-
Content Count
22 -
Joined
-
Last visited
About tooldtocare
-
Rank
Member
Profile Information
-
Gender
Male
-
Location
usa
-
Science students need a problem too solve. A machine that claims to produce useful energy while defying logic. Students are to evaluate the physical properties showing why the design is flawed. Pickout the flaw you see and write a summary of what is technically wrong in your own words. As a student you can pick out where he/she sees flaws in the design/physical properties that prevents the machine from operating as advertised. The forum body will grade the papers as presented. It is now, where I live Wednesday, March 31, 2021 @ 12:00AM cst usa The fin
-
Can we then agree that a cubic foot of sea water weighs 67 lbs. It takes a force of 67 pounds on an empty cube to submerge the cube from surface to one (1) foot deep into the water. Do we agree-? Can you convert a constant force of 118,428 pounds of force traveling at 3 feet per second-? Unfortunately, this is nowhere near enough information for you to go on - I understand - but hopefully it is a start in the right direction. Thanks, I enjoyed your thoughts, again thanks, May you and yours have a great day and beyond. I gave you my company email address. if yo
-
As a side note: Machine an apparatus using or applying mechanical power and having several parts, each with a definite function and together performing a particular task. tinyurl.com/7e4v5vuk air pressure at sea level about 14.7 pounds per square inch One atmosphere (101.325 kPa or 14.7 psi) is also the pressure caused by the weight of a column of fresh water of approximately 10.3 m (33.8 ft). Thus, a diver 10.3 m underwater experiences a pressure of about 2 atmospheres (1 atm of air plus 1 atm of water). Conversely, 10.3 m is the maximum height to which water can be
-
I came up with an idea that could possibly produce more useful energy than is required to keep the system running & no it is not a perpetual motion machine. The output is mechanical to electric and that is why I am introducing this idea here. SeaPower description Attached is a diagram that details a new energy generating power source using the expanding rise of air underwater as a lifting force. This is the same principal that keeps a boat afloat. A cubic foot of air under water has a lifting force of 67 pounds. A ship/boat that weighs 2,000 pounds must displace (2,000/
-
G B Reid, I used 3 feet per second because I read an article that stated that an air bubble in water will rise at 3 fs. Looking further into this I have discovered that it is a bit more complicated than I first thought. Since the air in the balloons are expanding as they rise the enlarging balloons will accelerate the rising speed. Based on your post, I need to convert everything into Joules but first I need to come up with a speed and from there I can work on determining if I am using more energy to keep the system running than I am getting out of it. I have a land surveying co
-
tooldtocare reacted to a post in a topic: Seaengine design to use combined rising air bubbles as force
-
Thank you for your input I sincerely appreciate your response. I knew there would be losses in the efficiency of the machine but because of my limited understanding of the machine’s inner workings I could not pinpoint where these losses would come from. Having said that even with these losses the machine would still operate and produce some useful work. To calculate how much useful work the seaengine can produce a few properties need to be determined. [1] what is the speed of the rising air bubbles? [2] what is the lifting force of the rising bubbles? [3] how much ene
-
amusement park rides and mechanical engineering
tooldtocare replied to dudleybenton's topic in Forum Games
i bet gravity is in there somwwhere -
I created this topic to give others here an opportunity to do a little math to improve their skills in solving a mechanical problem. The problem is whether this machine can produce the energy claimed and whether the machine produces more energy that is consumed to operate the machine. I am 80% confident the machine produces less energy than is required to maintain the operation of the machine. Unfortunately, when I do the math, I get a positive return but that theoretically could not be true.