RE: Ok So Suitcase Nukes Are Real After All? (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Casual Banter] >> Off the Grid



Message

CuriousLord -> RE: Ok So Suitcase Nukes Are Real After All? (5/3/2007 10:04:47 PM)

Ohh, neat!  You finally mentioned something more specific than "OMG ITS GOING TO BE POWERZED YO"!  Let's do the math.  :)

Heat of Combustion (Hydrogen):   62,000  (BTU/lb) (Gross)
-The Chemistry of Combustion in Plain English.

Because I perfer SI over English units: 62,000 BTU/lb = 1.4 * 10^8 J/kg

Therefore, for every kilogram of elemental Hydrogen you put into the cyclinder, you're going to get about 1.4*10^8 Joules of energy.

Let's, for a moment, assume that the cyclinder's head interia comes to, for the same of arbitrary convinence, 1.4*10^7 kg.  Assuming a friction coefficient of, being generous, 0.001, you're looking at an increase of 9.99 rotations per second in the turbine head.

Next, how much is the generator going to put out?  Half, at best.  -Wikipedia.
Note:  This is very generous.  This is the theorical best, not something we can actually achieve in real world mechanics.

So, now you're back with 6.9(93) * 10^7 J in electricity.  You can get, in a large scale environment under best conditions (again, what you're not going to get- I'm just being generous)- a 70% return of energy in Hydrogen.  This means 4.8(951)*10^7 J.  -HyWeb: Knowledge-  Hydrogen in Energy Sector Chapter 3.*

Going back to the orginial conversion, this equates to 0.34(965) kg Hydrogen.  Again, being generous, and rounding up, 0.35 kg Hydrogen.

You're going to get a return of 0.35 kg Hydrogen for every 1.00 kg Hydrogen you run through this system- 35%- at optimal efficiency.

You're not going to make net hydrogen.

*See just under '3.4.1 Present state of the art'.
 
Edit:  Added in a source.



CuriousLord -> RE: Ok So Suitcase Nukes Are Real After All? (5/3/2007 10:13:54 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Real0ne
doing the math 5hp = 3730 watts if the generator was 100 % efficient which it is not.

so 100*(300/3730)= 8%

So are you trying to say that the generator is less than 8% efficient?


..what the hell were those numbers even supposed to represent?



Real0ne -> RE: Ok So Suitcase Nukes Are Real After All? (5/3/2007 10:32:21 PM)

err so then you are saying that the motor generator set is less than 8% efficient?




Real0ne -> RE: Ok So Suitcase Nukes Are Real After All? (5/3/2007 10:34:30 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: CuriousLord

quote:

ORIGINAL: Real0ne
doing the math 5hp = 3730 watts if the generator was 100 % efficient which it is not.

so 100*(300/3730)= 8%

So are you trying to say that the generator is less than 8% efficient?


..what the hell were those numbers even supposed to represent?


i was being generous and upped the number to 300 watts to run that 5 horse motor instead of 250.



CuriousLord -> RE: Ok So Suitcase Nukes Are Real After All? (5/3/2007 10:35:02 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Real0ne

err so then you are saying that the motor generator set is less than 8% efficient?




No, I said it's 50% efficient, at best.  I even cited it.



CuriousLord -> RE: Ok So Suitcase Nukes Are Real After All? (5/3/2007 10:36:09 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Real0ne

quote:

ORIGINAL: CuriousLord

quote:

ORIGINAL: Real0ne
doing the math 5hp = 3730 watts if the generator was 100 % efficient which it is not.

so 100*(300/3730)= 8%

So are you trying to say that the generator is less than 8% efficient?


..what the hell were those numbers even supposed to represent?


i was being generous and upped the number to 300 watts to run that 5 horse motor instead of 250.



I don't know what you think you were doing here, but it has no basis in Math nor Science.



Real0ne -> RE: Ok So Suitcase Nukes Are Real After All? (5/3/2007 10:38:22 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: CuriousLord

quote:

ORIGINAL: Real0ne

quote:

ORIGINAL: CuriousLord

quote:

ORIGINAL: Real0ne
doing the math 5hp = 3730 watts if the generator was 100 % efficient which it is not.

so 100*(300/3730)= 8%

So are you trying to say that the generator is less than 8% efficient?


..what the hell were those numbers even supposed to represent?


i was being generous and upped the number to 300 watts to run that 5 horse motor instead of 250.



I don't know what you think you were doing here, but it has no basis in Math nor Science.


LOL sort of figured we would get to this point.  doesnt it suck when things "appear" to defy physics?  it really doesnt tho.



CuriousLord -> RE: Ok So Suitcase Nukes Are Real After All? (5/3/2007 10:40:38 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Real0ne

LOL sort of figured we would get to this point.  doesnt it suck when things "appear" to defy physics?  it really doesnt tho.


..so you're going to randomly string together some numbers.. and say that it comes to some conclusion.. without any reasoning behind it?



CuriousLord -> RE: Ok So Suitcase Nukes Are Real After All? (5/3/2007 10:47:35 PM)

Actually, hell.  I didn't mention it because your numbers aren't even based in reality.  But, if the generator were 8% efficient, then you'd still be screwed.   You need an efficiency over 100% from a process for it to make more than what it started with..



Real0ne -> RE: Ok So Suitcase Nukes Are Real After All? (5/3/2007 10:51:42 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: CuriousLord

Actually, hell.  I didn't mention it because your numbers aren't even based in reality.  But, if the generator were 8% efficient, then you'd still be screwed.   You need an efficiency over 100% from a process for it to make more than what it started with..


your whole approach to this problem is incorrect



CuriousLord -> RE: Ok So Suitcase Nukes Are Real After All? (5/3/2007 10:52:51 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Real0ne

quote:

ORIGINAL: CuriousLord

Actually, hell.  I didn't mention it because your numbers aren't even based in reality.  But, if the generator were 8% efficient, then you'd still be screwed.   You need an efficiency over 100% from a process for it to make more than what it started with..


your whole approach to this problem is incorrect



I see.. and my error is in..?



Real0ne -> RE: Ok So Suitcase Nukes Are Real After All? (5/3/2007 10:55:46 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: CuriousLord

quote:

ORIGINAL: Real0ne

quote:

ORIGINAL: CuriousLord

Actually, hell.  I didn't mention it because your numbers aren't even based in reality.  But, if the generator were 8% efficient, then you'd still be screwed.   You need an efficiency over 100% from a process for it to make more than what it started with..


your whole approach to this problem is incorrect



I see.. and my error is in..?


what is the bottom line here?  Its not that we cant get ponies out hydrogen, its that you believe we cannot make hydrogen using less power than burning it in a motor puts out

tell you what, i will finish assembling my unit and goive you exact numbers to work with hows that?



CuriousLord -> RE: Ok So Suitcase Nukes Are Real After All? (5/3/2007 10:59:43 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Real0ne

what is the bottom line here?  Its not that we cant get ponies out hydrogen, its that you believe we cannot make hydrogen using less power than burning it in a motor puts out



Correct.  -Wikipedia.



Real0ne -> RE: Ok So Suitcase Nukes Are Real After All? (5/3/2007 11:03:31 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: CuriousLord

quote:

ORIGINAL: Real0ne

what is the bottom line here?  Its not that we cant get ponies out hydrogen, its that you believe we cannot make hydrogen using less power than burning it in a motor puts out



Correct.  -Wikipedia.


yah i know and none of your sites list the way we are doing the electrolysis :D



CuriousLord -> RE: Ok So Suitcase Nukes Are Real After All? (5/3/2007 11:06:00 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Real0ne

quote:

ORIGINAL: CuriousLord

quote:

ORIGINAL: Real0ne

what is the bottom line here?  Its not that we cant get ponies out hydrogen, its that you believe we cannot make hydrogen using less power than burning it in a motor puts out



Correct.  -Wikipedia.


yah i know and none of your sites list the way we are doing the electrolysis :D



The Conversation of Mass/Energy is universal.  (In other words, the method doesn't matter.)



Real0ne -> RE: Ok So Suitcase Nukes Are Real After All? (5/3/2007 11:15:28 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: CuriousLord

quote:

ORIGINAL: Real0ne

quote:

ORIGINAL: CuriousLord

quote:

ORIGINAL: Real0ne

what is the bottom line here?  Its not that we cant get ponies out hydrogen, its that you believe we cannot make hydrogen using less power than burning it in a motor puts out



Correct.  -Wikipedia.


yah i know and none of your sites list the way we are doing the electrolysis :D



The Conversation of Mass/Energy is universal.  (In other words, the method doesn't matter.)


i will be back in a couple weeks on this subject and snap pics of the meters for ya :)



CuriousLord -> RE: Ok So Suitcase Nukes Are Real After All? (5/3/2007 11:16:19 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Real0ne
i will be back in a couple weeks on this subject and snap pics of the meters for ya :)



Meters of what..?

Edit:  Ack, excuse me.  I was thinking you meant "meters" as in meters of length.
So.. you're.. actually going to waste money on this..  Meh..

That analysis I did at the top of the page would've cost you $65 in real life.. I do wish you'd think it through before spending money on a lot of junk you don't need..



Real0ne -> RE: Ok So Suitcase Nukes Are Real After All? (5/3/2007 11:24:01 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: CuriousLord

quote:

ORIGINAL: Real0ne
i will be back in a couple weeks on this subject and snap pics of the meters for ya :)



Meters of what..?

Edit:  Ack, excuse me.  I was thinking you meant "meters" as in meters of length.
So.. you're.. actually going to waste money on this..  Meh..

That analysis I did at the top of the page would've cost you $65 in real life.. I do wish you'd think it through before spending money on a lot of junk you don't need..


i have the scopes, meters machine shop and everything for years wont be buying anything in the line of equipment, just a few parts for the control circuitry

i just reaslized what you said, i can build a whole darn electrolyser for that much, at least a demo LOL



CuriousLord -> RE: Ok So Suitcase Nukes Are Real After All? (5/3/2007 11:39:46 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Real0ne

i just reaslized what you said, i can build a whole darn electrolyser for that much, at least a demo LOL


Yup.  Us Engies are supposed to make pretty good money.

Better, too, after the shit they put us through at college.



kentaro1980 -> RE: Ok So Suitcase Nukes Are Real After All? (5/4/2007 3:21:35 AM)

What you're trying to build is a generator that produces more energy than it consumes...among others, it's called a perpetuum mobile.
one pound of hydrogen can only create so much energy...and you need so much energy to produce hydrogen via electrolysis. Unless you are relying on an outside source (wind, water, solar power) there is no way you will get out even, let alone yield a profit.
Even *if* you manage somehow to get even....or maybe in the plus....you will lose that plus in the resistance of the power transmission (i.e. cables), and the pump that might want some electricity as well to pump the water from "somewhere" into the electrolysis basin. (unless of course you use superconductors and/or the watersource is higher than the electrolysis basin...at which point you might as well have built a little embankment and a water powerplant.)



Page: <<   < prev  1 2 [3] 4 5   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy
0.0234375