遞,卻無法克服最基本的一個問題,就是除非平衡重可以像上次水力升降機的設計一樣可升可降,否則下降了的平衡重一樣要同樣的位能來補償,除非有一個辨法令平衡重不用升降也可以發揮它的重力作用,於是靜態(或相對靜態)的平衡重居然用自身的重量可以令電梯升降。
我的想法是把電梯上升及下降時的動作分成萬千個分割的片段,假設平衡重是比電梯重近百部,如此當電梯要上升時,我們可以用重力傳遞系統把平衡重的重力間竭傳送到電梯上,電梯每上升一格後便被不可逆的齒輪卡住,而由電梯上升而產生的反作用力則會令平衡重有一剎那的躍動,但不久便會回複正常的位置。如此的過程不斷重複,直至電梯抵達最高層為止。而當電梯向下降時,運作方式就更簡單了,只要電梯的鋼纜夠長,我們要可以在此時令重力傳遞系統暫時失效,於是平衡重的重量為電梯上升提供的動能便不用任何方式來補償,達到充份利用地球重力場所提供的勢能的效果,節省能源自然是最環保。
首先,一般的設計都是把平衡重和電梯直接連在一起,以便平衡重的重量和電梯的重量直接互動,其實要平衡重的重量可以和電梯的重量發生作用,兩者不一定直接連起來,只要有適當的方法把平衡重的重量傳過去,有這樣一個媒介的好處是我們可以控制兩者的重力如何互動,其中一個媒介/方法是利用發電機發電時產生的阻力效應來把平衡重的重量在有需要時傳到電梯,而當沒有需要時,這個重力傳遞系統可以關掉。但是,雖然可以控制重力的傳遞,卻無法克服最基本的一個問題,就是除非平衡重可以像上次水力升降機的設計一樣可升可降,否則下降了的平衡重一樣要同樣的位能來補償,除非有一個辨法令平衡重不用升降也可以發揮它的重力作用,於是靜態(或相對靜態)的平衡重居然用自身的重量可以令電梯升降。
我的想法是把電梯上升及下降時的動作分成萬千個分割的片段,假設平衡重是比電梯重近百部,如此當電梯要上升時,我們可以用重力傳遞系統把平衡重的重力間竭傳送到電梯上,電梯每上升一格後便被不可逆的齒輪卡住,而由電梯上升而產生的反作用力則會令平衡重有一剎那的躍動,但不久便會回複正常的位置。如此的過程不斷重複,直至電梯抵達最高層為止。而當電梯向下降時,運作方式就更簡單了,只要電梯的鋼纜夠長,我們要可以在此時令重力傳遞系統暫時失效,於是平衡重的重量為電梯上升提供的動能便不用任何方式來補償,達到充份利用地球重力場所提供的勢能的效果,節省能源自然是最環保。
2009年5月31日 星期日
My idea of hydrallic driven elavator
Now it is trendy to invent energy saving items, so I design this new elavator for solve the age old dilemma of balancing weight. The idea behind balancing weight is to increase the easiness of lifting an elavtor, at the price of paying back the same amount of potential energy it saved on its upward motion. Is there a way to save energy on upward motion without compensate in the downward motion?
There are several ways to approach this problem: First, we can made the weight of balancing weight variable in according to the direction of motion for the goal of energy saving; Second is to change the way which these two interact with each other. I save the later for another article. Now, how to change the weight of balancing weight so it would be heaviest when the elevator is going up and lightest when the elevator is going down?
Easy, by using the waste water pump out of each level; we now need a collection facilitate for collecting all the waste water from each apartment of each level; and also not a very complicate system to intelligently decide the amount of waste water used during each passage of elevator. Assume such a system is in place, then the balancing weight is actually a metallic cylinder allowing waste water to be collected. When the elevator is travelling upward, the rule of thumb is to increase the balancing weight as much as possible; and when the elevator is going back, the waste water in the cylinder is expelled through its opening in the bottom, which then going to the public sewage processing system.
How would such an idea to be implemented?
There are several ways to approach this problem: First, we can made the weight of balancing weight variable in according to the direction of motion for the goal of energy saving; Second is to change the way which these two interact with each other. I save the later for another article. Now, how to change the weight of balancing weight so it would be heaviest when the elevator is going up and lightest when the elevator is going down?
Easy, by using the waste water pump out of each level; we now need a collection facilitate for collecting all the waste water from each apartment of each level; and also not a very complicate system to intelligently decide the amount of waste water used during each passage of elevator. Assume such a system is in place, then the balancing weight is actually a metallic cylinder allowing waste water to be collected. When the elevator is travelling upward, the rule of thumb is to increase the balancing weight as much as possible; and when the elevator is going back, the waste water in the cylinder is expelled through its opening in the bottom, which then going to the public sewage processing system.
How would such an idea to be implemented?
2009年5月21日 星期四
水力升降機小主意
環保潮流,萬事萬物都以節能為尚,但是現在的升降機一點都不服膺於這原則,因為聰明的工程師為了省回升降機上升時的能量,於是便加上了平衡重來作相反方向的運動,不過省回的能量卻在升降機下降時被浪費掉。關鍵是有升必有降,只要平衡重的重量不變,節能是絕對不可能的。
有幾個可以解決此難題的思路,一是由平衡重如何和升降機的重量互動箸手,另一是相當簡單的把平衡重的重量由不變改成可變,順騰摸瓜,要節能的話當然是想辦法令升降機在上升時的平衡重變成最重,同理,升降機在下降時的平衡重變成最輕。如何令升降機在上升時的平衡重變成最重,升降機在下降時的平衡重變成最輕呢?其中一個辦法是先把平衡重變成一大容器,然後利用每戶每天生產出來的污水,每當升降機要向上時,就把平衡容器注滿污水,然後當升降機要下降時,就把平衡容器盛的水放走到污水渠,如此我們是巧妙利用了污水的重力勢能作能源來推動升降機作升降任務,它本身只消秏少量的電來作通風和照明(可從太陽能取得),絕對合乎環保的原則,如果全世界都使用的話,每年將減低數以千噸溫室氣體的排放。剩下唯一的技術難關,是如何有效控制污水的收集及排放,而污水收集又如何儲藏才能避免衛生問題?要是污水不足的話,在雨帶地方可收集雨水作同一用途。
此發明應用了蔣振寧抽取地心吸力的原理,本人為開發群組其中一成員,願意和任何人(除了曾拿我主意去註冊專利的他)合作開發!
有幾個可以解決此難題的思路,一是由平衡重如何和升降機的重量互動箸手,另一是相當簡單的把平衡重的重量由不變改成可變,順騰摸瓜,要節能的話當然是想辦法令升降機在上升時的平衡重變成最重,同理,升降機在下降時的平衡重變成最輕。如何令升降機在上升時的平衡重變成最重,升降機在下降時的平衡重變成最輕呢?其中一個辦法是先把平衡重變成一大容器,然後利用每戶每天生產出來的污水,每當升降機要向上時,就把平衡容器注滿污水,然後當升降機要下降時,就把平衡容器盛的水放走到污水渠,如此我們是巧妙利用了污水的重力勢能作能源來推動升降機作升降任務,它本身只消秏少量的電來作通風和照明(可從太陽能取得),絕對合乎環保的原則,如果全世界都使用的話,每年將減低數以千噸溫室氣體的排放。剩下唯一的技術難關,是如何有效控制污水的收集及排放,而污水收集又如何儲藏才能避免衛生問題?要是污水不足的話,在雨帶地方可收集雨水作同一用途。
此發明應用了蔣振寧抽取地心吸力的原理,本人為開發群組其中一成員,願意和任何人(除了曾拿我主意去註冊專利的他)合作開發!
2008年8月22日 星期五
2008年6月28日 星期六
Euler's invention: MCSSF
(With permission from Euler, I suspect that is not really an invention at all, it is just a principle that we can apply on Magnetic field emitting object. If we arrange them right then we got the strengthening effect, if we arrange them wrong then we got a weakening effect. This is Euler/Tesla's Coil applied on magnetic field.)
2008年6月25日 星期三
From euler: Summary of Euler's Coil Technology
(Looks like Tesla Coil to me, it appears to me that many innovation now are only a renovation of past innovation from genius like Nicola Tesla. How backward is humanity still struggling with technology 50 years ago! This topic is worth exploring. It is also interesting that the implementations and experiments don't correspond closely with the theory. I will write a better one later.)
Theory: http://eulertruthbible.wordpress.com/2008/06/25/the-idea-of-eulers-coil-technology/
Consider n electromagnetic coils arranged in a circle with end to end. One electromagnetic coil is connected with A.C, and all other electromagnetic coils are switched on(i.e. Maximum electrical current). The is the source electromagnetic coil, and other are receiving electromagnetic coils. How is the mutual inductance of the system as a whole varies as n changes?
In the case of n=2, one can imagine that when one end of the source electromagnetic coil is induced to polarize in the direction of N, and the other end of the source electromagnetic coil is induced to polarize in the direction of S. Now it is obviously the one end of other electromagnetic coil would be induced to polarize in the direction of N and the other end would polarize in the direction of S. Thus, in a sense, the receiving electromagnetic coil added to the ‘ease’ of the source electromagnetic coil. We thus expect the mutual inductance of the system as a whole to be lower than individual electromagnetic coil.
In the case of n=3. For the sake of description, we assume that source electromagnetic coil is in the middle. Suppose the left end of the source electromagnetic coil polarize in the direction of S, and the right end of the source electromagnetic coil polarize in the direction of N. From the perspective of the induction from the source electromagnetic coil, the right end of the left electromagnetic coil polarize in the direction of S, and the left end of the right electromagnetic coil polarize in the direction of N. Due to the virtue of construction of electromagnetic coil, the two end of the same electromagnetic coil must be of opposite magnetic polarity. Therefore we suppose the left end of the left electromagnetic coil should polarize in the direction of N, and the right end of the right electromagnetic coil should polarize in the direction of S. However, since these two end are next to each other, from the perspective of mutual induction between the left electromagnetic coil and the right electromagnetic coil MUST be of the same magnetic polarity. Therefore we arrive in a contradiction between two induction tendency, which cancel each other out. Thus, we expect an mutual inductance of the whole system to be infinite, therefore it is impossible to magnetize the source electromagnetic coil. (The whole situation change, however, when we place an ferromagnetic metal bar to connect the left end of the left electromagnetic coil and the right end of the right electromagnetic coil.)
In the case of n=4. For the sake of description, we assume that source electromagnetic coil is in the leftmost. Suppose the left end of the source electromagnetic coil polarize in the direction of S, and the right end of the source electromagnetic coil polarize in the direction of N. From the perspective of the induction from the source electromagnetic coil, the left end of the 1st electromagnetic coil polarize in the direction of N, and the right end of the 1st electromagnetic coil polarize in the direction of S. The left end of the 2nd electromagnetic coil polarize in the direction of S, and the right end of the 1st electromagnetic coil polarize in the direction of N. For the 3rd electromagnetic coil, the left end polarize in the direction of N, and the right end of the 1st electromagnetic coil polarize in the direction of S. Notice that is of the same magnetic polarity as the left end of the source electromagnetic coil. Thus the mutual induction effect from the source electromagnetic coil produce the same direction of change in magnetic polarity as from the interaction from the pairs of receiving electromagnetic coils nearest to each other. The net effect is the mutual inductions of individual pairs of receiving electromagnetic coils added to each other. Thus we expect the mutual inductance of the system as a whole must be lower than we place all electromagnetic coils parallel to each other(as in a transformer.)
We can generalize the result to all cases which n is even. The mutual inductances of the system as a whole drop below the average. However when n is odd, the mutual inductances of the system as a whole goes up throw the roof. The gist of all of them: The configuration and arrangement of electromagnetic coils would alter the mutual inductance of the system as a whole that is not linearly related to the electromagnetic coil's natural inductances.
Could we get extra electrical energy by the virtue of how we arranged the electromagnetic coils? Is there exists particular configurations of electromagnetic coil that would increase and decrease the mutual inductance of the system as a whole? Could we use this method to maximize the chance of two electromagnetic coils resonance with each other? Could we use this method to alter the pattern of variation of the mutual inductance of the system as a whole to produce extra electromagnetic energy?
Yes, Euler think so. This would be a solution to the energy crisis. Science just doesn’t explore these instance of electromagnetic system because that may require a major modification of the laws in classic electromagnetic.
Discussion:
Experiments:
訂閱：
文章 (Atom)