molecular force visual aid.

[syler]

Add videoThis video shows the molecular force of a state change between water and steam. It has nothing to do with heat save that necessary to cause steam to condense. The same results wouldn't occur with an empty can. The force comes solely from the state change wick only requires 1 degree difference.

[Johansson]

Cool, but what has this to to with gas turbines?

[racket]

Hi Syler

LOL........the can collapses because steam at 14.7 psia is reduced to 0 psia whilst outside ambiant air pressure remains at 14.7psia, which then exerts a force of ~23 tons on the surface of the drum , the same effect can be achived by using a vacuum pump to lower the air pressure inside a sealed drum of air .................the drum collapses because of ambiant air pressure not because of any "molecular force" within.

The first steam engines used this same principle , very low pressure steam was fed into a large cylinder , the valve was closed and a cold water spray was fed into the cylinder , the condensation of the steam and the partial vacuum it created allowed ambiant air pressure on the underside of the piston to move the piston ..............theoretically they should have been called "ambiant air engines " as it was ambiant air that did the work .

Steam turbines use condensers for "exhaust chambers" at ~0.5 psia , this allows steam at ambiant 14.7 psia to achieve an ~ 29 :1 pressure ratio and lotsa work output before being exhausted into a virtual vacuum , unlike us poor gas turbine engine users which have to put up with 14.7 psia exhaust "back pressure" .

Cheers
John

[Johansson]

Feb 25, 2014 16:17:39 GMT -5 racket said:

The first steam engines used this same principle , very low pressure steam was fed into a large cylinder , the valve was closed and a cold water spray was fed into the cylinder , the condensation of the steam and the partial vacuum it created allowed ambiant air pressure on the underside of the piston to move the piston ..............theoretically they should have been called "ambiant air engines " as it was ambiant air that did the work .

Weren´t those steam engines considered to have the absolutely lowest efficiency in history? They were often used for pumping water out of coal mines and most of the coal extracted from the mine had to be used to run the steam engine...

[racket]

Hi Anders

Yeh , they were very inefficient due to the low "pressure" involved , but at least they didn't/couldn't suffer for boiler explosions , a real danger at that time and for the next hundred years until they developed metals strong enough to cope with higher steam pressures which then improved efficiencies from the high expansion ratios .

I think the main benefit from those early mine pumps was less children were drowned working down the pits whilst the fat mine owner grew rich .

The history of steam power is a long and very interesting one ...............having operated steam boilers at different times when in the workforce I found them fascinating beasts , especially the older coal fired ones , there was one I operated at a chemical plant that was built back in the 1920s , natural draught , no noisy induced/forced draught fans , just the gentle "clicking" as coal was "dribbled" onto the firebars , a pleasure to manually operate during the summer shutdown of the plant when they only needed a limited steam supply , unlike the bigger water tube unit we operated during the rest of the year , noisy bastard turning half a tonne of water into steam every minute , but it had a great steam driven piston pump for feeding water into the 200 psi boiler , the pump sang like a canary when going slowly , but banged away like thunder, shaking the foundations of the boiler house when going full bore pumping 20 gallons a stroke from its double action pump ..............ah , the smell of hot steam and oil :-)

Cheers
John

[finiteparts]

Ugggh! I tried to not reply to this, but it is so dumb that I just had too. It only requires one degree of temperature difference if you forget about the energy require to boil the water into steam and then the cold water bath to make it condense. Water doesn't just spontaneously sit at boiling conditions, you had to apply energy to the system, in this case by applying heat. The heat required to excite the water molecules to translate far enough apart so that intermolecular forces became insignificant (phase change to a gas) has to be accounted for...like racket said, you could do the same thing by using a vacuum pump to apply the work on the system. You can't selectively choose when to begin accounting for the energy in a system like that just to support a flawed theory.

Mark Twain once said, "It is better to remain silent and be thought a fool than to open one's mouth and remove all doubt."

You have removed all doubt.

[gidge348]

Anders, John & Finiteparts,

You have the patient's of saints..... sorry I don't..... no further comment.

Ian...

[Johansson]

It is interesting though to see how easily he dodge every flaming arrow of logic fired at him, every unpleasant truth or question directed back at him is ignored or answered with a new strange theory he just came up with.

On internet this behavior is not uncommon, but I´ve never met this type of personality in real life. I can´t help but wonder why, perhaps the authorities have managed to lock most of them away in some forsaken castle with only a computer for company.

[gidge348]

Anders,

I have seen this type of behaviour before and I believe it is called a TROLL .........they throw a few stupid comments out and then disappear, but this guy just wont let up.

Not sure about a castle.... maybe under a bridge somewhere...

[syler]

Hilarious. I guess when I sat through this demonstration in college my PhD professor didn't know what he was talking about.

The heat has nothing to do with it. The demonstration shows molecular force - and a weak type. Steam is 1,600 times the volume of it's water. So it goes from 1ml at 99C to 1,600ml at 100C. What you see in the demonstration is the sudden collapses back to 1/1,600 it's size and the resulting loss in the pressure it was maintaining. If this was a simple function of heat, one could do it slowly. It occurs all at once due to the physical chemistry involved. Anyone with a background in these fields can tell you that. It's not up for debate.

That's okay though, you guys just keep focusing enormous time, wealth and energy based on a book written about toy jet motors written by a guy who's qualifications are unknown, and who's purpose is RC toys. Don't look for innovation or improvement because nobody else on the internet has tried it and lord knows copying the last guy is the only way to produce something. And, by the way, just ignore that fact that your end results are good for nothing but novelty. has it occurred to any of you that you could build a turbocharged Hyabusa motor that is superior in every way to what you guys are doing for a fraction of what you have invested? if only you had a bigger hammer...

"The definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results." Albert Einstein.

[syler]

Here is a paper written by another guy who evidently doesn't understand that there is no such thing as molecular repulsion. www.ajsonline.org/content/s3-17/102/433.extract

[stoffe64]

Richard..isnt it time maybe?...before it gets too nasty in here?

[Richard OConnell]

Sigh, while I like leaving these threads open for debate, I also believe the wheel has been reinvented countless times on turbines. Some accidentally, some experimentally. There is a model that we have come to accept because it works. I dont want to discourage you from trying whatever it is you are trying to achieve, but until you can make something work, they are nothing more than words.

There are still countless people who think perpetual energy can be achieved with magnets as well. They have done all of the "math and numbers," but we still arent flying around on our free energy flying saucers. Keep experimenting Syler. You are going down the right path. You are asking questions instead of following a standard, and that is definitely more than we can say about most youth these days. You just need to go out and make some of your ideas a reality.

I'm closing this topic as I cant really see how it applies to the accepted understanding of turbines, but I encourage you to continue your work. If you want to start building something, I'm sure there are a lot of people here who could help you get started in the right direction.