snip

The only thing, that puzzles
me, why is the lamp going out so fast
at the end, when he removes the plug and
after about 2 seconds the lamp goes out immediately...
Hmm, is this due to the modified generator ?

Shouldn?t the lamp go out more slowly as the generator is
still turning ?
 

Much as a computer APC kicks in when the line voltage drops a certain level, is it possible that the generator's voltage regulator when sensing voltage dropping below a certain point, kicks out to prevent brownout damage? And the connect to light goes?
 
That is the one funky aspect of this thing. Too bad the guy didn't say "It's a such and such generator with this kind of mod (as to the rewiring) "
 
One can re-make all but the generator part easily if they have the spare $400 or so and see how much torque and speed one could -in reality- get from that pump and setup.
 
Just from a quick look around the web, looks like a Generac? Maybe 10000 watt? (Not 50 years old as one poster said). Pump appears to be a Cal T10000 Torpedo.

rc

Much as a computer APC kicks in when the line voltage drops a certain level, is it possible that the generator's voltage regulator when sensing voltage dropping below a certain point, kicks out to prevent brownout damage? And the connect to light goes?
 
That is the one funky aspect of this thing. Too bad the guy didn't say "It's a such and such generator with this kind of mod (as to the rewiring) "
 
One can re-make all but the generator part easily if they have the spare $400 or so and see how much torque and speed one could -in reality- get from that pump and setup.
 
Just from a quick look around the web, looks like a Generac? Maybe 10000 watt? (Not 50 years old as one poster said). Pump appears to be a Cal T10000 Torpedo.

rc

Hmm? OK - genarator is "military stuff", very secret one and so what? Efficient surelly not higher than 65%. Have you ever tried to spin the shaft of such like generator? Even without any load its not easy at all and you look at large washingmachine pulley, unefficient beltdrive 1:10 or even higher to the gen shaft ... Even when pump "appears to be a Cal T10000 Torpedo" (and so what?) it has less than 30% of efficient. When generator is younger than 50 years then Waterwheel is older than Jesus at that extreme stupidly made. Energy comes from where? From plywood ?
Why most of suchlike videos are done with very weak lightings? No energy? No money to buy more lamps?
khabe

OK,

lets do some calculations:
 snip

Nice.

He says that's 20 gallons in the tank there initially. It runs about 18-20 seconds before it's done actually, not the 5-10 he mentions. The pump test starts at a .18 second mark ends at about the .38-.40 mark.

That comes out to 60 gallons a minute going out, not 160...so things must be working better than that would indicate, or there's a problem?

The big wheel is 18 inches, the small is 4 he says, which means the generator is turning at 4.5 times the waterwheel's speed.

So, whatever speed the wheel is turning, the generator should be doing 4.5 times as fast?

What speed would the waterwheel be turning given that pump's output? I don't get a whole lot of rpm as to that here myself, but maybe I am figuring it wrong.

rc

OK,

lets do some calculations:

(this is referenced by the datasheet of the pump)
1.) 9720GP/h -> 37000 l/h  @ 1600W/h -> 5,76 MJ
Potential Energie achieved by lifting water E=m.g.h = 108kJ
(-> not so much - this can be "collected" on comming down)

2.) Output hose diameter 1 inch = 2,54cm-> cross section 5cm square.
Water length in hose/beam 2m/1 liter.
This means with 37000l/h or 9720 GPH a speed of water beam of 70km/h or
20m/s.
The kinetic energy of the water beam is (m*v^2)/2 = (20*20m/s^2)*3600/2=
14.4MJ

3.) That means we invest 5.76MJ electrical power and get 108kJ of potential energy +
14.4MJ of kinetic energy. -> COP 2.52.
The Lamp takes 216 kJ -> resulting efficiency needed for generator+turbine
-> 40%.

CONCLUSION: (very vague but interesting - est. pump parameters may differ)
Even a turbine/generator setup with 40% efficiency would run forever.

amazing. nice pump.

PS.: Feel free to calculate it yourself - and don?t stick to the parts with coils
inside ;-))). I?ve seen no calculation so far.

Hi, Fritz!
I have to disagree with your calcs. Simply, centrifugal water pumps are not OU. They're not "heat pumps", where "surplus" energy (HEAT) is being pumped from an environment.

If you calculated that CoP is 2.5, then from where is this energy comming from?

Pumps like the one we're talking about are quite inneficient devices. Khabe said it's (overall) efficiency is probably below 30%, and I certainly agree with this number.

If the water stream output velocity really is 20 m/s, then the water flow rate is severely reduced. Accordingly, energy calcs results are quite lower, too. Well underunity.

Pump manufacturers are "cheating" big with providing ideal/theoretical values for capacities. But flow rate is easily measurable - there are good and not expensive flow meters on the market, still the easiest way is filling a known volume container in known time....

I have a "state of the art" centrifugal pump (all stainless steel and 2" output to pipe, single phase 600W). It's nominal capacity is declared at 14000 l/h, but It never went above 11000l/h (and that was at the beggining of emptying the pool - height difference less than a foot.). When the pool is allmost empty (-2m), it's pumping capacity is reduced below 5000l/h. So a  140m3 of water is pumped out after cca. 26 hours... Ah, yes, output pipe ID 2"/5cm, lenght 4m. If I would put a 1" "nozzle" at the exit, it would probably take a week to empty the pool.

The pump is definitelly not the source of OU in this setup. So - turbine or generator?
As turbine - "paddle" wheel (the spoons on a pulley every now and then) is (sorry to say) - rather primitive - highly inneficient. No OU here either.

If this setup is really self sustaining, than the generator must be at least 10xOU.

Either that, or "inventor" lies.
 
What is more probable?

Cheers!

When experiment - then it need to be nice, not stupid!
Waterwheel need to be changed for at least this kind of turbine
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hVr8SnEJ18E and see Related Videos!
Efficiency of an automotive (alternator) generator is 54% (up to 80% very seldom) .
Generator must to be changed to high efficient PM brushless one - the good one has 95%, and  gen must to be not large one!
Losses of  high efficient but large 10KW gen are adequate - then 5% of losses are not small at all, see the efficient curve of generators - the best area is narrow,
Even when used this kind of turbine and direct drive high efficient generator ...unfortunately ... but OK  - funny anyway ;-)
Then people at least can understand that serious men are trying something,
Up till now it looks like product of madhouse handicraft therapy,
Regards,
khabe

Hi, Fritz!
I have to disagree with your calcs. Simply, centrifugal water pumps are not OU. They're not "heat pumps", where "surplus" energy (HEAT) is being pumped from an environment.

With the same arguments - I can declare that almost everything in this forums is
nonsense.
BTW: Viktor Schausberger did interesting things with vortex driven turbines -
and thos pump is nothing different.

If you calculated that CoP is 2.5, then from where is this energy comming from?

From hydrodynamics !? Other people working on OU from electrodynamics !?

Pumps like the one we're talking about are quite inneficient devices. Khabe said it's (overall) efficiency is probably below 30%, and I certainly agree with this number.

What efficiency are you talking about ?
If you take as efficiency the work needed  lifting water some meters up - than 30-50%
is the efficiency. If you add the accelerated water flow at the end - the efficiency
is somewhat different.

If the water stream output velocity really is 20 m/s, then the water flow rate is severely reduced. Accordingly, energy calcs results are quite lower, too. Well underunity.

If you take have of the GPH (5000) and have 20m/s - there is still a
COP >1 (what concerns the pump - energy system (excl. generator+turbine)).

Pump manufacturers are "cheating" big with providing ideal/theoretical values for capacities. But flow rate is easily measurable - there are good and not expensive flow meters on the market, still the easiest way is filling a known volume container in known time....

I agree with that.

I have a "state of the art" centrifugal pump (all stainless steel and 2" output to pipe, single phase 600W). It's nominal capacity is declared at 14000 l/h, but It never went above 11000l/h (and that was at the beggining of emptying the pool - height difference less than a foot.). When the pool is allmost empty (-2m), it's pumping capacity is reduced below 5000l/h. So a  140m3 of water is pumped out after cca. 26 hours... Ah, yes, output pipe ID 2"/5cm, lenght 4m. If I would put a 1" "nozzle" at the exit, it would probably take a week to empty the pool.

I own a similar pump (...)

The pump is definitelly not the source of OU in this setup. So - turbine or generator?
As turbine - "paddle" wheel (the spoons on a pulley every now and then) is (sorry to say) - rather primitive - highly inneficient. No OU here either.

Where do you got your truth - "owning a pump" !?
A pump like this is from the mathematical point of view at least as complex as the
other parts involved.
It feels like you own a wide range overunity detector.

If this setup is really self sustaining, than the generator must be at least 10xOU.

Why ? because of the rotten copper inside !?

Why sould OU only occur in generators ? Thats bizarre.

Either that, or "inventor" lies.

There is no truth and there are no lies - only different perceptions
of reality.
The problems we are facing today are based on the illusion that there
is a truth somewhere out there - and if you are not willing to believe
that - they judge you in the name of the lord.
I dont like that.
 

What is more probable?

I dont know.

Cheers!

Prosit !

 I am betting that the setup would not have ran by itself for very long. The amount of energy used to start the process would have lit that bulb for along time and I am betting it would have lit that bulb longer then what the setup does.

 

Watching the video again near the end where the paddle-wheel is spun disconnected, there is an obvious "kerchunka" on each revolution, once per turn.  Either due to a bent shaft, an out of balance wheel, something loose, you can clearly pick it up. 
Rewinding back to the zoom-in of the paddles, where the device is running closed loop, you can clearly pick out the kerchunka sound.  Watching the seconds count and counting the sounds, there are, on average, very close to 4+ per second.  That would put the small pulley somewhere around 18-20 per second, and thus the generator, if the 4" pulley is on its shaft, would be turning 1100-1200 RPM.
-Duane