To browser these website, it's necessary to store cookies on your computer.
The cookies contain no personal information, they are required for program control.
  the storage of cookies while browsing this website, on Login and Register.

Storing Cookies (See : ) help us to bring you our services at . If you use this website and our services you declare yourself okay with using cookies .More Infos here:
If you do not agree with storing cookies, please LEAVE this website now. From the 25th of May 2018, every existing user has to accept the GDPR agreement at first login. If a user is unwilling to accept the GDPR, he should email us and request to erase his account. Many thanks for your understanding

User Menu

Custom Search

Author Topic: A Simple Wave Microcurrent Motor  (Read 14817 times)

Offline BlueMental

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 5
A Simple Wave Microcurrent Motor
« on: September 21, 2011, 01:52:51 PM »
Greetings, I am new to and this is my first post. I devised this Wave motor in 1996. I state 'Wave Microcurrent' in the title. The reason for this is that the relatively small currents that flow in the channels on the coastlines is what the motor uses as the source for its drive.

The common 'scientific' concept states that the water does not move, but in reality, after I got stuck in one of these channels with flippers, it took me over an hour of maximum effort swimming to get out of the channel without being shredded. I was almost totally exhausted, and I then realised how powerful a 'small' channel actually is.

In essence, the water in these types of channels does not move very far and it is cyclic. Meaning that the same water moves along the course of the channel (this channel was defined by natural rock formation) and moves approximately 15 to 20 metres back and forth. The channel I speak of remains fluid in both high and low tides.

Prior to describing the motor, I wish to state my methodology/philosophy regarding how I design things.

1. Occam's Razor - If there is a branch or sub branch that is not needed to make a device work, then it is nothing more than a waste of time. Prune It. In other words, Less is More. This leaves you with a more solid 'trunk' with less moving parts so there are less things that can break and are cheaper to make in both energy (sweat equity) and resources.

2. Design it from the ground up. - I like to think about the things I design from the viewpoint of the person that has to build/assemble the thing. Having to take out 4 parts to replace one part with 'special' tools is frustrating and inefficient to say the least. I am certain you know what I mean... we all recall working on some item at some stage, for example, where we had to squeeze ourselves into a space the size of a suitcase and then develop extra joints in our limbs while being upside down to reach an impossible bolt to take out a gearbox so we could reconnect a wire that had slipped off an alternator. (No lies, work on an old Clark Forklift if you doubt this to be true.)

3. Modular appproach. I prefer to make things in an OOP based way. Each and every item or part can be replaced individually with the least possible time and energy spent. While at the same time, each thing can again be used as a part of another system wherever and whenever possible.

So, how does one harness this cyclic flow of water? Quite simple really.  This info is open to the public and I have no intention of patenting it in any way.


When using the cyclic flow of water in a seabed channel situated in the shallow areas of a beach, it enables one to build a structure that reaches above the water level while submersing a 'paddle' into the water. For ease of description, I use the terms 'Landward' and 'Seaward' which relates actually to the 'In' or 'Out' flow of water in the channel.

Now the sea moves inwards and outwards regardless of the tides. By taking a pendulum and hanging part of it in the ocean, it would be swept by the flow as the water moves seaward and landward. The pivot for the pendulum is mounted on a base (Main Base) that is firmly entrenched in the ocean bed. The amount of cubic meters of water that actually pushes the pendulum is based on the surface area of the paddle that is perpendicular to the waters flow. (Sketch 001)

Translating lateral movement into circular movement is a very simple technique, and in this case, it is even easier, since the pendulum is also radial. As the lower end of the pendulum goes in an arc being pushed by the water, the upper end is attached to a ratchet, (Primary Ratchet), that rotates a gear, (Primary Gear), that is centred on the pendulums fulcrum. The rotation of the drive gear is the opposite direction of the lower end of the pendulum. (Sketch 002)

Now imagine that the first pendulum is linked to a second pendulum (They move in tandem). A second gear is in place, (Secondary Drive Gear), which is also centred on the dual pendulums fulcrum, but is not linked to the drive gear. The secondary pendulums ratchet, (Secondary Ratchet), pushes in the opposite direction to the primary ratchet. In other words, when the sea is flowing inland, the primary gear is rotated anticlockwise, while the secondary gears ratchet is slipping over the gears teeth. When the flow reverses, the secondary ratchet pushes its gear clockwise and the primary ratchet slips over the primary gears teeth. (Sketch 003)

Both the primary and the secondary gears are linked through a simple gearbox to a separate gear (Power Gear) centred on a shaft mounted in the main base, so that they both rotate the power gear in the same direction when their respective ratchets are pushing their respective gears. The gears in the sketch are not to scale, they are drawn that way for easier observation of the mechanics involved. (Sketch 004)

In the gearing structure, there are large circular discs which are there for the purpose of maintaining momentum in the flow change period. ( Not shown in sketches. ) The size and mass of these is calculated according to the torque required for the generator. The leverage of the pendulums and the ratio of the gears are calculated to best suit the power and speed required of the generator. { Studies of the Time Cycle, Speed and Depth of the ocean will have to be done to determine each modules characteristics. I.E. The length of the pendulum is related to the time cycle, and the depth ( which is directly proportional to water volume) will define the gearing ratio to best suit each generator .}

The device is then place in a flow chamber that increases the force available on the pendulum. When the cross section that a liquid flows through is decreased, the pressure increases. Also by limiting the escape route of the water, a piston action is defined that is more effective. On the opposite side of the pendulum, the water drops away which creates a vacuum that also pulls the pendulum. (Sketch 005)

To give you an idea of the scale of this device, If the flow chamber covers 70m width  x 57m length x 5m depth, the volume of water in the chamber is 7465m^3. Therefore half of that ( excluding momentum, water passing ineffectively past the paddle etc. for 'loss of energy' ) is 3732.5m^3. Therefore we have ( assuming the pendulum ratio is 1:10 ) 37325 Metric tons excerpted on the primary and secondary drive gears.

Needless to say, those figures vary depending on the actual ocean bed and generator applicable. Remember also that the increase in size is exponential. An increase in depth to 6m and an increase of 10% in area would equal 10840m^3 that becomes 54200 Metric tons of force excerpted on the drive gears. If the drive gear has a radius of 1 metre, then that translates to 54200 NewtonMetres.

In other words, this is a power motor of note.

The generator mentioned is one of many ways to utilise the motor. It can pump sea water inland for desalination and evaporation for distilation in a sun exposed water trough, or it can be used for a hydraulic pump etc. The motor can be used as a motor regardless of what it is one wishes to turn and there are many uses. If you wish details, I can show you how it can be used to convert seawarter into drinkable water that can be pumped vast distances inland to convert deserts into a self expanding arable ecosystem. The uses are staggering to say the least.

This is what I came up with in 1996 and I have since realised that this particular method is actually already obsolete on the 'big picture' scale. There are far easier and more powerful methods of creating resource free global electricity in the Antarctic Circumpolar Current.

Unfortunately people are terribly slow on the uptake.

NB the two drive gears rotate in opposite directions but share the same shaft. They are 'free floaters' as opposed to being fixed on the shaft.


Offline BlueMental

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 5
Re: A Simple Wave Microcurrent Motor
« Reply #1 on: September 21, 2011, 05:40:35 PM »
Greetings webby

A mechanical rectifier of electric current correlates directly to whatever item, tool or system the motor drives. It is not relevant to the Wave Motor. It would be relevant if the motor was driving a generator that needs rectifying.

The 'microcurrent' term was used to refer to the small flows of sea water current that occur in and around the seabed near to the beach, not to any electrical current induced by a generator, be it a standard generator or a better and more effective generator (like the SSG circuit or others found here on

I hope this clarrifies the use of 'microcurrent' in the heading.

Thanks for your input even though it is a misinterpretation and is not needed.


Offline BlueMental

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 5
Re: A Simple Wave Microcurrent Motor
« Reply #2 on: September 21, 2011, 09:38:42 PM »
OK. It was  me that was misunderstanding. I could not get the picture when I looked the first time, and I misunderstood what you meant by 'less tuning'.

Turning linear motion into radial motion is as old as time. Nothing new and totally simple. It was probably invented about 5 minutes after the wheel was :)

The thing is using it for methods most others feel need a more complex solution.

With regards to it's use in a cycle, it works well on a recumbent tri-cycle that uses pushing with legs from a seated position on a chair.

The only real difference between the two is that the Ocean Wave Motor weighs roughly 150 metric tons.

Offline BlueMental

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 5
Re: A Simple Wave Microcurrent Motor
« Reply #3 on: September 21, 2011, 11:58:50 PM »
I actually did a cad design of the motor which I lost due to my hard drive dying. (Yes I know that I should have backed it up... :) )

I did quite a bit of research regarding what would be the best method for a motor that would be open to the corrosive sea water, and it was not easy to get clear answers regarding exactly what to use. Spherical roller bearings seemed to be the best solution since they can deviate if the sea bed distorts and they are the strongest bearings that can handle both axial and radial torque.

The stress on a machine of this nature is immense. Think about the worst possible scenario's, for example a tsunami or hurricane. Even a 'mild' storm can turn a machine like this into dust. So it is important to 'over-engineer' the motor in extreme. There are no easy ways of building in fail-safes and there is also no real way to simply 'disengage' the paddle.

Some bush methods are quite solid and robust. For example cast iron outer with a hardened and polished tool steel shaft. In this method the 'modular' aspect would be to make the parts that wear to be removable and replacable while the shafts all have the same specs so as much as possible is interchangeable.

What actually works best in ocean conditions is not something I know enough about to comment, but there are many who are in that field already, be it techies who work on oil rigs or marine equipment etc.

The other part regarding modular is that each Wave Motor contributes to a 'grid' as it were and if one were to malfunction, then the grid still continues to function. If for example the motor were used for electricity generation and 3 of them were needed to supply the relevant area with power, then 2 units of 3 motors would be a 'modular' approach to the system. That way it allows a relatively stress free method of doing scheduled shutdown maintenance and repair if one or 2 of the motors fail. They also feed the same grid, so there would under the majority of circumstances be 3 running to supply the needed power.

If the power need were to increase, another 3 motor unit can be created and set up before it becomes an urgency. So the term modular is linked to all aspects of things, from interchangable parts to planning and implementation.

The actual manufacture of this machine/motor is actually quite simple. It is just BIG. Some negative aspects of this particular design are the safety of people. If a person were to get sucked into the channel for whatever reason, they would be mincemeat in minutes, the same applies to large fish, dolphins, seals etc.

Also if it has a generator mounted on the actual motor, then the possibilities of short circuiting becomes an issue. Depending on what generator is used, it could be lethal, but those issues are as valid to water turbine generators and therefore have already been addressed in other situations.

Using the motor to drive a massive hydraulic pump would enable the energy to be transferred to land and a generator plant could be set up there. There are a multitude of ways to find solutions.

There are also other ways of harnessing the water flow that are more safe but that way one loses out on the leverage aspect of the paddle. For example, the shaft can be submerged in the channel with barrels that lie perpendicular to the flow with curved fins to harness the flow. That would use cw curves for seaward and ccw fins for landward.

Whichever way it gets done, in comparrison with a conventional electric power station, the price is far less and the running costs are almost zero. That being the primary reason why no large corporation is actually interested in using a motor of this nature.

It is too easy, too cheap and does not hit a corporations primary interest... huge profit margins. Yet in truth, it would actually create an economy boom. Imagine how many people would open up small businesses if their overheads were virtually free? Just as Edison tried to keep electricity DC and Tesslers 'crazy idea' of AC was ignored for decades, with the claims that AC would be bad for economy.

Now we have reached the other end of the circle, AC is global since it can transport electricity long distances, but almost every item in our households actually run on DC with transformers inside them. Imagine how much cheaper things would be if the power substations converted AC to DC and our households all ran on 24VDC? How many hundreds of thousands of tons of copper would not need to be made into small transformers in our computers and sound systems?

Would the companies that make transformers collapse and leave millions of starving unemployed people? Or would they simply convert to other forms of business? Just as what happened when the pocket calculator made the old tills and adding machines obsolete.


Offline BlueMental

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 5
Re: A Simple Wave Microcurrent Motor
« Reply #4 on: September 22, 2011, 12:50:02 PM »
Viscous couplings would be viable for the paddle structure. In a sense they act as 'shock absorbers'. There is actually one easy way to 'shut down' the motor for maintenance situations etc. The way is also simple, it is just to mechanically rotate the paddle till it is above the water flow. The mechanical structure of the machine needs to be designed so that the paddle can be moved to a fully horizontal position and be 'locked' there.

If a storm or any other form of violent water movement is imminent, then the motor can be locked to 'ride out the storm'.

As far as sediments are concerned, they would flow and move as if the paddle were not there. What gives the system it's unusual power take off is that the channel is very close in size to the paddle, so in essence it is actually a hydraulic piston. By doing it that way, the momentum and kinetic energy of all the water 'builds up' until it has nowhere else to go put 'through' the paddle. In situations where there is just 'too much' water flowing, the 'pressure release' mechanism that would naturally fall into place is that the excess water passes over the paddle.

In other words if there is too much water moving too fast, it takes the natural escape route of going over the paddle. Beneath the paddle is a distance where the water can flow back and forth in it's natural path.

No I have not seen the Hudson turbine show, but what you describe speaks clearly of how water can turn just about anything we (man) make into dust. The trick in design is to build the mechanism to absorb the small power fluctuations and 'hide' within the large ones.

Another failsafe can be added to the paddle part, that if it reaches too close to breaking strain because the failsafes did not self-engage, then it blasts the paddle section away from its mountings on the pivot structure and can easily ride out almost any storm.

However, the biggest hurdle that this machine has to overcome is the following:-

They are used and placed in the ocean, which is controlled and regulated by government. Governments are not democratic and they bend to the 'powers that be', which are corporations. The corporations basic mandate is profit, and free energy is their enemy. So all the regulation boards and security systems, (NSA, FBI, CIA, MI5 etc.) inadvertantly or directly tow the line of the 'unseen' megasorus rex of the corporation giant.

As I stated in my first post, this motor is actually already obsolete. It is not obsolete because of the hurdles it needs to cross. It is however obsolete because it is not big enough!

The Antarctic Circumpolar Current (ACC) is the big one. Read the following link :-

If you look at the picture at that site, you will see that the entire continent of Antarctica is surrounded by water. It is also perpendicular to the axis of the earth. This means that at any point around Antarctica, we have a huge mass of water that constantly flows in one direction only. In essence it is one huge 'mega-river'.

There are several areas where the natural bed structure funnels the large mass of water through a smaller area which increases the speed of the current and also increases the pressure. Depending on the depth (I do not know the specs) of the ocean at those points, a multitude of submersed turbines can be placed to harness and convert the flow into electricity. The cables can be used in a network or grid that reach Africa, South America and Australia. The same electricity can also be transported to the northen continents.

Yes there are losses involved in long distance transporting of electricity, but since the source is predominantly 'free', those 'losses' mean nothing more that building an excess of ACC mini turbines that together form the huge global power station.

All of the 'loss of profit' that the corporations envisage would be regained by the fees charged to maintain this network.

We as receivers of that electricity would not be getting it for free. The infrastructure that is built and maintained costs money and sweat equity, and the companies that do all that would have to tender to get those jobs just like any other supply and demand system.

Yet the truly free part would entail us as humans, no longer destroying our home, the planet Earth. It is the freedom from resources, coal, nuclear etc.