proposed generator setup

[Cariboocoot]

Originally Posted by stephendv

If I understand your idea, you might as well use a bucket instead of a stream right? Because you're not trying to take any energy from the motion of the stream. You're using the energy of falling water to power the rising water.

and that's where the second law of thermodynamics comes in. Under perfect conditions, the energy lost by the water going downhill is the same as the energy it requires to pull the same amount of water from the creek back up hill. You can't get energy from nothing.

Yep. In essence the proposal is a perpetual motion device, no matter how you pipe it.

[BB.]

Remember, even with a siphon, there are two different water levels. And the water from the higher level will flow to the lower level of water.

In your case, it is a "U" shaped siphon? Both the inlet and outlet (at best) are at the same water level--therefore no water level / potential energy difference to harvest.

-Bill

[mike90045]

All you can do in your situation, is use a RAM PUMP, and it can, without breaking any rules, move some of the water uphill, where you can store and use it for a small waterwheel. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ram_pump

[t00ls]

as I have been looking at this all day....siphon is an incorrect term.

the water in the large 4" pipe will be acting as a piston, creating a vacuum,slowly.
once a critical vacuum is reached, it will allow the spring loaded foot valves to open an atmospheric restricted flow of water through a 2" pipe.

the 2"pipe only needs to replace the amount of water that was exited through a 1" pipe.

one thing I did not mention....the exit will be slightly lower than the inlet

I think why people have failed at this before is none of the cases I looked at were using a valve at the top of the loop or the bottom to keep the water at the height till it once again pulled a vacum

think of a piston moving in a motor...it wouldnt work without valves...the exaust is always smaller than the intake and the pitons volume determines the power

not violating any conservation laws...just using natural physics

at any rate...I am going to do this, it may take a year to gather the parts ,as I am strapped for cash right now, and I have a very greedy ex-wife

but I will do this and let you guys know how it turns out

an idea never tried ...never fails

[BB.]

From Dave in another post/thread:

Originally Posted by Dave Sparks

Home Power, this month has a full page add for a new company making some pretty good deals on small pelton systems. They are stackable. Looks like they are around 1.3K$ Head x flow GPM / 10 should give you ballpark power production, or head x GPS = power.

http://www.powerspout.com/

Here is a low head turbine (don't know anything about company). Works on 5 foot of head and ~10 Gallons per Second flow rate for 200 watts of power.

www.powerpal.com/lowhead.html

In general, hydro requires quite a bit of water flow, and low head requires a lot more water flow for reasonable power output.

-Bill

[t00ls]

some visual aids for ya...I live on a hill, at the bottom is the creek. the 4" pipe would be about 150' -200' long on a slope of about 30 degrees

I can run the 2" pipe up stream about 100' with about a 2' fall

the outlet at the generator would be 3' below that point

so I would be using 3 natural physics properties...gravity, atmospheric pressure, and siphon properties

the water as it lowers in the 4" pipe will cause an intake (low pressure) effect causing the valves to open, as the water level rises the pressure returns to zero

I'm hoping a valve at the generator side will stop air from entering at the bottom when the low pressure occurs...but it shouldnt be a problem

[stephendv]

It won't work :)
To convince yourself you could try it at home with a bucket and few lengths of hose.

[t00ls]

Originally Posted by stephendv

It won't work :)
To convince yourself you could try it at home with a bucket and few lengths of hose.

I'm sure it wont work on small scale.....the pressure just isnt there

but thanks for your encouragement,I'm gonna be nice,but I'm glad you werent around when wilbur and orville built their plane..............................

[stephendv]

I didn't mean to be rude, just straight forward. This is a variation on hundreds of years of thinking on perpetual motion devices and you're in good company, Da Vinci and others have attempted to build them: http://www.lhup.edu/~dsimanek/museum/people/people.htm

Wikipedia also does a good job of explaining why they can't work: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Perpetual_motion

[t00ls]

Originally Posted by stephendv

I didn't mean to be rude, just straight forward. This is a variation on hundreds of years of thinking on perpetual motion devices and you're in good company, Da Vinci and others have attempted to build them: http://www.lhup.edu/~dsimanek/museum/people/people.htm

Wikipedia also does a good job of explaining why they can't work: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Perpetual_motion

yup...I saw those also....none of them used spring loaded valves in an enclosed system ....with one end higher than the other

did you also see this
http://sentinelkennels.com/Research_Article_V41.html