Obamot wrote:Just so we know a little more about you (and at random):
How old are you?
What certified studies have you done with a diploma, do you already have a "real" job?
In what field are you a researcher exactly?
Otherwise we risk explaining things that you would have already seen in class, which would be a waste of time, or that you would not have seen, and maybe you would not understand?
Cordially. ^^
Well I am 41 years old I am a "gear cutter" I have a technical qualification certificate in general mechanics (it is between a BEP and a BAC pro).
I'm not a researcher, I'm just interested in science that's all.
But if in the end you tell me that all this can not have a higher performance than a turbine in the case of a low flow I can understand it because I have a lot of notion about energy forces or the electromagnetism, but at my level I do not know how to calculate the efficiency of the device with the frictional losses of water, nor how this calculates the potential energy of the weight with a gravitational field in the water.
I understand that in the state the device is not very interesting, but I find it very versatile and with many possibilities, and I would like to be sure not to miss something.
Understand that I did not come here to say that I have an on-unit functional device, certainly not, I would just understand why if the loss performance is limited to the volume of the weight (ideal) this is not interesting to exploit a low flow.
Also, I think that even if the device can not be used to exploit a low flow, I imagine very well that it can be optimized for the transfer of a fluid with less than 50% of loss despite everything, and nothing for that I thought it useful to take a look at it.
Kind regards.