Merged DDWFTTW in a “Real” Wind

[Llyricist]

Piffle

heh, close, but no cigar.

 

[ThinAirDesigns]

The H's truly must believe that spork, and tad are Gods.

On your knees unbelievers.

JB

 

[CORed]

Yep -- one of the wild things to watch over the last few years has been the incredible lengths people like humber and Schroeder/Christoph/Harold/Yev/ChristopherM/prof/etc. (all one poster) will go to to "explain" what has happened.

The claim that vibration on the threadmill can be harvested to make the cart climb the belt is hilarious considering the specific tuning that would be required to (perhaps) make such a device. You can line up a hundred treadmills of all sizes shapes, makes, weights, etc and a properly completed cart will climb them all with no adjustment whatsoever. Tape varying weights to the cart and still it works. All these factors of course point out the absurdity of such a position - capturing vibrational energy at such a low level requires precise tuning -- well, not with our little 'magic' vibration collector. ROFLAO

Same thing with the 'off the wind' argument -- if their theory is true, we've developed the most efficient wind energy collector of all time (by a huge margin).

Their excuses are astonishing in their complexity and technological leaps -- the real story is one of simple wheels, simple gears and a simple propeller.

JB

To sum it up, the deniers have proposed several explanations that are flat impossible to explain away ddwfttw, which they think is impossible.

 

[humber]

Yes.



That "opposing force" at this point is drag - no different than the drag that has to be overcome to turn the prop on a Cessna as it flies along on a no-wind day. At this point the wind is not trying to turn it in the opposite direction as a turbine. That only happens below wind speed.

More barefoot physics. This turns that, faster than this moves this way...
Add to that, some hyperbole from the bluffer's guide to aerodynamics, and the middle manager puts himself in the top 1% of all aerodynamics.

A Cessna's engine accelerates the air, to produce thrust. There is no way that a freewheeling prop can accelerate the air within a stream tube, and you won't find one reference that says it can. All of your claims exist only because they are not within any known physical or engineering texts.
This makes your claims cranky, rather than exceptional.

Dodge69 remarked about the variable pitch of a prop, jamming as a screw in hard material. It certainly would.

If you were correct, and because the gears link the angular motion of the prop directly to its linear motion, it could only ever turn at one speed relative to the medium.
The forward advance of a screw in hard material, bears a fixed relationship between the pitch and the angular velocity of the screw.
If your Medieval screw notion were correct, then the cart would instantly track wind speed changes. It doesn't, so the idea is false.

 

[humber]

On your knees unbelievers.

JB

I can readily believe you do that.

 

[humber]

Some further points of interest for anyone who hasn't really grasped the full absurdity of the Humber/HyevPrangGloss tacking theory. Absurdity if you don't believe them, specifications of the most revolutionary sailcraft ever invented if you do.

They admit the cart is maintaining a constant heading on average downwind. They maintain the cart is powered to 2.8x WS not by a traditional sail which needs constant broad reach winds to sail at this speed but by invisible sails which can utilize the shifts in wind direction as a power source. This is achieved by two symmetric invisible sails which do not cancel each other out but provide continuous acceleration utilizing millisecond transients as a power source.

These airfoils on the cart are magic as well as invisible because they provide lift in the direction of travel regardless of the winds direction. A glance at the visible structure of the cart shows that any crosswind component of the wind would tend to tip the cart over. So the cart has invisible stabilizers as well as invisible, magic sails.

The symmetric, invisible, magic sails become miraculous, symmetric, invisible, magic sails when we consider that not only must they accelerate the cart in a way no prior sail craft could begin to, they manage this feat all the while fighting the "failed upwind turbine" as Humber calls it. It is not just a plate drag but a turbine trying to send the cart upwind.

The H's truly must believe that spork, and tad are Gods.

You can impute all the errors you like. You are not going to learn what is going in that report.

 

[humber]

Well said.

On a lighter note, my blood pressure has dropped considerably since I employed judicious use of the ignore feature.

Oddly, I just read or pass over what you say without any change either way. The ignore button is useful for cutting out screen clutter.

 

[ThinAirDesigns]

You are not going to learn what is going in that report.

Then it's clear you never intend to submit this "report". If you submit it to anyone of value, everyone here will see the nonsense word for word.

JB

 

[Dr. Keith]

heh, close, but no cigar.

Dammit Jim, I'm a doctor, not a psychic.

/bones

 

[Dr. Keith]

Some further points of interest for anyone who hasn't really grasped the full absurdity of the Humber/HyevPrangGloss tacking theory. Absurdity if you don't believe them, specifications of the most revolutionary sailcraft ever invented if you do.

They admit the cart is maintaining a constant heading on average downwind. They maintain the cart is powered to 2.8x WS not by a traditional sail which needs constant broad reach winds to sail at this speed but by invisible sails which can utilize the shifts in wind direction as a power source. This is achieved by two symmetric invisible sails which do not cancel each other out but provide continuous acceleration utilizing millisecond transients as a power source.

These airfoils on the cart are magic as well as invisible because they provide lift in the direction of travel regardless of the winds direction. A glance at the visible structure of the cart shows that any crosswind component of the wind would tend to tip the cart over. So the cart has invisible stabilizers as well as invisible, magic sails.

The symmetric, invisible, magic sails become miraculous, symmetric, invisible, magic sails when we consider that not only must they accelerate the cart in a way no prior sail craft could begin to, they manage this feat all the while fighting the "failed upwind turbine" as Humber calls it. It is not just a plate drag but a turbine trying to send the cart upwind.

The H's truly must believe that spork, and tad are Gods.

I'm a polyatheist, so I'm going to go with CGI and massive data faking, which could have been done a bit better if I'm honest.

 

[Llyricist]

Dammit Jim, I'm a doctor, not a psychic.

/bones

No Fair! You changed the outcome by predicting it.
/Prof Farnsworth

 

[humber]

Interestingly, there is a sort of inverse quadratic relationship to wind speed for the cart moving faster than the wind. In that as the wind speed falls, the relative headwind increases, increasing it's drag in a quadratic relationship with that increase in relative headwind. So as wind speed increases the drag falls in an inverse quadratic relationship with that increase.

Should we use the Square Mean Root of wind speed?

It means that you fully support my argument from Newton;s impact theory, that drag is related to acceleration of the slower air mass, and therefore not a possible source of energy, but a loss to the cart.
When will you learn that you have been cheated by a series of unrelated demonstrations?

 

[jduffy77]

I'm a polyatheist, so I'm going to go with CGI and massive data faking, which could have been done a bit better if I'm honest.

Fair enough, but add massive conspiracy to your list since at this point there have been a pretty large number of independent eye witnesses, Jenkins being my favorite. He was a doubter and an undisputed expert in what is possible with traditional sail craft. As well as independent TM videos.

 

[Llyricist]

It means that you fully support my argument from Newton;s impact theory, that drag is related to acceleration of the slower air mass, and therefore not a possible source of energy, but a loss to the cart.
When will you learn that you have been cheated by a series of unrelated demonstrations?

No, I do not fully support your argument. It just so happens that aerodynamic drag on the cart body, wheels and appendages (except the propeller), contribute an opposing force to the cart's forward motion.

And no-one except you and others that didn't understand how it works, ever claimed the apparent headwind as a source of energy.

 

[CORed]

You can impute all the errors you like. You are not going to learn what is going in that report.

Humber's report will only be seen by NALSA's circular file.

 

[humber]

When it does it disrupts the sail because the sail is no longer at the best angle to the wind. Rapidly changing wind direction is a bitch when sailing because you don't have any time to adjust angles to exploit the wind. Claims that BB somehow takes advantage of rapidly changing wind direction with fixed pylons push this further into the realm of way cool.

Well, you are comparing chalk and cheese in an attempt to turn the failing ddw cart, into an expectational tacking cart, because even the flattering trial data so far presented, makes it blindingly obvious that the trial was not ddw in the manner previously claimed, or expected.

A tacking boat takes a longer path than the ddw path, meaning more air mass passes over the sail when tacking, than for the same case when moving ddw.

The cart maintains the shorter direct heading ( there is no attempt whatsoever to follow the wind), as the changing wind moves about it. That way, there is more air mass for the same linear motion of the cart, than if cart were following the wind.

A better comparison would be the performance of a tacking boat set up to take advantage of crosswinds, rather than one that to physically tack a constant wind. Therefore, NALSA's use of 10degrees, based on the performance of existing tacking craft is arbitrary.

 

[Llyricist]

Humber's report will only be seen by NALSA's circular file.

I take it you only bet on sure things.

 

[humber]

I take it you only bet on sure things.

The wager over the TM is still open. I plan to willfully squander any financial gains I would certainly make, should any of you have the courage to accept.

 

[Llyricist]

The wager over the TM is still open. I plan to willfully squander any financial gains I would certainly make, should any of you have the courage to accept.

you have never defined the bet.

 

[jduffy77]

A better comparison would be the performance of a tacking boat set up to take advantage of crosswinds, rather than one that to physically tack a constant wind. Therefore, NALSA's use of 10degrees, based on the performance of existing tacking craft is arbitrary.

Of course Humber will not divulge any of his theory's on what a "tacking boat set up to take advantage of crosswinds, rather than one that to physically tack a constant wind" might actually look like.