fay's unKle

Members
  • Content count

    3
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About fay's unKle

  • Rank
    Member

Recent Profile Visitors

129 profile views
  1. Ships for better balance in wavy seas.

    If ships were made conical, with the broader side at the bottom off course, less volume would've been 'available' for additional bayoncy forces to act, in wavy seas, on one side, when water on one side of the ship is higher (crest) than the other side. (valley) Off course the same is true for ship rocking along the longitudinal axis when the bow or stern is in the water. Considering the sphere as a floating vehicle is very interesting, in regards to its stability versus resistance in propulsion. Is there a better 3d floating shape to negotiate the wavy seas, than a sphere. P.S. To me it doesn't matter that it's not 100% ME, it's mechanics too.
  2. 'Personal' A/C unit on a fan.

    Not as much an idea as a need. In many cases one wishes to have an A/C unit on a fan because at temperatures of 35 deg C ( 90 deg F) the air blown by the fan is WORM. If a 150 W A/C unit is used, it can cool about 95 CFM, 15 deg F (8 deg C) economically. This is fine because air blown continuously at lower temperature i.e. 25 deg C (77 F) is too cool, and about 100 CFM is enough for personal comfort at about 27 deg C There is a need, in my opinion, for warehouses, porches even in the house due to economic considerations. Also an other incarnation of personal, and not only, comfort unit, would have been one that sprays a fine mist of water. Pumping requirement must be about 150 psig with the water sprayed to be about half the amount sprayed in homes by air refreshers.
  3. Some time ago I saw articles, most probably from car manufacturers, describing the ideas/wishes of some, to use hydrogen as fuel for their internal combustion engines, if the economies turn to it, as energy source and thus satisfy the environmental requirements. In my opinion it's not only the environment that has to be protected it's an economical matter too. Internal combustion engines can't get away of an overall efficiency in the low thirties while fuel cells climb to 80%. Huge difference. We understand how admirably the engine manufacturers have perfected them during the past 100 years or so, but they have to do the same with fuel cells and a lot faster, because technology now is many times more advanced in all respects. It is my humble opinion that now fuel cells are not developed by the best and the progress is very slow, if I'm not mistaken there isn't a fuel cell ready for reliable use after almost two decades of research and development.