Notices
Results 1 to 21 of 21

Thread: Seeking Advice in Creating a Vortex Engine

  1. #1 Seeking Advice in Creating a Vortex Engine 
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Posts
    10
    So you know, I'm very serious about this project, but what's holding me back is lack of expert help. I have a very specific series of ideas as to how I think it will work, but I'm trying to pick the brains of other, more-informed people than myself. Please don't criticize me for not knowing high math, or the physics of heated fluid, rocketry, etc., because I'm well-aware, and seeking due compensation.

    Go ahead and laugh about my hubris if you like, but if you're unwilling to help me try to make my vision work, revise, please don't waste my time; I think I've found a way to harness the power of the cyclone, and if there be some relevantly-knowledged folks around, I'd like to kick some ideas around. That said, if I've got one idea to make my ideas work, well, by all means be unafraid to rip my poor head off.

    I've a workshop space available, and do have people who I think are willing to help me build this (I be no handyman), but I need opinions better informed than me. Just as long as your comments are designed to build me up, as opposed to tear down, I will do my best to welcome them.

    So, project advisers--any volunteers? We can chew the mental fat in here or in private, but public is best for the greater openness of ideas, which is best for starting out. Heat, pressure, layering, and temperature differential will all be project keys, here, and prototyping will of course be necessary.


    Last edited by Noitartst; October 3rd, 2013 at 06:15 PM. Reason: Additional words.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  2.  
     

  3. #2  
    Genius Duck Moderator Dywyddyr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Scunthorpe, UK
    Posts
    10,689
    My first thought was that you meant one of these, but given that you later say "I think I've found a way to harness the power of the cyclone" it appears not.
    Therefore you're highly unlikely to get any help until you explain exactly what you're talking about.


    "[Dywyddyr] makes a grumpy bastard like me seem like a happy go lucky scamp" - PhDemon
    Reply With Quote  
     

  4. #3  
    Forum Professor
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Location
    San Diego
    Posts
    1,970
    Quote Originally Posted by Noitartst View Post
    What sort of advice? My advice would be to start with a known working engine like the Honda CVCC ("compound vortex controlled combustion") engine. Then start tinkering with it.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  5. #4  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Pennsylvania
    Posts
    8,822
    What's your idea? Spit it out.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  6. #5  
    Brassica oleracea Strange's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    喫茶店
    Posts
    16,540
    Quote Originally Posted by billvon View Post
    What sort of advice? My advice would be to start with a known working engine like the Honda CVCC ("compound vortex controlled combustion") engine. Then start tinkering with it.
    If this is the sort of thing you are thinking of, then be careful because they will probably have all sorts of patents covering the technology.
    Without wishing to overstate my case, everything in the observable universe definitely has its origins in Northamptonshire -- Alan Moore
    Reply With Quote  
     

  7. #6  
    Forum Senior pineapples's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    Ireland someplace
    Posts
    359
    So is this for military use to flip up some tanks, or domestic use to replace the hoover?

    Iranian Government might be listening!
    Reply With Quote  
     

  8. #7  
    Cooking Something Good MacGyver1968's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Dallas, Texas
    Posts
    2,051
    Well...ya learn something everyday...I always though CVCC stood for "Crappy Vehicle that Cannot Cruise"
    Fixin' shit that ain't broke.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  9. #8  
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Posts
    10
    Hmm...well, given that my audience wishes elaboration, I'll by all means elaborate. For starters, Dywydrr mentioned another's vortex engine. Yeah, my idea is similar to that one, but also, if my thinking is correct, (which is unproven, naturally) superior. If I had photo-shopping skills, illustrating visually what I was looking for, it would be easier, but I don't, so please bear with me. Later, I may well remedy this drought of pictures, but for now you'll need to bear with me.

    Imagine, friends, a spindle, or shaft of cold air, ascending to the Heavens, or more correctly, descending from them, entering a hole in the ground. Imagine the cold shaft surrounded by a concentric circle, or buffering layer, of hot air, rising up, spinning in the opposite direction. In turn, this hot buffer is duly protected by a downward, cold-spinning one. And thus it goes, with each buffer, so on and so forth, protected in turn by a buffer of the opposite variety. Collectively, the entire composition of the shaft and buffers makes one large Vortex, but I'll venture saying the shaft, and each buffer, represents an individual vortex itself even as they're mutually reinforcing as a group.

    The goal, you see, of making a giant Vortex in the sky is to create a giant hole in the upper atmosphere to suck it down into the ground with great force--and effect. Once underground, the air can then be energized via a heat reservoir, scrubbed of carbon, if you like, and blasted back up to where it came from, via a mirror Vortex of the first one, only with a hot shaft surging up, as opposed to a cool one, sinking down.

    Obviously, the bigger the Vortex, the greater the economy of scale you get, but remember--all I'm trying to do is create something that can compete with contemporary solar panel setups that power homes off the grid. All I want to is that--and not use it to launch stuff into space, which I really think is possible in the high end.

    So that's my un-illustrated vision, at least. Did it make sense? Can it work in practice? What are the structures that need be built at ground level to mix the air? How to heat it efficiently? What would a prototype take the form of? I'm trying to figure all that out, friend, and hopefullf that gives a picture how you can help me.

    Does it?
    Reply With Quote  
     

  10. #9  
    Forum Professor
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Location
    San Diego
    Posts
    1,970
    Quote Originally Posted by Noitartst View Post
    Imagine, friends, a spindle, or shaft of cold air, ascending to the Heavens, or more correctly, descending from them, entering a hole in the ground. Imagine the cold shaft surrounded by a concentric circle, or buffering layer, of hot air, rising up, spinning in the opposite direction.]
    What would prevent them from mixing and cancelling?

    The goal, you see, of making a giant Vortex in the sky is to create a giant hole in the upper atmosphere to suck it down into the ground with great force--and effect.
    Where would you get the energy to suck and compress that much air?

    Once underground, the air can then be energized via a heat reservoir, scrubbed of carbon, if you like, and blasted back up to where it came from, via a mirror Vortex of the first one, only with a hot shaft surging up, as opposed to a cool one, sinking down.
    They'd tend to mix and cancel unless you somehow prevented that.

    So that's my un-illustrated vision, at least. Did it make sense?
    Not yet.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  11. #10  
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Posts
    10
    The solutution to mixing, and cancellation, you see, lies in the buffering layers! Think about the reverse updrafts and downdrafts that add power to tornados in nature--I'm trying to copy those principles, friend. The Cold Shaft's ringed by Hot Buffer 1, and the effect of Hot Buffer 1 on Cold Shaft is to discourage diffusion of air that would otherwise be sucked underground by the lure of the Heat Sink, or Reservoir. Hot Buffer 1'll be pushing warmed air up and to the side of the shaft, assisting in directing where we want the air to go. Of course, even as Hot buffer 1's pushing Cold Shaft back and up, there's nothing to stop Hot Buffer 1 from diffusing away from the Shaft, doesn't it? Course not--all that hot, energized will be seeking the course of least resistance-namely out, and to the side. Solution? Cold Buffer No. 1, of course, nowhere near the deterrent to sideways dispersions, but that wont be necessary, assuming we've correctly tapered the overall system of mutually reinforcing system of overall vortices, descending for as long as you like in a series of hot-cold-, hot-cold patterns. The outer vortices reinforce the inner vortices, and all the vortices collectively reinforce the Core, or shaft. I won't be able to reply again till Monday, but that is how I intend to prevent mixing, and diffusion. Nature creates weather systems vastly outstripping the might of nuclear power plants all the time, using nothing more than heat and pressure, I might add, and I can't see why aping her isn't such a good idea. Upon reflection, I'd love have it explained why I'm not aping Mother Nature, because I assure you, that's my role model. I'll reply on Monday, so don't think my silence is a sign of cutting and running. See yas.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  12. #11  
    Forum Professor
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Location
    San Diego
    Posts
    1,970
    Quote Originally Posted by Noitartst View Post
    The solutution to mixing, and cancellation, you see, lies in the buffering layers! Think about the reverse updrafts and downdrafts that add power to tornados in nature--I'm trying to copy those principles, friend.
    Tornadoes are caused by huge amounts of atmospheric suction caused by the momentum of large bodies of air, the condensation of water and the lifting forces in warm, moist air. There is a tremendous amount of energy driving them. Without that energy to drive them, tornadoes would dissipate instantly. There is nothing inherent in a vortex that generates energy, sustains itself or can 'reach into the atmosphere.' Without all the energy of a storm, there's no vortex, no tornado.

    To put it another way, storms cause tornadoes, not the other way around.

    Nature creates weather systems vastly outstripping the might of nuclear power plants all the time, using nothing more than heat and pressure
    Agreed! And if you can replicate that amount of energy you might be able to recreate a tornado. Even a moderately sized thunderstorm releases more energy than the largest nuclear bomb ever detonated (distributed over more time, of course.) Where are you going to get that kind of energy?

    As a side note if you want to replicate this _mechanically_ it's quite doable. Rather than all the stuff about "vortexes isolating each other" (which doesn't really work) you can actually build a tower to mechanically isolate the rising air after you have heated it. This sort of structure is called a solar updraft tower:
    Solar updraft tower - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
    This has also been recreated on a small scale by warming an area of the Earth and allowing convection to begin. You in effect get a "dust devil" that can be a few hundred meters tall. This is an artificially initiated version of the natural dust devil, but doesn't create "a giant hole in the upper atmosphere to suck it down into the ground with great force." Indeed it does the opposite - it vents warm air to a cooler, higher layer of the atmosphere. Also keep in mind that these are effectively the opposite of a tornado. A tornado is driven by the energy above a relatively calm surface - a dust devil is driven by surface energy, and is characterized by a warm, energetic layer on the ground and a more stable air mass above it.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  13. #12  
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Posts
    10
    Quote Originally Posted by billvon View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Noitartst View Post
    The solutution to mixing, and cancellation, you see, lies in the buffering layers! Think about the reverse updrafts and downdrafts that add power to tornados in nature--I'm trying to copy those principles, friend.
    Tornadoes are caused by huge amounts of atmospheric suction caused by the momentum of large bodies of air, the condensation of water and the lifting forces in warm, moist air. There is a tremendous amount of energy driving them. Without that energy to drive them, tornadoes would dissipate instantly. There is nothing inherent in a vortex that generates energy, sustains itself or can 'reach into the atmosphere.' Without all the energy of a storm, there's no vortex, no tornado.

    To put it another way, storms cause tornadoes, not the other way around.
    A fair point--in fact, I was thinking of moisturizing the air like happens in storms, adding to heat and energy density. The key, aggreed, is to create suction, but for some reason, you think I'm not creating it, or at least not enough. For my part, I think I've derived appropriate push-pull mechanisms.

    Nature creates weather systems vastly outstripping the might of nuclear power plants all the time, using nothing more than heat and pressure
    Agreed! And if you can replicate that amount of energy you might be able to recreate a tornado. Even a moderately sized thunderstorm releases more energy than the largest nuclear bomb ever detonated (distributed over more time, of course.) Where are you going to get that kind of energy?

    As a side note if you want to replicate this _mechanically_ it's quite doable. Rather than all the stuff about "vortexes isolating each other" (which doesn't really work) you can actually build a tower to mechanically isolate the rising air after you have heated it. This sort of structure is called a solar updraft tower:
    Solar updraft tower - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
    This has also been recreated on a small scale by warming an area of the Earth and allowing convection to begin. You in effect get a "dust devil" that can be a few hundred meters tall. This is an artificially initiated version of the natural dust devil, but doesn't create "a giant hole in the upper atmosphere to suck it down into the ground with great force." Indeed it does the opposite - it vents warm air to a cooler, higher layer of the atmosphere. Also keep in mind that these are effectively the opposite of a tornado. A tornado is driven by the energy above a relatively calm surface - a dust devil is driven by surface energy, and is characterized by a warm, energetic layer on the ground and a more stable air mass above it.[/QUOTE]

    What I'm trying figure out, basically, I how much power I could get say, just from a shaft a foot in diameter, not counting the air sucked in by the buffers. Alright, so I might not get much, if any, but how much, specifically?

    At the very least, I'd like to know my miscalculation.

    Oh, and after looking at that article on solar towers, I do see the similarities to my ideas, but I think mine places greater emphasis on suction, it seems. The greater the heat, , the greater the pressure, the greater the suction, goes my thinking.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  14. #13  
    Genius Duck Moderator Dywyddyr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Scunthorpe, UK
    Posts
    10,689
    Quote Originally Posted by Noitartst View Post
    Even a moderately sized thunderstorm releases more energy than the largest nuclear bomb ever detonated
    No.
    "[Dywyddyr] makes a grumpy bastard like me seem like a happy go lucky scamp" - PhDemon
    Reply With Quote  
     

  15. #14  
    Forum Professor
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Location
    San Diego
    Posts
    1,970
    Quote Originally Posted by Noitartst View Post
    Oh, and after looking at that article on solar towers, I do see the similarities to my ideas, but I think mine places greater emphasis on suction, it seems. The greater the heat, , the greater the pressure, the greater the suction, goes my thinking.
    Right - and the greater the area, the more air there is available. Get a huge area, heat it with the sun, constrain all that air via a chimney and you could get a lot of power. Trying to do it unconstrained will be tough, since even a mild wind will upset that surface hot air. (which is why dust devils tend to form most readily when the winds are either absent or moderate above a very smooth surface.)
    Reply With Quote  
     

  16. #15  
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Posts
    10
    You know, correct me if I'm wrong, tornados strike me as a type of chimney, and they form in nature on a fairly regular, if rare, basis. The air in tornados, are trying to attain equilibrium, and once that is attained, the tornado breaks down. So: Follow like in nature, disrupt equilibrium, prevent restoration of equilibrium, you've got yourself a stable vortex.

    Correct?
    Reply With Quote  
     

  17. #16  
    Life-Size Nanoputian Flick Montana's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Location
    Flatland
    Posts
    5,438
    What "equilibrium" are you talking about? I'm not sure your understanding of the phenomenon is quite accurate.
    "Sometimes I think the surest sign that intelligent life exists elsewhere in the universe is that none of it has tried to contact us." -Calvin
    Reply With Quote  
     

  18. #17  
    Forum Professor
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Location
    San Diego
    Posts
    1,970
    Quote Originally Posted by Noitartst View Post
    The air in tornados, are trying to attain equilibrium, and once that is attained, the tornado breaks down. So: Follow like in nature, disrupt equilibrium, prevent restoration of equilibrium, you've got yourself a stable vortex.

    Correct?
    Well, no. Tornadoes are chaotic events that cannot be "maintained."

    However at a larger level, yes - phenomena like dust devils are caused by a disrupted equilibrium, and if you could somehow maintain that you could keep them going. Often the sun alone is enough to sustain a temperature differential for quite a while. That's why solar towers work. The covered area at the base traps the sun's heat, and the chimney prevents the updraft from moving away from that area.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  19. #18  
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Posts
    10
    Well, some chaotic events can be "maintained," like walking. As to starting such a system of disrupted equilibrium, well, I believe the term is, "Priming the pump," and that takes more energy than simply sustaining it does, as I do recall...
    Reply With Quote  
     

  20. #19  
    Forum Professor
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Location
    San Diego
    Posts
    1,970
    Quote Originally Posted by Noitartst View Post
    Well, some chaotic events can be "maintained," like walking.
    Walking is not a chaotic event. Your destination does not depend on tiny changes in your first step. (To be sure there is some chaos _within_ walking but walking itself is not chaotic any more than any other system that uses feedback is.)
    Reply With Quote  
     

  21. #20  
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Posts
    10
    Well, walking has been described as a controlled fall, and yet is seen as quite a stable process, despite that. Once sufficiently understood, I don't see why vortices can't be seen similarly. The key is just about figuring how to sustain it; no, I guess falling isn't chaotic, per se, but it is dynamic.

    WHat I really wish is that you gave me suggestions on overcoming the challenges, as opposed to enumerating them.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  22. #21  
    Forum Professor
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Location
    San Diego
    Posts
    1,970
    Quote Originally Posted by Noitartst View Post
    Well, walking has been described as a controlled fall, and yet is seen as quite a stable process, despite that.
    Right, because there is active, deterministic and intentional feedback in the process via actuators (muscles) that intervene directly in the process of falling.

    Once sufficiently understood, I don't see why vortices can't be seen similarly.
    Because there are no "actuators" in the vortex to prevent normal fluid dynamics.

    WHat I really wish is that you gave me suggestions on overcoming the challenges, as opposed to enumerating them.
    My suggestion? Start from what is known to work (i.e. vortex generators based on heat.) You could build one without too much difficulty; it will teach you a lot about the process and give you insight into the problems you will face in your next version.
    Reply With Quote  
     

Similar Threads

  1. vortex generating rims
    By qua in forum Mechanical, Structural and Chemical Engineering
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: February 17th, 2014, 02:27 PM
  2. Loophole or vortex?
    By Whyte in forum Philosophy
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: August 31st, 2013, 06:20 AM
  3. Seeking personal Health Advice? WARNING: READ HERE FIRST
    By Robbie in forum Health & Medicine
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: August 17th, 2013, 03:05 AM
  4. Titanic Vortex
    By Ascended in forum Astronomy & Cosmology
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: July 19th, 2012, 07:12 AM
Tags for this Thread

View Tag Cloud

Bookmarks
Bookmarks
Posting Permissions
  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •