Powertrain

Status
Not open for further replies.
C

cryogenic

Registered Senior Member
POWERTRAIN places 2000+ 16,500V Alternator stations every 1 mile on a cross country rail line. Each station is constructed simultaneously in a short duration. Trains traveling across the country are sent at 10 minute intervals, each producing electrical current as they wend by an alternating station.

Each 16,500V station is stepped up via transformer to 250,000V and feed directly to the grid. It is the worlds largest fuel to electrical current efficiency concept known to mankind, and it's application over due, therefore should be implemented immediately.

It saves billions in fossils and emissions from trucking alone, and nuclear waste, as it provides electrical current more efficiently than anything man currently uses today. It will power all electric cars and/or trucks. POWERTRAIN utilizes a trains thrust/momentum/velocity/hp to produce electricity.

Comments and/or questions welcome.

Thank You,

David Adams
 
Why is it the most efficient? Do you have some wheels that are engine powered and others that are generators?
 
I do not think it would be very efficient at all. You are converting energy into differnt forms, and losing power with each change. Unless you can invent a resistence free alternator that meats your lofty 16,500V goals. When a train hits the alternator, it will lose energy, and slow down. It will have to burn more fuel to compensate. That is not creation of energy, it is changing the form of energy.

Unless you can make resistence free tracks/alternaters, eliminate wind resistence, and prevent any energy loss in the form of heat, you will get quite a bit less energy then what had entered the system to move the train.

So your system would be less effiecent then whatever system you use to generate the energy in the first place. It would be extremely expensive. And in the end pointless, as the cheaper, original method you used to generate the energy for the train would be far more efficient.
 
cryogenic said:
Can you name a more efficient fuel to electrical power conversion? ;)
Click to expand...

How about any standard chemical to electrical energy power station. They can be large enough to inlude several energy recovery techniques that are not as easy on a train and the turbine and generator axle friction can be easily controlled, unlike a train which is running on a less-than-perfect, probably dirty, track aswell as having to cope with air resistance (unlike in a power station).

Why would you want to drain the kinetic energy from a train during the journey anyway ("every10 minutes")? Rather than at the end: at which point slowing down is the desired effect. That way it is regenerative braking energy that is going to the grid, which does recover free energy that would otherwise have been lost as heating in the brakes at each station. If you could apply the same principle to cars ( but intead of giving the energy back to the car to reuse you direct it to the grid) you will have a huge source of free, unexploited energy with no difference to the driver in fuel cost or total useage.(cars are much more numerous that trains)

(added to above: an internal-combustion-engine car does not have the capability, without modification, to reuse any regenerated energy in the form of electricity.)
 
Last edited:
If I misinterpretted post one and you meant that each passenger station is ten minutes apart and not just alternator stations being ten minutes apart, isn't that a bit too frequent and inefficient for a big and heavy train to have to slow down and then use energy to speed up again, and the other problem is (if that's what you meant); are there really going to be passenger stations at intervals so close together as ten minutes?
 
Koe, you've lost ur crackers....



KOE said:
I do not think it would be very efficient at all. You are converting energy into differnt forms, and losing power with each change. Unless you can invent a resistence free alternator that meats your lofty 16,500V goals. When a train hits the alternator, it will lose energy, and slow down. It will have to burn more fuel to compensate. That is not creation of energy, it is changing the form of energy.

Unless you can make resistence free tracks/alternaters, eliminate wind resistence, and prevent any energy loss in the form of heat, you will get quite a bit less energy then what had entered the system to move the train.

So your system would be less effiecent then whatever system you use to generate the energy in the first place. It would be extremely expensive. And in the end pointless, as the cheaper, original method you used to generate the energy for the train would be far more efficient.
Click to expand...
 
No heating of brakes, simply slightly more throttle is given just before hitting each 'alternator station'. Trains run 10 minutes apart. 2000 alternator stations across the country, or did I say all that already? Again, there is no greater conversion, and when you add together all the added benefits as well as powering the entire country with 1 rail line, it clearly speaks for itself. Some of our power facilities still burn coal, others provide the bad thing, nuclear waste, others use gravity as an energy, but we'll never beat gravity as the world's most efficient energy source. Take the Hoover Dam for example, it is the world's first free energy device, always will be, and a clean green producer which utilizes the energy of gravity. The DoE refuses to acknowledge that gravity is even an energy, that's how top secret it is. I also have a machine which produces electricity using gravity as it's primary energy source. http://www.geocities.com/da2da2/

Thank You,

David Adams


Trilobyte said:
How about any standard chemical to electrical energy power station. They can be large enough to inlude several energy recovery techniques that are not as easy on a train and the turbine and generator axle friction can be easily controlled, unlike a train which is running on a less-than-perfect, probably dirty, track aswell as having to cope with air resistance (unlike in a power station).

Why would you want to drain the kinetic energy from a train during the journey anyway ("every10 minutes")? Rather than at the end: at which point slowing down is the desired effect. That way it is regenerative braking energy that is going to the grid, which does recover free energy that would otherwise have been lost as heating in the brakes at each station. If you could apply the same principle to cars ( but intead of giving the energy back to the car to reuse you direct it to the grid) you will have a huge source of free, unexploited energy with no difference to the driver in fuel cost or total useage.(cars are much more numerous that trains)

(added to above: an internal-combustion-engine car does not have the capability, without modification, to reuse any regenerated energy in the form of electricity.)
Click to expand...
 
You still have not explained why, by comparison to existing power stations, this train idea is more efficient - and do you honestly think that one train can provide GigaWatts of energy, or enough to power an entire country?!!

Also when you say "gravity as an energy" I assume you mean gravitational potential energy - but created by what? (ie solar, wind, chemical, etc?)

"machine that uses gravity as its primary energy source"

What is it though? A dam? Or something which makes use of the solar energy absorbed by the hydrological cycle? Could you be more specific by elaborating on at least something! If you were willing to mention it surely its not such a well kept or valuable secret!
 
Just wanted to let you know how annoying your website was. Too much going on with the UFO's and the gay UFO that followed my mouse pointer around. Grrr.
 
Trilobyte I think he meens you put a train on top of a big hill and push it down, the wheels spin as it decends, each wheel is a generator. The Gravitational potential energy powers the train down the hill.

Probably the least efficient thing I'v heard of since you spend the exact same amount of energy getting to the top of the hill.

But im still slightly confused.

The hoover dam is powered by falling water, but your forgeting the energy isnt coming out of no where. you spend the exact same amount of energy getting an object to a certain height as you will once it falls the distance. The fact that Humans arent providing the power needed to lift the water at a dam up, dosnt meen it is coming from thin air.

As for your site it explains nothing as to how the device works, and since you have supposedly patented it you stand no danger if you post a few pictures and such.

And the phrase "how top secret it is" made me laugh for very long so please elaborate.
 
Last edited:
cryogenic said:
POWERTRAIN places 2000+ 16,500V Alternator stations every 1 mile on a cross country rail line. Each station is constructed simultaneously in a short duration. Trains traveling across the country are sent at 10 minute intervals, each producing electrical current as they wend by an alternating station.

Each 16,500V station is stepped up via transformer to 250,000V and feed directly to the grid. It is the worlds largest fuel to electrical current efficiency concept known to mankind, and it's application over due, therefore should be implemented immediately.

It saves billions in fossils and emissions from trucking alone, and nuclear waste, as it provides electrical current more efficiently than anything man currently uses today. It will power all electric cars and/or trucks. POWERTRAIN utilizes a trains thrust/momentum/velocity/hp to produce electricity.

Comments and/or questions welcome.

Thank You,

David Adams
Click to expand...
Trains and other vehicles need a lot of power to accelerate. Then the motor runs inefficently at constant speed. Converting some of the kinetic energy to electricity at constant speed needs just a little fuel to make up the loss(especially down hill) so efficiency is high IF the kinetic energy is converted to electricity with high efficiency. The electricity would be produced close to the electric customers reducing tranmission losses. Done small scale, the alternators can feed the power into most any near by power line, making the voltage increase typically much less than 250,000 volts. Is the alternator coupled to the train magnetically? Few tracks have a train every hour, so ten minute intervals seems unrealistic. It would not be cost effective to send trains partially loaded just to generate a little electricity. Perhaps your plan would work with cars and trucks on busy highways on the down hill slopes. the voltage, amps, frequency and wave form produced would vary with the clearance, how fast and the constuction and contents of the railroad car. Neil
 
Last edited:
You still have not explained why is not the most efficient fossil fuel to electrical conversion known to mankind. Trains are meant to replace cross country trucking, and sent at 10 minute intervals. This allows many alternator stations to be turning at any given moment along a line, and enough at anytime to provide the country with sufficient gigawatts/tarawatts electrical supply, each station a mile apart. I'm powering the country with commuter/freight trains on cross country railways, utilizing a trains hp/velocity/momentum/thrust to provide electrical current to the entire country 24/7/365, while transporting people, cargo, livestock etc.

This is the POWERTRAIN thread. When you say 'gravity as an energy' you must be refering to my DAGAFEED. Yes, DAGAFEED uses gravity as an energy, because gravity 'is' an energy. And when you mention GPE, you should first realize that 'ALL' gravity is GPE. You must be confused, gravity is not created, it is simply there. And if you know it is 'created by what' as you say, please shoot for the Nobel Prize on defining gravity. Unfortunatly, DAGAFEED is a very top secret machine. It uses gravity to make electricity, I wish I could tell you more, although I have not aquired the patent. If you have the means don't miss this opertunity, it will be the biggest device since the PC, automobile, or the discovery of electricity itself.

Trilobyte said:
You still have not explained why, by comparison to existing power stations, this train idea is more efficient - and do you honestly think that one train can provide GigaWatts of energy, or enough to power an entire country?!!

Also when you say "gravity as an energy" I assume you mean gravitational potential energy - but created by what? (ie solar, wind, chemical, etc?)

"machine that uses gravity as its primary energy source"

What is it though? A dam? Or something which makes use of the solar energy absorbed by the hydrological cycle? Could you be more specific by elaborating on at least something! If you were willing to mention it surely its not such a well kept or valuable secret!
Click to expand...
 
Sorry about your short-comings. My webpage is 'FUN', as is designing machines that produce electricty with no energy input other than gravity. And at high hp. It's not the fun stuff that is important, it's the advertisment for a limited partner on this joint venture, and I know it's not as annoying or full of drab as your post. :D

Quigly said:
Just wanted to let you know how annoying your website was. Too much going on with the UFO's and the gay UFO that followed my mouse pointer around. Grrr.
Click to expand...
 
Odum, you win the Idiot award....Don't you read? I'm looking for an investor to aquire the patent and build the proto-type. Fisrt off, POWERTRAIN has nothing to do with a hill, don't expose your ignorance for all to chuckle at.

Odum says: The hoover dam is powered by falling water, but your forgeting the energy isnt coming out of no where. you spend the exact same amount of energy getting an object to a certain height as you will once it falls the distance.

That's BS. First off, thermonuclear fission, and the eco system do the work, then gravity is the energy used to force the water past the prop, tuning the prop, which in turn turns the generators/alternators providing electrical current. DAGAFEED provides 'ANY' amount of electrical current utilizing gravity as an energy, and runs on less than 1% of the energy DAGAFEED produces.

Odum says: The fact that Humans arent providing the power needed to lift the water at a dam up, dosnt meen it is coming from thin air.

Did you figure this out on your own? :rolleyes:



Odin'Izm said:
Trilobyte I think he meens you put a train on top of a big hill and push it down, the wheels spin as it decends, each wheel is a generator. The Gravitational potential energy powers the train down the hill.

Probably the least efficient thing I'v heard of since you spend the exact same amount of energy getting to the top of the hill.

But im still slightly confused.


As for your site it explains nothing as to how the device works, and since you have supposedly patented it you stand no danger if you post a few pictures and such.

And the phrase "how top secret it is" made me laugh for very long so please elaborate.
Click to expand...
 
Each train would hit a wheel or series of wheels at each station. In eliminating cross country trucking, a train is sent every ten minutes, more than realistic. There is no transmission loss, it's direct feed after being stepped up. Any ESD or transmission losses are minor and of no concern.

>N. Cox says: It would not be cost effective to send trains partially loaded just to generate a little electricity.

It absolutly would, you could send these trains 'empty' and it is still more efficient and cost effective. The more trains the better, in that we eliminate cross country trucking, we may need to send trains every 5-8 minutes.

N. Cox says: Perhaps your plan would work with cars and trucks on busy highways on the down hill slopes. the voltage, amps, frequency and wave form produced would vary with the clearance, how fast and the constuction and contents of the railroad car.

Wha?....Have you been smokin' crack? :bugeye:

neil cox said:
Trains and other vehicles need a lot of power to accelerate. Then the motor runs inefficently at constant speed. Converting some of the kinetic energy to electricity at constant speed needs just a little fuel to make up the loss(especially down hill) so efficiency is high IF the kinetic energy is converted to electricity with high efficiency. The electricity would be produced close to the electric customers reducing tranmission losses. Done small scale, the alternators can feed the power into most any near by power line, making the voltage increase typically much less than 250,000 volts. Is the alternator coupled to the train magnetically? Few tracks have a train every hour, so ten minute intervals seems unrealistic. . Neil
Click to expand...
 
Who's making a fool of themself? Instead of insulting others' questions why don't you just answer them? "smoking crack?!"
 
cryogenic said:
Odum, you win the Idiot award....Don't you read? I'm looking for an investor to aquire the patent and build the proto-type. Fisrt off, POWERTRAIN has nothing to do with a hill, don't expose your ignorance for all to chuckle at.

Odum says: The hoover dam is powered by falling water, but your forgeting the energy isnt coming out of no where. you spend the exact same amount of energy getting an object to a certain height as you will once it falls the distance.

That's BS. First off, thermonuclear fission, and the eco system do the work, then gravity is the energy used to force the water past the prop, tuning the prop, which in turn turns the generators/alternators providing electrical current. DAGAFEED provides 'ANY' amount of electrical current utilizing gravity as an energy, and runs on less than 1% of the energy DAGAFEED produces.

Odum says: The fact that Humans arent providing the power needed to lift the water at a dam up, dosnt meen it is coming from thin air.

Did you figure this out on your own? :rolleyes:
Click to expand...


Who wins the idiot award is you cryo, you dont seem to posses the most basic physics knowledge as to what gravitational potential energy is, so fuck off and take your redneck design of a power system with you.

what turns the props on the hoover dam is Kinetic energy not gravitational energy, the conversion is
Ek =Ep = mass x gravity x height

I suggest when you turn 12 you start on a new project.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top