generator build idea?

[bigred1951]

ok guys ive played around with this in my head for a while now. Would it be possible to take an electric motor, one or 2 car alternators and a couple heavy duty batteries and build a self powered generator? I was thinking of somehow making the batteries turn the electric motor which would then turn the alternators which would charge the batteries and so and so on. I have no idea if it would work or the know how to wire this up to work or if it would even put out much power. Just thought id finally say it and see if anybody has any ideas or thoughts.

[DDDfarmer]

Always wanted to try that ;D  Mentioned it to one of our electrical eng. at work and he said if you think it would work try it.  ???

[beenthere]

Perpetual motion?

[Bandmill Bandit]

With some solar input you should be able to get one that would run pretty good with out a load. When you add load you would need calculate your conversion and resistance losses and then size your solar panel accordingly to make up those losses plus a bit to ensure positive charge feed to you batteries.

I see $$$$ signs. my little 5.5 horse Honda on a 130 Delco alternator is a real good. cheap slave. cost me about 5 bucks a day to run it.

[Al_Smith]

Perpetual motion?

Up to this point not possible .However if good old Rube Goldberg were still alive with his fertile mind he could draw it up no doubt .It would look good on paper so to speak .

[pineywoods]

I had the same idea, sometime around 1951. Didn't work then, won't work now. I won't bore you with the technical details of why...

[WoodenHead]

You would have a very effective battery drainer.   ;D  ;)

[Ianab]

You would have a very effective battery drainer.   ;D  ;)

Those pesky things called friction, electrical resistance and eddy currents will get ya every time...  :'(

No motor or generator is 100% efficient, so each time the power runs around the system you loose a % of it, until the battery is flat.

Thing is you can't make energy from nowhere. You have to have some source of energy to start with. The sun, burning wood, running water, wind, radioactive decay, hamster in a wheel etc. Then you can play about converting the energy, storing it, and making it do stuff.  But any closed system is eventually going to run down.

Ian

[hackberry jake]

All of the energy we use on earth either came from our sun or a long dead ancient sun (nuclear) Einstien said energy can neither be created nor destroyed. Most of the energy we use gets converted to heat. Example: you fill your car up with gas, while you are driving you are passing through air which causes friction (heat). Your piston rings are scraping back and forth in your cylinders (friction/heat). You are converting chemical energy (gas) into mecanical energy through igniting it and it expanding (heat). Internal combustion engines create so much heat that they have to be engineered with cooling systems (radiator, water pump, etc). When your refrigerator creates cold air for your food, it creates even more hot air in the room through the coils on the back. Every conversion of energy has losses to heat. Darn laws of physics.

[Thehardway]

Bigred,

Your idea is not workable.  A similar concept would be mounting a wind turbine on top of an electric car.  The faster the car goes the more wind you have to drive the turbine and the more power you make which makes the car go faster and faster.... or not.....

What you have proposed is a balanced system.  A balanced system has no potential energy.  Energy potential comes from imbalances.  For instance, nuclear energy is derived from radioactive isotopes (elements which are unstable)  Solar energy is developed by chemical or thermal imbalance, Electrical energy is derived from a an electromagnetic imbalance.  Hydro power is derived from a pressure imbalance caused by gravitational pull.  Wind power is derived from an imbalance in temperature and atmospheric pressure.

Nature does a wonderful job of balancing energy, in the rare cases we can manipulate the path to balance we can find a source of energy.  When we do so we "cheat" the system and never without a resultant reaction.  This man made manipulation is always very inefficient compared to the process of nature.

There are few mysteries when it comes to energy conservation.  One mystery is amplification.  Amplification is not creating energy but rather focusing and increasing the efficiency of energy so that loss in work is minimal.

An example would be a cricket chirping.  Crickets have the ability to emit sonic energy well in excess of what would be considered reasonable for the amount of kinetic energy they expend and the size that they are.  An echo would be another example or a megaphone.

A more complex example would be an old lighthouse.  By using a simple candle flame, a polished reflector and a fresnel lens, the light of a candle can be made visible for an extremely long distance with great clarity and brightness.

These examples all feature efficiency gains by non-mechanical, non-chemical enhancers.  They do not add energy but they do a great job of using imbalance more efficiently before balance is reached.

Often times a unique characteristic in nature can provide immense energy potential.  This can be found in chemical, nuclear, and elemental properties reacting to temperature or catalytic changes.

Example, Nitroglycerin requires very little energy to make but has tremendous energy potential. This is chemical instability or imbalance.  Water has a unique property in that it contracts only until it reaches 32F and then it expands.  This non linear expansion and contraction can produce a large amount of energy capable of breaking stone and heaving foundations.

You get the idea, if you want free energy, find a source of natural imbalance and a way to harness it to do useful work. 

Perpetual motion is theoretically possible but it is incapable of performing any work. As soon as a load comes into play, motion ceases.

A better system is the old cats and rats system... ;D