Merged DDWFTTW in a “Real” Wind

[humber]

Ah, so when you think an opinion supports your incorrect assumption (which it actually doesn't) a boat IS like a land based cart - except when it isn't...

Both land and water craft are not capable of >WS, and Blackford's paper provides the calculations to a show that.
Ruina argued (amongst the analogies) that Blackford's prop parameters were too pessimistic. But, in the intervening 30 years, no magical props have appeared, and all current upwind carts do no better than 65% of WS, despite having all the advantages of high efficiency electric motor and generators, and optimized DC/DC converter algorithms.

ETA:
And your steering system is still a certain failure.

 

[ThinAirDesigns]

.
Until the propellor orientation in the diagram agrees with real life, I won't bother.

Ignorance and hard-headed. A combination that won't get you far.

A.T.s diagram agrees 100% perfectly with our vehicle. You're making youself look silly insisting otherwise.

JB

 

[ThinAirDesigns]

To prove to I Ratant that a wheel rolls, someone produce diagrams which show the wheel from both sides. Otherwise you are not consistent with reality.

Do it. Do it now.

JB

 

[ThinAirDesigns]

Drela did not address Spork of JB, nor did he refer to anything they posted.

Exactly -- Drela agreed 100% with our calcs and position and us with him. He clearly addressed those he disagreed with and those who said it was impossible.

His position is clear on both DDWFTTW and the treadmill.

JB

 

[I Ratant]

Force down incline due to gravity = [latex]m.g.Sin\theta[/latex]
Wind force on the cart equals that.

...

.
My physics book uses tan(theta).
In the wind, the coffee cup would be useless.
With these tiny forces there probably isn't any simple way to measure them dynamically.

 

[I Ratant]

...
Put them side by side in the wind, and ensure the wheels cannot lift, I Ratant. That is only holding TAD to their own claim: the wheels drive the prop. Why should they object?
When that is done, the free-wheeler will thrash the geared cart.

.
I've been hoping for a simultaneous free release of bof'em, since the git-go...
But dat Ol' Debbil friction is fighting me.
There about a 2 oz difference between the drag the freewheeling prop has over the geared cart, to keep both of them on the inclined plane.
I don't expect the fixed prop can make up that difference.
And it's the prop drag that starts the whole thing off... right?
But I have yet to get a geared prop cart to move any distance, much less at any speed.
Maybe a larger vehicle with much larger props, to get closer to the faster portion of the wind, but not by me.
If that wood framed cart is the Bauer, it shows all I could expect to show, but I'm far from going to that much effort.

 

[humber]

Exactly -- Drela agreed 100% with our calcs and position and us with him.

He never responded to you, and if you mean his paper agrees with you, then you show me where. Totally different. His ideas bear no relationship to yours.

He clearly addressed those he disagreed with and those who said it was impossible.
His position is clear on both DDWFTTW and the treadmill.

Drela works in Computational Fluid Dynamics, perhaps he was amusing himself with internet wannabees.
He pulls a fast one by never referring to the prop's AV, but his calculations say that will be zero at WS, yet if connected to the wheels, can't be.
Solution: make the rolling resistance "arbitrarily low". A problem is that wheels won't roll without friction, so he is proposing sliding. Ha Ha.

He never completed the rest of the paper, not has he developed it in any way since.

Bauer has another plan, different from yours.
But, here is how sees the prop:

 

[ThinAirDesigns]

Totally different. His ideas bear no relationship to yours.

Yes, we know that in the Humberverse, "identical" interprets to "totally different" and "no relationship".

So, we're all in agreement then.

JB

 

[humber]

.
My physics book uses tan(theta)

.
Can do. The normal force is m.g. cos(q) . Tan(q) = Sin(q)/Cos(q)
Mrs Geddes will be so pleased I remembered that.
But it does raise the question of the cart's differing masses

.
In the wind, the coffee cup would be useless.
With these tiny forces there probably isn't any simple way to measure them dynamically.

Small force, big problems, but 0.65oz is not so small that it can't lift a small mass. One thing that will screw things up, is that the geared cart's rotor will not spin fast enough to be as effective as the free-wheeler.

 

[humber]

Yes, we know that in the Humberverse, "identical" interprets to "totally different" and "no relationship".

So, we're all in agreement then.

JB

You or Spork point to where his calculations or even principles are like yours.
Why not?
He directly answered all the questions from the others posters, but did tend down play the problems. He twice revised the Galilean Transform.
Anyway, perhaps he saw in your TM, the sliding that he had in mind.

 

[quarky]

Perhaps someone here could bring me up to speed:

Humber's objections mention fraudulent, scammish activity. Is this because the various videos are a fake, or because the really fast wind cart doesn't qualify as ddw, due to various factors?

Or is it more of a matter that the math simply disagrees, and humber is faithful to that?
Much like an engineer rejects PM because it violates the laws? And needn't look further? Which is understandable. Whether correct or not?

 

[ThinAirDesigns]

Humber's objections mention fraudulent, scammish activity.

humber's objections mention anything and everything.

JB

 

[ThinAirDesigns]

.But I have yet to get a geared prop cart to move any distance, much less at any speed.

Your fail -- not ours.

JB

 

[humber]

.
I've been hoping for a simultaneous free release of bof'em, since the git-go...
But dat Ol' Debbil friction is fighting me.
There about a 2 oz difference between the drag the freewheeling prop has over the geared cart, to keep both of them on the inclined plane.
I don't expect the fixed prop can make up that difference.
And it's the prop drag that starts the whole thing off... right?
But I have yet to get a geared prop cart to move any distance, much less at any speed.
Maybe a larger vehicle with much larger props, to get closer to the faster portion of the wind, but not by me.
If that wood framed cart is the Bauer, it shows all I could expect to show, but I'm far from going to that much effort.

If the friction were zero, that would only influence the transmission efficiency of the net force produced at the prop. The inherent flaw of opposing forces remains. It could be that reducing the transmission losses, will actually make things worse for Little Nell.
If the cart won't start, then I don't suppose they can be raced, but that does not auger well for a bigger cart, compared to a bigger free-wheeler.

 

[humber]

humber's objections mention anything and everything.

JB

It all one thing. You and your determination for "success" in the face of failure, which was so incandescently exposed in the street video.

 

[humber]

Perhaps someone here could bring me up to speed:

Humber's objections mention fraudulent, scammish activity. Is this because the various videos are a fake, or because the really fast wind cart doesn't qualify as ddw, due to various factors?

The data of the published chart does not match NALSA's data. That has never been cleared up, nor explained. If the discrepancy were at someone else's hand, or just an error, why would TAD not want to clear their name? At first, I said it was a "discrepancy", it became to look more like manipulation, when there was no response

But, the primary deception, is to set the prevailing conditions. The wind is variable and was known to be so, allowing short term wind pattern to be exploited by trial and error, and the negative results discarded. Many practice runs proved that to be possible.
The run is too short to eliminate that indeterminate wind factor. One approach, would be to set the cart off at fixed time intervals, record all results, and apply the appropriate statistical tools.

Or is it more of a matter that the math simply disagrees, and humber is faithful to that?

The math says no. All competing ideas are different. I know the how the TM works, and that stands, even if only as an alternative explanation. TAD have refused to do the tests that would settle the matter.

Much like an engineer rejects PM because it violates the laws? And needn't look further? Which is understandable. Whether correct or not?

Yes, nobody in the legitimate power business is actually looking at over-unity, and first principles say why. Same for the cart. It's a no-brainer.
However, the cart's fails to circumvent the fundamental objections, by not actually complying with the original claim.
It was NOT doubted that transient winds could send the cart to above WS when not ddw. I made a proposal for such a cart, way back at the start of this fiasco.
Ddwfftw is a specific claim, and that was not tested for.

 

[I Ratant]

.
Can do. The normal force is m.g. cos(q) . Tan(q) = Sin(q)/Cos(q)
Mrs Geddes will be so pleased I remembered that.
But it does raise the question of the cart's differing masses


Small force, big problems, but 0.65oz is not so small that it can't lift a small mass. One thing that will screw things up, is that the geared cart's rotor will not spin fast enough to be as effective as the free-wheeler.

.
It's not the lifting, it's the buffeting.
The cup would need to be protected from that.
Sketched up a balance for use in wind..
But how to see the numbers on the scale?
The thing would be flipped around to get the reading for the wind on the other side of the prop.

 

[I Ratant]

If the friction were zero, that would only influence the transmission efficiency of the net force produced at the prop. The inherent flaw of opposing forces remains. It could be that reducing the transmission losses, will actually make things worse for Little Nell.
If the cart won't start, then I don't suppose they can be raced, but that does not auger well for a bigger cart, compared to a bigger free-wheeler.

.
The wire framed cart certainly moves.
Not as much clap-trap as mine.
I may go looking for some wire hangers to bend into interesting shapes, and use some slotcar crown and spur gears on the prop shaft.

 

[A.T.]

For example, what is called “dynamic soaring” -- the maneuvering in a wind gradient field (regions where there is a consistent pattern of different wind speed) that allows birds (and gliders) to soar by extracting energy out of the wind gradient field. This is the life-blood of the albatross, and to some extent, the frigate bird. The world record for a radio-controlled glider in dynamic soaring is something close to 400 mph!

For those interested in how this works, here an explanation in simple terms:



The current record is 468mph:



Here is a slower one where you can see the glider better:

 

[Modified]

Perhaps someone here could bring me up to speed:

Humber's objections mention fraudulent, scammish activity. Is this because the various videos are a fake, or because the really fast wind cart doesn't qualify as ddw, due to various factors?

Or is it more of a matter that the math simply disagrees, and humber is faithful to that?
Much like an engineer rejects PM because it violates the laws? And needn't look further? Which is understandable. Whether correct or not?

In the beginning it disagreed with humber's intuition. Humber seems incapable of ever admitting to an error about anything, even very simple things he's been clearly wrong about. Since he first objected to it, he can never admit it works.