Merged DDWFTTW in a “Real” Wind

[ThinAirDesigns]

The cart is moving away from the energy source, ...

Nope -- the cart is moving *through* and *towards* it's energy source at all times. It is the true wind it is in now and the true wind that is ahead of it and will eventually reach that is it's energy source during it's run. What it is moving away from is behind it and old news.

JB

 

[Llyricist]

OOH, getting a little testy aren't you?

No, just the facts.

There can be NO such thing as 100% energy transfer, so you are imagining it. There is also no perfect prop so you are imagining it.

I am no imagining anything, I fully accounted for more aerodynamic losses than necessary.... elsewhere. Because the formula used was based on 100% energy transfer.


You seem to have a real problem understanding what I am saying.

But you can't show me the supposed error can you?

Already have, the main error being in your overall approach where you try to account for work done and do an energy balance at the same time.

A positive feedback loop?

Yes, a positive feedback loop, it is using negative work against it's forward motion to provide a force to keep it moving.
This can't work without an input of energy to cover its losses. In this case, there is an input of energy more than sufficient to cover its losses.

The rest is gibberish.

 

[humber]

Nope -- the cart is moving *through* and *towards* it's energy source at all times. It is the true wind it is in now and the true wind that is ahead of it and will eventually reach that is it's energy source during it's run. What it is moving away from is behind it and old news.

JB

The cart show apparent winds that are greater than the speed of the vehicle relative to the wind.

 

[humber]

No, just the facts.

Yes, a positive feedback loop, it is using negative work against it's forward motion to provide a force to keep it moving.
This can't work without an input of energy to cover its losses. In this case, there is an input of energy more than sufficient to cover its losses.

The rest is gibberish.

You are claiming energy gain that is greater than the work expended to get it.

 

[ThinAirDesigns]

the cart show apparent winds that are greater than the speed of the vehicle relative to the wind.

lol. Demonstrating once again that relative motion is a problem for you.

Jb

 

[humber]

lol. Demonstrating once again that relative motion is a problem for you.

Jb

LOL. It's all in the data you hoped would never be examined. And keep the "relative motion" sales pitch for all the magazines and blogs you spammed in self-promotion.
Spork was foolish enough to post my e-mail address. You will be surprised at what has arrived.
"the torque of a Corvette" one that is perhaps pushed...

 

[ThinAirDesigns]

You will be surprised at what has arrived.

There will be no "surprise" because 'nothing of value' is both exactly what I expect from you and what will be. You've shown remarkable consistency in this regard.

JB

 

[Llyricist]

You are claiming energy gain that is greater than the work expended to get it.

Cart gains 102 J, air loses 920 J.

You were saying?

 

[jadebox]

If the objective here was to move 72 kg per second of air @ 2.2 m/s, as a fan would, then 320 Watts would definitely be sufficient for that task. But the main objective here is to move the 295 kg cart @ 9 m/s over the ground. To do that requires Work = Force x Distance and in this case that is 160 N x 9 m = 1,440 Joules, or in terms of Power 1,440 J/s (Watts).

The main objective is to accelerate the cart. It is already moving.

Force = mass times acceleration. The force is 72 kg/s * 2.2 m/s or about 158N.

158N = 295 kg / s * ? m/s
(295 kg / s) / (158 (kg *m)/s^2) = ....

... about 1.9 m/s. Therefore, using your numbers, the propeller provides enough thrust to accelerate the cart 1.9 m/s per second.

-- Roger

 

[Subduction Zone]

I see that profpangloss does not understand inertia. He speaks of inertia building up on the treadmill. Inertia does not "build up". Inertia is equivalent to mass, inertia does not increase anymore than the mass of the cart increases. He probably meant to say momentum, but with momentum you are dealing with relative velocities and his argument cannot stand up to relative velocities.

And by the way Harold (ppg) will not participate in my Yes/No questions nor will he answer this simple question: "What is the speed of a cloud of dust blown by the wind relative to the wind?" The reason he won't answer that one is that there is a beautiful video of the BUFC charging through a wind blown cloud of dust. He has no explanation of how the BUFC did that. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PhD_3vdIvu4And there it is.

 

[humber]

There will be no "surprise" because 'nothing of value' is both exactly what I expect from you and what will be. You've shown remarkable consistency in this regard.

JB

Yes, he is like a bull that carries its own china shop.

And see if you can talk down this lesser gem.

 

[Subduction Zone]

humber, assuming a steady wind, is the wind blowing at the same velocity over the ground when the cart is at or above wind speed as it was blowing over the ground before the cart was at wind speed?

 

[tobermoryphil]

Humber: my offer of an award of £1000 if you can demonstrate your propless cart advancing on a treadmill still stands.

Is there any good reason why you are not claiming this?

I think my money is safe.

Either prove me wrong, or just shut up trolling out your never ending fantasies and delusions.

 

[humber]

humber, assuming a steady wind, is the wind blowing at the same velocity over the ground when the cart is at or above wind speed as it was blowing over the ground before the cart was at wind speed?

A 60 degree shift, and the cart nose dives when the wind approaches ddw. I wonder why there is no wind direction data for the 50.4mph record?
So many failures too. All that pushing for nothing.

 

[windgrins]

Those Shifty Winds!

A 60 degree shift, and the cart nose dives when the wind approaches ddw. I wonder why there is no wind direction data for the 50.4mph record?
So many failures too. All that pushing for nothing.


[qimg]http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/attachment.php?attachmentid=22112&stc=1&d=1305052228[/qimg]

Spork and JB,

I think you'll appreciate this. If you wait for another couple of hundred posts or so, you won't need to produce an upwind cart. Humber will have shifted it around to 180 degrees by then! And you can claim both the DDW and upwind record in the same run! He has already managed a 60 degree shift of the headwind!

Regards,

WindGrins

 

[Subduction Zone]

A 60 degree shift, and the cart nose dives when the wind approaches ddw. I wonder why there is no wind direction data for the 50.4mph record?
So many failures too. All that pushing for nothing.


[qimg]http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/attachment.php?attachmentid=22112&stc=1&d=1305052228[/qimg]

That was not the question I asked humber. So once again, humber wrong try again. I was not talking about the cart when it was tested.

 

[humber]

Spork and JB,

I think you'll appreciate this. If you wait for another couple of hundred posts or so, you won't need to produce an upwind cart. Humber will have shifted it around to 180 degrees by then! And you can claim both the DDW and upwind record in the same run! He has already managed a 60 degree shift of the headwind!

Regards,

WindGrins

It's a direct plot of NALSA's data, directly comparable with the published record chart. NALSA have no reason, let alone an excuse, to deny it, because they were led to believe it was not important - rather than trying to hide it.
Further analysis is even more illuminating, but that is for NALSA to see.

 

[humber]

That was not the question I asked humber. So once again, humber wrong try again. I was not talking about the cart when it was tested.

And I ignored your question, because that data is rock-solid evidence that I can.

 

[tobermoryphil]

And I ignored your question, because that data is rock-solid evidence that I can.

Yep, folks, Humber is an expert at ignoring- we all knew this without the evidence, old chap.

 

[humber]

Spork and JB,

I think you'll appreciate this. If you wait for another couple of hundred posts or so, you won't need to produce an upwind cart. Humber will have shifted it around to 180 degrees by then! And you can claim both the DDW and upwind record in the same run! He has already managed a 60 degree shift of the headwind!

Regards,

WindGrins

It is an upwind cart, but a failed one. A free rotor turns CCW, and the wheels into the tailwind.
TAD expect that a headwind above WS can drive the cart, but not a headwind if going upwind. They have tried that, and are now busy making a "better" one according to Spork's visions.