ohiotemplar

So I invented this aluminum roller-body with tin fins which is attached to an alternator. It goes behind the grille and catches wind and generates electricity. In working with invent help corp, I found that 2 guys already hold a patent on the exact same device I thought up. So I'm not getting rich anytime soon from this. Anyhoo, the basic idea for gasoline engines is that it creates enough energy at highway speeds to power the car. When your car needs more power, usually you alternator needs to increase drag on the engine to provide it. This invention would stop that. (extra drag) Thereby increasing HP, torque and gas mileage during highway driving. 2. You could use it with a clutch-pack alternator and disengauge your alternator all together on the highway. 3. You could slap it on a prius and drive on the highway a virtually unlimited distance. The only problem is, the prius uses gasoline on the highway and electric in the city. I bet it would be easy to tell the computer to switch that up though. -

QUESTION::So I'm making one for my car and I wanted to ask how I should hook it up? I don't want to send too much current throguh my electrical system and fry my car. So what would be the best way to add this generator?
Also, this post works well as proof a relative date at which I thought of the afformentioned applications of this invention in case I run into anyhting legal when trying to sell the prototype. YAY!

ANY input or opinions would be great. The other patents on this didn't do it to help the environment or save gas like me, so there's still a chance my patent app will go through. Thanks - Nate

Jproz1167

iTrader: (3)

this one is up there with my idea LOL

ohiotemplar

so for the second alternator I should just ground it to the body and run the power... to the battery? To the fuse box? Split off the power going from the existing alternator by just splicing in the extra reserve power?

xomega

iTrader: (1)

my question would be. how are you going to be able to regulate the voltage output?

ntomsheck

iTrader: (1)

Hook it in series

xomega

iTrader: (1)

....

ohiotemplar

these are kinks I need to iron out. The point is, if you're holding an alternator in your hand, you turn the pully with your fingers; besides getting shocked, what do you notice? It turns freely. Well that simply ceases to be true when demand is placed on that alternator. I've researched it. As it needs to generate more power, it increases drag. This wind powered generator adds a comfortable reserve of power, thereby leaving your stock alternator to spin freely. Why not go with a bigger alternator for your reserve? B/c stock alternators are mounted too close to the engine and they get hot. Which causues drag as well. The wind powered generator would be bombarded with cool air constantly, makig it that much more efficient... But I don't know how I would regulate the voltage or saftly hook it up....

Geno.

Well, what you need to determine is how much power the generator needs to produce (volts & amps) at maximum load. Say, if it takes 12 volts, 150 amps to power everything then set your regulator to trip at 13.5 volts and 160 amps. You"ll need to ensure that you have a constant charge to the battery so that when the load inceases and decreases the charge remains constant. It sounds like all you're really doing is transfering the job of the belt driven alternator to the wind driven generator. So why not hook up a switch in the charging circuit so that when you reach the optimum speed to power the wind generator you can transfer the load from the engine driven system to the wind driven system.

Now, if you REALLY wanted to work on something, how about this. How about attaching electrical generators at each wheel that would produce power as the wheels turn to drive an electric motor that would provide the power to move the car. A storage battery could provide enough power to get the car moving until it reaches enough speed where the wheel driven generators could take over. Much like the way a magneto works. As long as the wheels turn there would be power to the drive motor and to the battery charger for the storage battery. Think about it,you could take a trip from one end of the country to the other with the only limits as to how far you travel being your physical endurance. And with self generating power the cost would be.... Nothing. I wish I was smart enough to put that idea into practice.

atc3434

iTrader: (4)

Do you know that an alternator uses, at best, maybe 2-3hp when its under full load. So you're not taking much load off the engine. Also, its not going to generate anywhere near enough current to keep a car moving for long. If you place a wind/generator setup on a car, you'll up the aero drag faster than you'll build enough power to keep things moving. You guys are talking about perpetual motion, which is nothing more than a lab experiement. Don't you think if these concepts really worked, they would be in use already?

BigBadLou

iTrader: (3)

Atc3434 is exactly right on the money, Nate. Sorry. It won't work they way you want it to.

The air would normally freely flow through the engine compartment and exit. But if you put an alternator with big blades in its path, you'll create an obstacle to the flow. That will introduce extra drag which will slow the car down. Then you would need more power to overcome that drag and keep the car up to speed. There is no such thing as free power (don't we all wish!)

MANY scientists and smart people tried to create working perpetum mobile but nobody so far succeeded. It's just impossible with our current technology.

Sorry to rain on your parade.

Lou

naf

iTrader: (7)

You mean it's impossible with our current physical laws, right? Conservation of energy comes to mind, I'm sure there are others.

Toehead

It turns freely because there is no power supplied to the field coils. Alternators need a field current to work. That is why you can't jumpstart a COMPLETELY dead car on a hill. (manual of course)

Toehead

The kelvin-plank and clausius formulations come to mind

BigBadLou

iTrader: (3)

Well, the laws of physics are here only to limit us in what we can do. If we could overcome them with technology .... well ....

ohiotemplar

Geno: You are absolutly right. ATC - they re already being used. The Prius uses small generators on the wheels to charge it's electric battery. The only diff is, I'm talking about the wind here instead of a gasoline engine. I know it seems impossible at first. But notice that I said an electric car could run VIRTUALLY an unlimited distance. I went to OU, I have my fair share of physics. Enough to know this is possible. The main use for this wouild of course be on an electric or hybrid vehicle. There would be diminishing returns on the wind generator the longer it was in use and solar or gasolin would have to be used to pick up the slack. Wind drag from a roller body wouldn't be great enough to matter as long as the fins weren't angeled. The roller would in fact direct the air efficiently through it's intended path. I"m not talking about a large piece of equipment. I'm talking small, light discreet. GREAT idea on switching off the other alternator without the use of a clutch pack alternator invention. I wish I knew more about cars and I would set the voltage regulator and set the atock alt on a switch.

Jproz1167

iTrader: (3)

how about towing a trailer with say ten windmill generators on it and as your going down thew road your making electricity as well as thrust is provided by the spinning wind mills ....

atc3434

iTrader: (4)

The Prius generators on its wheels are only used under braking, and are used to conserve braking force back into usable energy. A novel idea, and it does work, but there is still a lot of lost energy in the system. If you had a completely dead battery in a Prius (disregard the whole gasoline engine part for this example), pushed it with a truck up to 60mph, then used the Prius's braking regeration system to slow down back to 0mph, you wouldn't have enough energy to then regain that 60mph. You'd be lucky to get the car to move on the menial amount of power you'd just generated. Thats becuase there is quite a bit of energy lost in coverting the motion to electricy, and then back again, storing it, overcoming the friction of the drive-train, wheels, etc. Geno, if the idea about stapping an electric generator to a cars axle, and then in turn having it power a motor to drive the car worked, don't you think they'd be doing that now. Try it yourself, get a small electric motor and a small electric generator. Hook them together, and get them spinning up to speed with something. Take the power away from them, and they won't run for long at all.

It really is simple physics, you can't get more energy out of something than you're investing in it. Efficiency can be improved, and certain we can get more and more distance out of X amount of energy, but with real world drag, and real world demands, you'll never go coast to coast without using fuel.

89RsPower!

already been said..

ohiotemplar

quite right everyone. There is no 100% efficiency. There are diminishing returns. But it wouldn't be out of the questions to go coast to coast on X amount of gasoline VS X amount of gasoline. Right now the only 100% electric car has a traveling distance of 40 miles. I'm sure that if they had thought of a way to use the wind resistance the car has anyhow, they could have extended that. But not indefinatly. The reaosn this idea makes sense, is that I think it would be possible to hone it to the point of going X distance on a thimble full of gasoline. And hey, who knows, if there is a super efficient way of turning off the stock alt and using the wind on the highway, I'd love that too. Anyway, I'm going to tinker with it if it ever warms up in ohio and I'll let you know what numbers I come up with. If the drag of the new part outweighs any possible benefits, I guess it's not a great idea for a camaro

slow_90firebird

Nah. It wouldnt be feasible. I mean, think of all that thrust from those big propellors. That additional force would most definately push the trailer back into the car, causing enough pressure on the reese hitch to make anyone fishtail and SPIN OUT!

Fullsizewagon

Oh my, I can't believe this thread is still alive.. Here's a whole bunch for the looney bin.. These ideas are not new you know, they have been extensively used in cartoons where for instance a character in a sailboat is blowing on the sail to get moving. Very funny idea for kids, but seriously..
Sailboats are the only vessels that moves on free energy btw. It's a principle that could be applied on land but in a very limited fasion, and not in the ways described here.

BigBadLou

iTrader: (3)

ohiotemplar

A Trailer would cause too much drag and cancel out any benefits the resulting electrical charge would have. I can't believe the negativity about this idea. I think it's very exciting. Surly there has to be some use for an extra 200 amp alternator that constantly and efficiently produces power at highway speeds. Saying that the idea doesn't work is like saying having a spoiler isn't worth it because of the drag it creates. But see, you get so much in return! I really can't see where it would create any more drag than the force of the wind slamming into the condensor. Like I said, there are already patents on this idea. One is an underwater roller for boats, and one is just like mine; intended for cars. So obviously someone thought it was a good idea to harness free power from the wind...

So I'm seeking a patent on the grounds that mine is for a different use than the other 2. Thiers is intended for generation of power only. I'm going to try and make the case that mine saves gas, but I have to get osme numbers together first. I'm getting a prototype together this week. Wish me luck. - Nate

atc3434

iTrader: (4)

Nate, how much power (Kwatt/hrs) do you think you wind powered alternator is going to produce? Figure that out, then look at the how much fuel is used to power a car down the road at 70mph. (in Kwatt/hrs). You'll find you won't even make a drop in the bucket towards the cars overall energy use. There is negativity to this idea because its not going to work to any extent of being actually useful.

slow_90firebird

yeah the reason people are saying it isnt gonna work is not because the extra drag will slow you down that much, but because the amount of horsepower you save by free-wheeling your serpentine alternator will be negligible. If you really want to save a few horses off that serp belt, get rid of the air pump and get an underdrive pulley.

emory 4-4-2

i saw a show in the 80s that had a scientist with a camaro. the hatch was off, and it had a huge flywheel in its place. the dude spun it like he was in the showcase showdown, and the thing took off, in circles, doing like 5mph. it just kept going and going. it used magnets to keep the flywheel going and then the power was transferred to the rear wheels somehow.

another concept i read about was in popular science in the early 80s. the idea was to use a tiny diesel engine to turn a heavy flywheel that would act as a giant alternator/generator and battery. using a computer, the electricity would be transferred to an electric motor that directly powered each wheel. all wheel drive, no brakes, no transmission. so few moving parts.

although the original idea of this post may or may not do what the guy wants, should we really give him a bunch of grief over it? everybody wants to have a fast car. i do too. but i am just as tempted to try and see just how much mpg i can get out of a car. my old 97 formula got 30.5 on the interstate at 80mph with the a/c on. now i hear on that i should be impressed that a prius gets 60? bfd. it takes hot rodders to make this thing work, not engineers at the big manufacturers. i want to see a 75 mpg third gen.

vwdave

Or you can hook up a kaiser supercharger on your car.....

BigBadLou

iTrader: (3)

Many people tried to nicely and politely explain that it wouldn't work and why.
But since the poster insists that it will and claims that he knows physics well, I am not surprised that others give him grief.

- With fine-tuning, you can obtain 30-35mpg (there is a Canadian member here who achieved that).
- If you add a turbocharger that converts the otherwise wasted energy in exhaust gasses into extra power, your mileage will improve even more.
- Converting your fuel system to sequential injection (halfway there!!) will give you a few extra miles out of a gallon of fuel.

One day, ONE DAY, I will be able to tell the wife "no, we're not taking your Civic gas guzzler, we'll take my car to save gas".

Lou

89RsPower!

2 votes for the kaiser roto-charger.

vwdave

Actually, the turbocharger will generate alot of backpressure before the turbo. Its not "Free horsepower." If you do not hook up the intake, you can probably measure how much you lose. But thats too much work really.

The theory behind a turbocharger is you can run a more efficient engine (usually with less power) and develop the power the car needs/you want.

A stock longblock 305 TPI with a T56 transmission, twin T3 60 trims, 3.23 rear gear should make for a extremely fast (12 second) and fuel efficient engine. (around 30mpg.)

If I had money for another project, thats probably what I would do. Just to say I did it.

BigBadLou

iTrader: (3)

Actually, there is free power in the exhaust stream. That's what partially drives the turbo, and I stress the word partially.
I agree, a turbine in the exhaust flow will create a partial obstruction but it will make up for it with the extra air forced into the engine by the compressor on the induction side.
But the turbine is driven by more than just the airflow, it uses also the energy of expanding gasses to spin faster than it would with simply cold air flow.
Ever driven a vehicle with a turbocharged engine? Notice any difference between cold engine boost pressure and hot engine boost pressure? Heat is very important in turbochargers.
On a naturally aspirated engine, the exhaust gasses simply expand in the exhaust tubing and escape into the atmosphere. Whereas on a turbocharged engine, they are harnessed and converted into kinetic energy that helps spin the turbine. There's your "free energy". It's not free per se but feel free to call it free (forgive me the pun ) since it's something we didn't have before but now do.

Btw, I hope you are aware that superchargers do not increase efficiency, they merely increase horepower.

So you do believe that a turbocharger will increase mileage, that's good. Sorry, I thought you were disagreeing with me at first.

G'night.
Lou

vwdave

Actually, you can say I have just a wee bit of experience with turbos. Some of the stuff you said was right too.

Ok, that is how a turbo works. Great. That isnt the point I was making. You said wasted energy. Whether you agree or dont, the exhaust system is far more efficient without the turbo than with a turbo. It costs horsepower to make horsepower. Thankfully, the compressor forces so much air into the engine it makes it worthwhile.

Yes, you can say that. Owned one for a few years, I work on them all day, I've built a few fast turbo VW's. The heat issue is mostly resolved by a intercooler. Once again, I have no idea why you are arguing this.

Ok, How does it increase horsepower? By accelerating and compressing air and forcing it into your engine. The amount of air/fuel is increased and increases your efficiency. Meaning there is more air getting into your engine per given cycle than it would get on its own.

Actually, it doesnt increase mileage directly. If you put a turbo on a engine that gets 20 mpg, youre going to lose mileage. The increase in fuel consumption under boost will be dramatic in contrast to non-boost conditions. IT WILL REDUCE MILEAGE.

The point I was making, is you can take a setup that gets incredible mileage, sacrifice just a little mileage and gain alot of mid-range torque and horsepower. Thus, making a slow, fuel sipping car into a faster car that gets insane fuel economy versus a similar car with a larger engine, cam, heads, intake, carb/large injectors.

I hope I cleared my opinion up some.

Pablo

iTrader: (1)

This is funny...

Smokey Yunick mentions his wind driven generator experiment in his book Power Secrets which was originally published in like 1980. He has a pic of it too.

As far as turbochargers increasing fuel mileage...

A turbocharger that could increase fuel mileage is possible but in reality would be a terrible choice for a performance vehicle.
In order for it to be efficient at such low exhaust flows that you encounter during part throttle, the turbo charger must sacrifice high exhaust flow volume for low exhaust flow velocity. This is accomplished by very small turbine and compressor housings, compressor and turbine wheels, etc.

A "compressor map" details where particular turbos start to become efficient at generating volume and pressure relative to the amount of exhaust energy driving their turbines. A properly sized turbo will not be in its efficiency range until WOT in the rpm range the engine is designed to run in.
This is why a turbo charged engine will indeed be generally slightly LESS fuel efficient than a non turbo charged engine of the same design.

Even at WOT, two engines generating the same amount of power -a turbo and N/A engine- the turbo engine will have a higher brake specific fuel consumption.

BigBadLou

iTrader: (3)

That's where variable-geometry (or variable-vane) turbines come in.
But that's old news.

Lou

emory 4-4-2

there was a guy that ran a car in car craft's real street eliminator that ran 11s (or maybe 12s) and pulled down 45 mpg. that was a tuned port 350 with a tunnel ram and a turbo in a 3rd gen t/a

Jproz1167

iTrader: (3)

Just build an exhaust driven alternator

Pablo

iTrader: (1)

Old news indeed but generally not applicable to us since the only production gasoline engine in the world with one is in the 997 porsche GT2 that costs about 190,000 dollars. The variable vane turbo still has an efficiency range as well.

and to the guy mentioning RSE.. I believe you might be confused with the Turbo Buick that got second place in 1995 RSE(unless there was another car with the same mileage in another RSE). That car pulled down around 45 mpg. Correlation does not imply causation. There are many strategies for getting more mileage out of a GM FI car. Lean cruise, decel fuel cut off, egr, etc. Not to mention that its a small V6 when not under boost.

84Z28406

There are other vehicles with variable geometry turbochargers. The 80's chrysler lebarons had a 2.2 liter turbocharged four cylinder, one of the versions used a variable geometry turbo. You are correct though, they have an efficiency range as well. Just wanted to point out that not only high end cars have them.

vwdave

VW Diesels have a variable scroll turbocharger.

Fullsizewagon

A turbo has a limited efficiency, and although it increases horsepower it can only impede mpg.

Mount a propeller on a vehicle, gear it down and drive the wheels; obviously it can drive into a headwind all by itself. Task; how fast can it go?
Will it go all by itself if you give it a push if there's no headwind? Nope..
Will it go any further than if there was no propeller mounted? Nope..
Mount a sail or something on a vehicle, utilizing sidewind. Task; how fast can you drive before the help from the sail is nulled out?

Any device mounted between a force you generate yourself (exhaust/headwind, from engine) and the means of propelling (wheels) can only reduce efficiency.

Hybrid cars gets great mpg because their engines are tuned to and are running in their "sweet spot", easily making them twice as efficient as the average drive with a normal drivetrain. The 10% loss from the electrics between the engine and the wheels then becomes negligible. Mount such a system in a 3rd-gen and you can get great power & mpg.

Buses have been made with epoxy/fiberglass flywheels running in vacuum. These store energy from braking, to be used for accelleration, obviously drastically increasing the mpg of these kinds of stop & go vehicles.

Yes, I have seen many patents of so-called free energy devices. I'm not impressed.. A device with special geometry magnets was described and was interesting but I have yet to see detailed drawings, a working model, or even a film of one.. I have some of the neccessary magnets and I'm dying to get info about the other ones to build it & test it out.

Pablo

iTrader: (1)

plenty of Diesel engines have them. Thats why I said gasoline. Gasoline engines put way more heat into a turbo than Diesels.. thats why you don't see many variable geometry turbos in gasoline cars. It costs a lot of money to make them reliable in that environment.

InfernalVortex

iTrader: (4)

The kind of wind power you'd need to power a 2 ton hunk of steel down the interstate is ridiculous.

Imagine how much air it would take to push the car at 70 miles an hour if it were blowing at the car from behind. Now imagine the "frontal area" of the car in such a circumstance and compare it to your alternator windmill's frontal area that it uses to turn it, and you can start to see the futility of the project.

Six_Shooter

iTrader: (2)

So which was it, Tuned port or Tunnel ram?

emory 4-4-2

i may be remembering the turbo buick motor wrong. the one i mentioned was a tuned port upper manifold on top of a tunnel ram, kinda like a super ram.

well, that's still 45 mpg. tricks or not

89RsPower!

wow that makes no sense... a buick v6 with an intake system thats part tpi part tunnel ram, that's turboed..

vwdave

That, and maybe because diesels need to have a wide powerband in a small RPM band. Its a required technology. Gasoline engines dont really need it.

emory 4-4-2

no, the tpi/tunnel ram setup was on a 350. it got well over 30mpg and knocked down 11.1s. the turbo buick was a 12 sec ride and got 45mpg. i think i finally got it right now.

dc_sniper9130

Was gonna say exactly the same thing. We dyno-tested a small-block chevy with and without an alternator just to see the difference in power output when there was a load, the engine got 298.18 hp with no alt, 297.37 with one at low electrical load, and 295.93 horse with a 140 amp load.

dc_sniper9130

+1

Even though turbos increase power and engine efficiency, they are a restriction in the exhaust. Plus, the very nature of turbos will make them less fuel efficient, since they cram more air into the engine, more fuel must go in as well. The advantage with them is that they are not driven off a belt (superchargers provide steady boost all the way from idle to redline, but kill mpg because they take a lot of ponies to turn over) and turbos also do not generate boost when you're not mashing the pedal. they just kinda idle along at a slightly negative pressure (which is not bad, vacuum after all). i think turbochargers are one of the best automotive inventions ever because at idle/cruising speeds, your getting more or less the same mileage and power as naturally aspirated, but when you put the hammer down, you get an extra 50% horsepower out of nowhere.

kuulkatdadieo

iTrader: (1)

+3