Merged DDWFTTW in a “Real” Wind

[humber]

Looks like my suspicion that humber is quote mining Camp is correct. Of course, that's just us carteers conspiring to keep humber from defending Truth Justice, and the humberverse.

Oh funny. It was Spork who went to Camp. He posted that he was 100% sure that he could make Dr Camp see the light of day, but he didn't.
The conclusion is that Dr Camp may be a "bright guy", but not capable of understanding the bigger picture.

Dr Camp does not accept that the road may be powered by a motor, and that is the common criticism, but I also know how it does what it does, and can replicate that, using several methods. It's nothing but a mechanical toy.

I have now sold you a cart that is driven by its brakes, and trashed the trial, so there really is nothing left for you to say but gossip about me. I expected no other outcome.

 

[Jack by the hedge]

Levers do not "amplify force".

F1*d1 = F2*d2 (your equation describing the lever's effect)

F2 = F1 * (d1/d2) (your lever, amplifying F1 by a factor of d1/d2)

 

[CORed]

Gather around the well, ye villagers. Come hear the tales of mystery.


Oh, an anecdote.


Maybe it wasn't flat.

Maybe the girl's grandfather was humber.

Well, that load of old rope has not dented anything.
It is in black and white, the you all supported my proposal for a cart that was driven by its brakes.
That one goes in the book.

 

[A.T.]

I suspect you are quote mining a letter that in fact does not support your position. You can prove me wrong by posting what you left out.

Here is the part of Camps e-mail humber never quotes:

I don't see how this system obviously violates conservation of energy. As long as there is energy in the motion of the air, it can in principle be extracted and fed to the car in some way.

Here the entire thing:
http://talkrational.org/showthread.php?p=1271615#post1271615

 

[Jack by the hedge]

I sold you a cart that goes faster when the brakes are applied.
That really does damage you credibility beyond redemption.

Yes you did. You sold us a cart which uses the energy from its brakes to move its propeller in such a way that it can harvest even more energy from the wind.

That you don't think it can work can't conceivably do any more damage to your credibility, unless it somehow desecrates its grave.

 

[GlennB]

I sold you a cart that goes faster when the brakes are applied.
That really does damage you credibility beyond redemption.

A cart that goes faster while the brakes are being applied (long term) is trivially easy to illustrate as a theoretical concept. It has been illustrated already in this thread with the steam-engine idea.

When the brakes (transiently) are applied is still theoretically possible but the concept is now very distant and hard to describe in any every-day meaningful way.

 

[CORed]

Oh funny. It was Spork who went to Camp. He posted that he was 100% sure that he could make Dr Camp see the light of day, but he didn't.
The conclusion is that Dr Camp may be a "bright guy", but not capable of understanding the bigger picture.

Seems like a perfectly reasonable conclusion to me.

Dr Camp does not accept that the road may be powered by a motor, and that is the common criticism, but I also know how it does what it does, and can replicate that, using several methods. It's nothing but a mechanical toy.

You have no idea how it does what it does, and you can't replicate it.

I have now sold you a cart that is driven by its brakes,

Actually, you "sold" us a cart driven by the wind, just as spork's is.

and trashed the trial, so there really is nothing left for you to say but gossip about me. I expected no other outcome.

The Black Knight, all his arms and legs having been chopped off by King Arthur, declares victory.

 

[CORed]

Here is the part of Camps e-mail humber never quotes:

Here the entire thing:
http://talkrational.org/showthread.php?p=1271615#post1271615

Thank you. Humber, in typical fashion, ignores the part that Camp got right, and latches on to the part he got wrong.

 

[Modified]

Maybe the girl's grandfather was humber.

It was 25 years ago, so unless humber is over age 85, probably not.

 

[humber]

Yes you did. You sold us a cart which uses the energy from its brakes to move its propeller in such a way that it can harvest even more energy from the wind.

That you don't think it can work can't conceivably do any more damage to your credibility, unless it somehow desecrates its grave.

No. All that I did was replace the generator. Generators are transducers, converting mechanical energy to electrical energy.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electrical_generator

A power station uses heat to run that generator, and I used the heat from braking. The problem is not of practicality, but that you will accept that a cart can be accelerated by pressing on the brake. The harder, the better. That is the claim outlined in the submission, and jolly old Santa NALSA has officially sanctioned that.

You may say that the wind is somehow responsible, but how many wind vehicles accelerate when braked? Any vehicle?
And that is the BB's claim.

 

[humber]

Thank you. Humber, in typical fashion, ignores the part that Camp got right, and latches on to the part he got wrong.

Fantastic. Poster Cored can tell Dr Camp where he went wrong.


Next post;
quote=Spork
"I should point out that I still believe Dr. Camp to be wrong with respect to the treadmill equivilency, but I've not yet convinced him. I suspect I will."

Oh dear.

 

[humber]

Seems like a perfectly reasonable conclusion to me.

But not to Dr Camp. It is staggering that you, and so many of the cart's supporters, think they know better than those with doctorates. Professional physicists.

The Black Knight, all his arms and legs having been chopped off by King Arthur, declares victory.

Elvis, Moonlandings and Monty Python. One more and Franklin Mint will make a commemorative plate

 

[Jack by the hedge]

The problem is not of practicality, but that you will accept that a cart can be accelerated by pressing on the brake.

You are fooling yourself by thinking of it as a brake (which throws energy away) instead of an energy recovery system (which uses the energy to gain even more energy from an available source).

The harder, the better.

No. You pulled that out of your backside. "Just enough" would be more accurate.

You may say that the wind is somehow responsible, but how many wind vehicles accelerate when braked?

Until anyone else builds one, you might say "one", but the energy extracted from the wheel to invest in moving the prop to the most advantageous position is simply equivalent to the energy a tacking land yacht uses up in moving across the wind to do the same with its sail.

 

[humber]

Here is the part of Camps e-mail humber never quotes:

Originally Posted by Camp
I don't see how this system obviously violates conservation of energy. As long as there is energy in the motion of the air, it can in principle be extracted and fed to the car in some way.

And there is more later....

But he is utterly sure about the TM.

Both Dr Camp and Steve Smith have said that changing winds and gradients may power the cart. I posted a model of such a cart way back when.
So, what? Of course. But not ddwfttw, because there is no energy to extract.

It was Spork who sought out Dr Camp, and not the other way around. I have never needed to go cap in hand to anybody.

 

[I Ratant]

I went to great expense and effort to construct an unpowered cart with a freewheeling prop, to get a Square One set of information.
Regardless of the direction it pointed in the wind, it always moved downwind with the prop rotating or fixed.
With the wind on the front of the prop, it moved slower than with the wind on the rear.
With the prop prevented from rotation, the cart would move downwind.. again, slower when the wind hit the face of the prop.
With no prop, the cart wouldn't move at all.

 

[humber]

You are fooling yourself by thinking of it as a brake (which throws energy away) instead of an energy recovery system (which uses the energy to gain even more energy from an available source).No. You pulled that out of your backside. "Just enough" would be more accurate.

No good at all. The wheel sees only force of the generator, and that decelerates the wheel, just as a brake does. Regenerative braking does not drive the car as the car is braked. It stores the energy recovered from the cars KE. I have also recovered the energy and used that to ACCELERATE the cart as the brake is applied and that is what the BB's theory says it will do.

Until anyone else builds one, you might say "one", but the energy extracted from the wheel to invest in moving the prop to the most advantageous position is simply equivalent to the energy a tacking land yacht uses up in moving across the wind to do the same with its sail.

There are no vehicles that accelerate when braked. Wind, gasoline, whatever.
save for the Rube Goldberg BB.

 

[humber]

I went to great expense and effort to construct an unpowered cart with a freewheeling prop, to get a Square One set of information.
Regardless of the direction it pointed in the wind, it always moved downwind with the prop rotating or fixed.
With the wind on the front of the prop, it moved slower than with the wind on the rear.
With the prop prevented from rotation, the cart would move downwind.. again, slower when the wind hit the face of the prop.
With no prop, the cart wouldn't move at all.

So it's a sail. What happens if the prop is replaced with the same area of card (foam?)
I made a geared cart, and put it in front of a fan - wind is too variable - but it will move to or away from the fan, dependent on the area of the chassis.
I suspect that the torque from the BB's rotor is low, so there is not that much force to oppose.

ETA:
Can you see any difference in acceleration if you first allow the prop to spin up before releasing it?

 

[jduffy77]

I went to great expense and effort to construct an unpowered cart with a freewheeling prop, to get a Square One set of information.
Regardless of the direction it pointed in the wind, it always moved downwind with the prop rotating or fixed.
With the wind on the front of the prop, it moved slower than with the wind on the rear.
With the prop prevented from rotation, the cart would move downwind.. again, slower when the wind hit the face of the prop.
With no prop, the cart wouldn't move at all.

Your cart does not appear to have a rigid geared linkage between the prop and the wheels in which case it has nothing in common with the ddw cart. The wheels spin the prop on the ddw cart. You mention you want a "square one set of info", but I just don't see what it has to do with anything we have been talking about.

 

[jduffy77]

No good at all. The wheel sees only force of the generator, and that decelerates the wheel, just as a brake does. Regenerative braking does not drive the car as the car is braked. It stores the energy recovered from the cars KE. I have also recovered the energy and used that to ACCELERATE the cart as the brake is applied and that is what the BB's theory says it will do.

Did would be the correct word Humber. You need to learn your English tenses.

 

[A.T.]

I went to great expense and effort to construct an unpowered cart with a freewheeling prop, to get a Square One set of information.
Regardless of the direction it pointed in the wind, it always moved downwind with the prop rotating or fixed.
With the wind on the front of the prop, it moved slower than with the wind on the rear.
With the prop prevented from rotation, the cart would move downwind.. again, slower when the wind hit the face of the prop.
With no prop, the cart wouldn't move at all.

But... but... humber told us, that you can tack downwind at 2.8 windspseed, just by using the "lift" of a symmetrical chassis.