Comments on: Hydro-Hydraulic Energy Invention

By: Jule Miller

Jule Miller — Sat, 06 Mar 2010 08:34:45 +0000

Restructure wheels. Place on ends and put then in the water with the shaft sticking strait up. Block off half of the water on the bank side. That way it will not interfere with other uses of the water, like boats and floating debris. A concave spin wheel like in hydro electric dams would be better than flat panel wheel. If China would use this style they could power the whole country.
Jule Miller – Fairbanks Alaska

By: Niklas

Niklas — Sat, 23 Jan 2010 22:40:12 +0000

Hi,

I’d like to add something: Since electrical machines prefer a higher speed of rotation, you should consider using hydraulic motors and pumps instead of pistons/con-rods.
After all, you can save all the transmission when you invest some time in the design of a small, fast running turbine. This time will pay off, because you save costs and gain reliability.

Best of Luck

Niklas
n.rusche att gmx dot net

By: reshma roy

reshma roy — Tue, 27 Oct 2009 01:29:42 +0000

This is a good project. We are doing an environment project in India ,as a part of our course in Engineering. Thank you for your valuable ideas.

By: michael doerner

michael doerner — Tue, 20 Oct 2009 02:22:10 +0000

Neat! What about using augers or helical forms instead of planar blades to reduce pulsing and maybe increase power input? And there are carbon fiber belts on the way! Peace to you and yours from Missoula Montana.

By: Alwi

Alwi — Sun, 18 Oct 2009 18:22:51 +0000

Bad idea. The first waterwheel will absorb a good deal of water energy and the second in the row will gain less energy and third almost nothing. Besides there is no such strong, cheap and light materials that could withstand a large force of fast wide river. And a small scale device will bring almost nothing because there is no much energy in the streaming water inlike in the falling one. Complicating system with extra things like cylinders make this device much expensive, unefficiency and unreliable.

By: Paul DiMaggio - G-Max

Paul DiMaggio - G-Max — Sat, 05 Sep 2009 14:34:05 +0000

Roger, your comment is appreciated. “Direct Drive” never thought of that. Coming up with challenges in the transfer of power for my device G-Max. I’ve ruled out belts & pulleys. Now using pressure tanks- water as the fluid. Seems to buffer the pulsating action inherent in the device by controlling the outgoing valve on the serving tank directly into the pelton turbine. The holding tank/s seems to be the answer for temp storage of this fluid energy.

Using a direct drive method, could there be some sort of “slip gear” to buffer the pulsate’s? I wonder if there are systems in place now that are similar?

By: roger

roger — Sat, 05 Sep 2009 08:55:47 +0000

I am working as and am a qualified mechanical engineer. Came across this site by researching water hammer and ram pumps.

Your idea appears good on the surface, but not very realistic, I can think of a dozen issues just by looking at your pretty design, if you want to make use of water streams, study turbines, for a little bit of non conventional go a little on a limb and read on Victor Schauberger.

But should you want to stick to the above concept you may want to use compressed air for the power transfer medium, and when you talk reciprocating hydraulic machines be prepared for mega bucks, inefficiency, high maintenance cost. Another words stick to direct reduction drives, with smaller generators. Remember this, “simplicity”, and you cannot go wrong.

Best of luck

By: Azmat Ali Shah

Azmat Ali Shah — Tue, 04 Aug 2009 05:07:46 +0000

The idea is good but it can be made more simple. Why not use canals coming directly from Barages like Sukkar,Guddu,Taunsa and Ghulam Muhammad Barages. Water through pipes can be flowed from either sides of the canal to water turbine at a certain slope;run the turbines with the water momentum to produce power.Smaller turbines can be installed at distances of 200 M on the entire feasible length of the canal. Experts can design capacity of generator in the system. I am sure,in view of availability of above types of canals in Pakistan, we are sure to produce more than 10,000 MW electricity from one canal only. There are so many types and designs of hydel turbines available in the markets. We can also select some floating types of such equipment for use on rivers. I have pondered on such opportunities in our country,which are immense, the problem is that our high tops do not want to give any facility to our common people. They want to keep them involved in their personal problems of bread, water, power etc.

By: Paul DiMaggio

Paul DiMaggio — Sat, 25 Jul 2009 21:03:40 +0000

G-Max-is a tidal Flow activated device to make electricity. The first prototype and test have gone very well. I hope to post some drawings soon so i can hear your opinions. Hopefully, an interested engineer can help me with some calculations for a percentage of the potential profit.

By: mickster

mickster — Thu, 04 Jun 2009 08:58:43 +0000

Check out national geographic 2009 overview much better system works with less power like fish.

By: Paul Purcell

Paul Purcell — Sun, 24 May 2009 18:31:16 +0000

My friend

I think that you would be much better off starting with a system that works on simple pulleys, belts and smaller generators. One massive hydraulic leak and you would have nay sayers lined up at your door and around the block. Don’t forget you can increase the speed of the flow of the river by using concrete forms in the river to create a smaller port for the water to flow through. Don’t forget the power yield from a fluid is a logarithmic one not a direct one. Your looking to increase the speed of the fluid. By creating many smaller units you will find the necessary parts and equipment easier to come by. Not to mention installation and maintenance costs will be lower. My background is in industrial mechanics. Let me know what you think. I’m a Canadian Citizen who is looking for a little bit of intrigue and adventure working in a different country. If anyone out there reading this is looking for a person with an industrial mechanics background and who like to think and work problems to a solution drop a line! pvpurcell[AT]yahoo.com

By: I French

I French — Sun, 26 Apr 2009 00:05:39 +0000

If you have interest in making your comcept into a production item, please contact me at the above e mail address. I own several factories engaged in various forms of energy and energy related products.

ILF

By: Amol

Amol — Thu, 26 Mar 2009 15:02:31 +0000

Hi,
This is one of the great idea I ever seen. I am trying to explain this to my prof. He is Ph.D. in hydraulic power generation. Will you please send the more details about this project? This concept is excellent and we are interested in study this further. Please please forward some more information about this. We will be greatful to see this concept working successfully.

Congratulations for this great concept, Please kindly send the details on my E-mail ID

AMOL GHAISAS
amolghaisas[AT]gmail.com

By: Imran rashid

Imran rashid — Thu, 19 Feb 2009 14:54:11 +0000

Aalamo alaikum
I don’t know where have you got up to with this idea as i said before it looks possible.Have you contacted some body in order to put this idea into reality, there may be some complications and you may need to bring some changes in your design but hardest thing is to take the first step which you need to take, and we blessed with one of the greatest cannal system in our region which can be ++ point in this regard. Please keep us up dated with your project as people like me far away from Pakistan are always eager to hear any success story from Pakistan. God help you and give you courage to carry out your good job.

By: Umar Farooq

Umar Farooq — Wed, 18 Feb 2009 16:29:20 +0000

Aslamoalaikum,

I am a mechanical engineer. I would like to congratulate Mr khan for his wonderful invention and wish him luck for all his endeavors. I am pondering over this invention. I find some improvisation in theis design. Sarfraz I want to discuss with u regarding this invention. Hopefully next month because I am busy in my exams these days. Best of luck.

By: Paul DiMaggio

Paul DiMaggio — Fri, 16 Jan 2009 00:49:28 +0000

Your concept is great, I agree that gears and pulleys are bulky. However, the fluid or air going to the “Cylinder or tank” must also not be pulsating coming out the other side spinning the generator. I’ve come across this problem with my invention “GeMax”. My solution was a holding tank brought up to preasure, then a secondary tank evenly distributing power without pulsing (I’m using water)..

Paul DiMaggio-

By: George

George — Thu, 01 Jan 2009 08:12:35 +0000

Hi,

First, it is amazing that internet is enabling this co-operation sans boarders. I am appreciate the idea of combining the energy into high pressure fluid. It allows spacing the turbines far apart without gears, belts and the problems associated with different individual speeds. A few thoughts. Well, when i started writing i did some math.

Water at 1m/s speed through a 1 square meter cross section, means 1 cubic meter of water -1000kg -flowing at 1m/s, has a kinetic energy 0.5 x 1000 kg x 1 m/s x 1 m/s = 500 Joules. Assuming that the flow is constant, it gives 500 Watts. For a 12m x 2m river, it is 12 kw per turbine. We will be able to tap only a fraction of this. That is good and bad. Bad that we are running at lower efficiency. Good that the water slowed down by first one is used by the second. Well, then it runs at slower speed if it is close by.(different speeds – no belts, chain – clumsy) Otherwise we will have to keep the second turbine(?) down the stream so that flow attains the lost speed. Again, if if the efficiency is low, and they all rotate at comparable speed, close enough, we may be able to extract more with more number of them. My wild guess is 50% efficiency. We need to consider the losses due to this hydraulic system (friction in piston, friction of un-compressible fluid on the walls of the tube, efficiency). This combined with the efficiency of the rest of the system, we might get total 25% efficiency. I am not sure of even that. This massive structures giving only 3kW may not be so bad. We need to consider – at what cost. If it can be built at say even at $5/W ($15000) it is worth trying. Finally everything boils down to $(or any currency) per watt in large scale. I also share the environmental issues.

The working fluid is water here. If it is something else more compressible, say air, although we loose some heat while compressing it, we can store energy in air cylinders. I read of some cars running on compressed air. I can also imagine similar pistons for wind turbines. Thereby reducing the cost of generators/stress/fatigue on top of wind turbines.

George
Bangalore, India

By: Attiq

Attiq — Tue, 23 Dec 2008 13:27:01 +0000

Hi Gmoore

can we have an online meeting our power generation without water, Wind and Solar.

If interested plz mail me at attiq[AT]sapphireconsultingservices.com

By: j ford

j ford — Wed, 10 Dec 2008 12:48:54 +0000

Good idea,

Yet the efficiency lost through the hydraulic system could hinder the output power generation

By: paul dimaggio

paul dimaggio — Thu, 27 Nov 2008 17:14:35 +0000

great idea, very hard to put in use. besides, the vertical movement to adjust for tides is important, as well as debris in the water. Very tough to get approvals. keep going! good stuff…pd- inventor of GMAX-