• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Wind powered prop cart goes directly downwind 2.5x Wind Speed?

Vector gains from angled surfaces do gain which is why ice boats for instance can gain incredible speeds...there MUST be a vector at play no matter how small the angle.

all else is woo..


That's why propellers have angled surfaces.

To get from the ice boats to the downwind cart without woo, just follow these simple steps.

Step 1 is to acknowledge that ice boats can not only sail at speeds faster than the wind speed, they can sail steady-state (without exploiting gusts, momentum from turns, etc) such that the downwind component of their velocity is faster than the wind. This can be verified from ice-sailing sources.

Once that's understood, all that's needed is to transform an ice boat into the downwind "cart" in a series of steps, each of which preserves the essential mechanics of the scenario.

So, step 1 is an iceboat sailing at a downwind angle in a steady wind on an infinite ice surface. The directly downwind component of its velocity is faster than the wind; it's speed of course is faster still.

In step 2, wrap the ice surface into a tube (larger in radius than the height of the iceboat's mast), with the iceboat inside. The wind flows continuously down the tube; the boat on its slanted downwind course now sails a helix in the tube. (Ignore gravity; if you must, assume zero gravity and that the centrifugal force of the spiral course is sufficient to keep the boat's blades pressed against the ice enough for them to work as normal.)

In step 3, add a second ice boat. It is identical to the first, and it sailing the same way, but it is positioned 180 degrees around the tube from the first one. If either ice sailor looks straight "up" he's looking straight down on the other boat.

In step 4, lengthen the two boats' masts so that they connect in the center, rigidly attaching the two boats together.

In step 5, add a threaded rod running down the center axis of the ice tube. This rod passes through a hole in the two masts where they join in the center. The threads have the same pitch (number of turns per meter) as the helical path the ice boats are sailing along.

In step 6, add screw threads to the hole in the masts, that match the threaded rod. Since the hole threads and the rod threads have the same pitch as the path the the boats were traveling anyhow, this will not (aside from adding a bit of friction which we can ignore for the moment, for reasons explained in the next step) alter the courses or impede the movement of the boats.

In step 7, we remove the runners from the ice boats. They no longer contact the ice. However, the screw threads serve the same function that the runners used to, of keeping the boats' course on the most efficient angle. There is no longer any runner friction, but the friction of the central bearing replaces it. Since in principle either can be minimized, call it even.

In step 8, we remove the ice tube, since it no longer plays any part (except maybe to contain the wind in a zero gravity environment, so if it helps, assume the tube is replaced with a much larger tube, still containing the same wind velocity along it.)

In step 9, we introduce a long strip of flat pavement parallel to the tube. The pavement is far enough from the threaded rod that the two boats stay about half a meter away from it at their closest approach. At the same time, we also re-introduce a gravitational field that attracts the boats toward that pavement. Since the boats are still held "up" by the threaded rod, and they counter-balance one another, this does not affect their motion.

In step 10 we add a three-wheeled cart that is in contact with the pavement. We also add some struts that extend from the cart to a bearing around the central threaded rod. The bearing where the threaded rod goes through the boats' masts pushes against the cart's bearing, pushing the cart along at the same downwind speed as the boats.

In step 11, we remove the hulls of the boats, since the pilots can now ride in the cart instead.

In step 12, we remove the threaded rod. Instead, we add linkages and gears from the main axle of the cart to the bearing around which the boats' masts rotate, with the gearing arranged so that the angle that the boats' mast rotates for a given rotation angle of the cart's wheels is the same as it was before.

And we now have the downwind cart. Note that from the start to the finish, the fundamental device that makes it work remains the same: a surface moving laterally at an angle to the wind, whose downwind movement is constrained to maintain a certain ratio to its lateral movement. At the start the surface is an iceboat sail and at the end it's a propeller blade. At the start the mechanism that enforces the ratio of lateral to downwind movement is the iceboat's blades and at the end it's the gearing between the wheels and the propeller. But the basic dynamics stay the same.

If you still have difficult accepting this, please point out in which step I introduced the woo.

Respectfully,
Myriad
 
Last edited:
Myriad

You mean that's why wind turbines have angled surfaces....propellers have them to maximize thrust and reduce tip vortice losses - not vector gain.

Answer the question....will the cart move with no wind?
Does a ice boat go faster downwind or across the wind...?

then you will know where you introduced the woo.
 
Gday all,

Very interesting

But one thing strikes me as odd - perhaps I misunderstood, or something, but...

The wind is apparently driving the angled-blade of the propeller to turn it and thus drive the wheels, right?

But looking closely at the video #2 at e.g. 1:25, the angled-blade of the propeller appears to be turning the wrong way - as if it is driving against the wind - implying it is powered from the cart, not the wind.

Or have I completely missed something :-)
?

But then, in video #3, after they lose the chain apparently - it free-wheels the OTHER way - the way I would expect.


K.
 
Last edited:
Gday all,

Very interesting

But one thing strikes me as odd - perhaps I misunderstood, or something, but...

The wind is apparently driving the angled-blade of the propeller to turn it and thus drive the wheels, right?

But looking closely at the video #2 at e.g. 1:25, the angled-blade of the propeller appears to be turning the wrong way - as if it is driving against the wind - implying it is powered from the cart, not the wind.

Or have I completely missed something :-)
?


K.

Yes, you missed something. The wheels turn the prop. The bluff body area of the cart and prop is large enough so that the wind can initially push it forward. That causes the wheels to spin, which in turn spin the prop.

Greetings,

Chris
 
Myriad

You mean that's why wind turbines have angled surfaces....propellers have them to maximize thrust and reduce tip vortice losses - not vector gain.


That would be my cue to answer with the laughing dog, except I don't do that.

A flat propeller produces no thrust.


Answer the question....will the cart move with no wind?


If by no wind you mean zero wind speed relative to the ground, no, it will not move. Who ever said it would?

If by no wind you mean zero wind speed relative to the cart, if the wind is moving relative to the ground the wheels are resting on, the cart will move. For instance, on a treadmill in still air, the cart will begin to move in the direction opposite the treadmill. There are many videos showing this with small carts.

Does a ice boat go faster downwind or across the wind...?


An ice boat goes fastest when angled downwind. As I said, in such configurations, high-performance ice boats go fast enough that the downwind component of their velocity is faster than the wind speed. Such an ice boat can get from a starting point to a point directly downwind faster than a balloon in the same wind.

I encourage you to verify this from ice boating sources.

Then you will know where you introduced the woo.


Which step, please.

Respectfully,
Myriad
 
:dl: :dl:

when ground = windspeed = zero energy to be harvested...

You are aware of the concept of frames of reference? You know that all motion is relative? You know how a lever works?

Do you think that if there is difference in speed between a surface and a medium, that as soon as an object reaches the speed of the medium everything comes to an halt, relative to the object?

this is getting hilarious.

This topic tends to, yes. But not for the reasons you might think.

tell us oh wise one....does the cart move when there is no wind`?

No one ever claimed that. The cart works because it has interfaces to two mediums (road and air) which are at different velocities.

Maybe it would help if you read a little about the topic.

Greetings,

Chris

Edit: For a simple equivalent of the situation check out this video:



Tell us, how can it move faster than the thing driving it, if what you claim would be true? If you accept that video, then tell us why the situation in the wind should be different?
 
Last edited:
11/9/08.

You do understand why that doesn't work (but this cart does), right?

It's just drag on the prop vs drag on the 'wheel'. Substitute another prop for the 'wheel', add wings.

Wind direction to ground shouldn't matter. Once the cart reaches wind speed, it ought to be free to change direction. Might need to twist the 'prop tower' to do it, keep the prop axis paralell to the apparent wind direction. Haven't you ever been on a sail boat? As cross wind speed picks up, the apparent wind moves closer to the bow. Sails need to be adjusted accordingly, that is when the 'wing' function of the sail becomes most visible. A variable pitch prop makes an airplane more efficient, propably need one to make anything practical in this application.
 
macdoc -

I am pretty sure you are stuck in the very same misunderstanding I was.

(Because I used to insist that this was absolutely impossible, and I was 100% sure of it. I forced myself into being tentative in my post above, but I was thinking that I had caught them out with a hidden power source in the cart :-)

There IS a power source in the cart - the WHEELS.

The gearing is the OPPOSITE to what you think it is - step back, unclench, look and think - the 'aha' moment should come :-)

The WHEELS drive.
NOT the prop.


K.
 
But one thing strikes me as odd - perhaps I misunderstood, or something, but...

The wind is apparently driving the angled-blade of the propeller to turn it and thus drive the wheels, right?

But looking closely at the video #2 at e.g. 1:25, the angled-blade of the propeller appears to be turning the wrong way - as if it is driving against the wind - implying it is powered from the cart, not the wind.

Or have I completely missed something :-)


The propellers do turn against the wind (the opposite direction the wind is trying to turn them). They're pushing the wind backwards. (Well, I haven't watched that video, but I'm assuming it works the same as the models in the original thread.)

The wind does not turn the propeller. The wind pushes the cart forward, and the forward motion of the cart turns the propeller. The propeller pushes the wind backwards, which pushes the cart forwards even more, which makes the propeller turn even faster, which pushes the wind back harder, which pushes the cart forward even more.

ETA: Looks like I was a little late on this answer. But I got distracted by something else while writing my reply.
 
Last edited:
The wind does not turn the propeller. The wind pushes the cart forward, and the forward motion of the cart turns the propeller. The propeller pushes the wind backwards, which pushes the cart forwards even more, which makes the propeller turn even faster, which pushes the wind back harder, which pushes the cart forward even more.

Whereas it is important to clarify that the power taken up at the wheels is more than the power expended at the prop. This is due to prop efficiency, gearing losses, etc. For that reason it is required that there is a difference in velocity between the ground and the air. Otherwise it would run in still air, once pushed, which of course is impossible.

Greetings,

Chris
 
Gday,

The propellers do turn against the wind (the opposite direction the wind is trying to turn them). They're pushing the wind backwards. (Well, I haven't watched that video, but I'm assuming it works the same as the models in the original thread.)

The wind does not turn the propeller. The wind pushes the cart forward, and the forward motion of the cart turns the propeller. The propeller pushes the wind backwards, which pushes the cart forwards even more, which makes the propeller turn even faster, which pushes the wind back harder, which pushes the cart forward even more.

ETA: Looks like I was a little late on this answer. But I got distracted by something else while writing my reply.

Thanks Brian,
another clear explanation :-)

I really hope some others get to share my experience to day - that was a real blast. To be wrong, and then to clearly realize I was wrong, and exactly HOW and in such a clear and obvious fashion - that was a fantastic emotional ride - it's hardly EVER so clear-cut (right now I'm in morning caffeine mode.)

It's one thing to argue, and maybe be wrong about some abstract meanings in Paul, or the future of oil, or the origins of the Bible, or the politics of XXX.

But to be so clearly wrong, and to fail to understand so many times - that really really shook me. All those smart people so convinced there are right - nah, somehow they are ALL wrong.

Honestly - I was thinking I was the first one to catch them out faking a video - I was gunna be hailed as a clear-thinking hero, Brian and Hans and bluskool would be in awe of my insight, James Randi would congratulate me personally ... maybe there'd be cars and women and fame (obviously there is more than caffeine at work here - Hey - it's the weekend :-)


So,
to anyone who keeps coming back to this :

"once you reach the speed of the wind - that's it, there's no more energy or whatever"

Stop right there, and imagine the propeller going the OTHER way - just think that, and see if the 'aha' happens for you like it did for me.

(You're subtracting the wind speed, when you should be adding it.)

(back to Battleground europe now, I hear grenades nearby :-)


K.
 
I really hope some others get to share my experience to day - that was a real blast. To be wrong, and then to clearly realize I was wrong, and exactly HOW and in such a clear and obvious fashion - that was a fantastic emotional ride - it's hardly EVER so clear-cut (right now I'm in morning caffeine mode.)


I had the same experience in the original DDWFTTW thread. Spork's explanations based on ice-boats made no sense to me. It's not until I actually saw a video of a model cart running up a treadmill that I began to think about it in a different way, and realize that I was wrong.
 
Glad to be of service :)

Some other clues:

If the prop was the power source, you'd expect top power when the cart was still (maximum wind wrt the cart) and zero power at windspeed. Just the opposite occurs, since it's the groundspeed wrt the cart that is of interest. At standstill, the prop-driving force is zero, since the wheels aren't turning. At windspeed, we have plenty of "engine" power, since while the wind is still wrt the cart, the wheels are spinning like mad and have plenty of power to turn the prop.

Which increases the turn rate, which increases the ground speed, which increases the wheel spin, which turns the prop faster...

Another simile:

Disconnect the wheels from the prop. Add a pair of pedals driving the prop, and Pepe the Mad Pedalier. You now have a man-powered prop cart.
Pepe will always crank the pedals at the same rate the wheels are turning. What will happen at windspeed? Why should Pepe care what speed the wind is going - he only cares about the wheels!
Obviously, with this setup, Pepe will be going to hit terminal velocity, horizontally.

Now add a handbrake, which Pepe will pull in rough proportion (~v^2 or thereabouts, I think) to how much he has to crank. Turns out this puts a limit to how fast he can go, when the breaking is equal to the prop's pull.

Replace Pepe with a differential connecting the wheels to the prop and there you go.
 
Oh god, he's still at it? :bwall He's not still trying to claim that balloons can't travel at wind speed because friction through the air slows them down, is he? :scared:

I didn't read enough of the threads to find out, but I think he's made that claim too often and too clearly to pull a "that's not what I really meant" (an "I was wrong" is, of course, completely out of the question).
 
I had the same experience in the original DDWFTTW thread. Spork's explanations based on ice-boats made no sense to me. It's not until I actually saw a video of a model cart running up a treadmill that I began to think about it in a different way, and realize that I was wrong.

I'd say that because I knew that sailboats can go upwind, I started off thinking this is possible and probably true. The wind and water are both streams; "upwind" equals "downstream faster than the stream"; if you can outrace one stream, you can probably do so for the other.
 
So what's the theoretical limit on overall speed - is it bounded by friction? I guess you would achieve that with a hypothetical frictionless geartrain mechanism, since there always needs to be friction between wheels and ground to have something to push against.

ETA: 'nother question - could you achieve the same effect by deriving power for the propeller not from the wheels, but from a second passive (i.e. feeder) propeller of different efficiency to the first one?
 
Last edited:
First, hi to Chris, Brian, and Modified. I remember each of you well from the original thread. Welcome to all others, some I recall posted on the earlier reincarnation but weren't among the regular punters. :D

Kudos on remembering that MichaelC spool video Chris. I should have included it in the OP. For a good chuckle, take a look at the comments under Michael's YT posts. He has developed a fan club of people in love with his voice and classic Oxford accent. They want him to keep talking no matter what the subject. Reading any book has been suggested-nay begged. It's a hoot. Michael is still very active on the TR thread, and I rib him about perhaps being able to convince humber with his melodious tones.

@Macdoc: Here's a link to a long comment today by Harold Bricer at TR: http://talkrational.org/showthread.php?p=894554#post894554 Along with humber he supports your over unity POV, so you will probably find this post of interest. ;)

Rats!! I forgot to mention we have a poll going on TR on what the NALSA test will reveal wrt percentage of windspeed. I'm one of the most conservative guessers, with a prediction of just 1.2 * ws. Spork's prediction was PI, and after Ivanpah he was far more confident it would be at least 3X ws. That seems unrealistically high to me, as even ice boats only exceed 3X ws by a bit going downwind, and then not directly but on a broad reach. I'd like to hear what others here at JREF think about this. And thanks to all for your input. :)

This just in: Here's a link to an interview spork did Thursday on The Bloomberg Report: http://www.facebook.com/video/video.php?v=382130502502 This one is about his day job, but I thought given he is in the center of the ddwfttw debunk the myth campaign some would find it of interest. I'm not actually a sports fan, but all here who are should give it a look.
 
Last edited:
3X ws by a bit going downwind, and then not directly but on a broad reach.
that would be correct

he supports your over unity POV,
I'm not clear on why you think I support over unity....unless you are saying he supports my view of "over unity" being impossible without a vector.
Your post is not clear and I have no idea nor do I care who Humber is.

from your link
There is NO way around this and anyone who tells you differently is a perpetual motion, over unity crank! There is NO way for a cart to go directly down wind faster than the wind powered by the wind!
this is correct
That said, birds and fish exploit turbulence all the time with micro-vectoring but they are so incredibly efficient at extracting energy they can do that...

•••

and to others....don't peddle pseudo Eureka moments just because you still don't get the very basic physical principals. :garfield:

•••

Floyt
So what's the theoretical limit on overall speed - is it bounded by friction?
assuming you throw out the directly downwind absurdity you then get into sailing theory with length of the hull in water as a major factor in speed ( the longer the vectoring edge the more energy gain ) against drag and sail efficiency.

This has implications for the directly downwind nonsense and should be required reading.
http://web.mit.edu/2.972/www/reports/sail_boat/sail_boat.html
 
Last edited:

Back
Top Bottom