General Business Forum Brought to you by 9 Spokes
Dismiss Notice
Hey Guest, make sure to follow us on Twitter! Say hi and we'll be sure to follow back!

Nerissa Gliders

Discussion in 'General Business Forum' started by Swisaw, Jan 31, 2011.

  1. Swisaw

    Swisaw UKBF Ace Full Member

    Posts: 1,825 Likes: 148
    In honour of my beloved departed wife, Nerissa, I rename my transportation invention 'Gliding Bridges' in her name to 'Nerissa Gliders' and disclose technical details of the invention to make her name immortal as I believe this invention will become one of the main means of transportation in future. For full technical details please click the link bellow:
    http://www.thrilling.me.uk/nery.html
     
    Posted: Jan 31, 2011 By: Swisaw Member since: Sep 24, 2010
    #1
  2. thetime22

    thetime22 UKBF Enthusiast Full Member

    Posts: 894 Likes: 114
    Please tell me you have this concept copyrighted? Seems like a great idea, I can't find any faults.
     
    Posted: Jan 31, 2011 By: thetime22 Member since: Dec 7, 2010
    #2
  3. vvaannmmaann

    vvaannmmaann UKBF Legend Free Member

    Posts: 13,117 Likes: 3,369
    Apart from not knowing how the system is powered?
     
    Posted: Jan 31, 2011 By: vvaannmmaann Member since: Nov 6, 2007
    #3
  4. estwig

    estwig UKBF Legend Free Member

    Posts: 11,404 Likes: 3,952
    Gravity, it is theoretical, but looks good on paper.
     
    Posted: Jan 31, 2011 By: estwig Member since: Sep 29, 2006
    #4
  5. thetime22

    thetime22 UKBF Enthusiast Full Member

    Posts: 894 Likes: 114
    A bit confused.. your asking me if i know how the system is powered, or your asking him how the system is powered?
     
    Posted: Jan 31, 2011 By: thetime22 Member since: Dec 7, 2010
    #5
  6. Swisaw

    Swisaw UKBF Ace Full Member

    Posts: 1,825 Likes: 148
    You mean if I have patented it? No, but patent pending and I am not sure If I can take it any further.
     
    Posted: Jan 31, 2011 By: Swisaw Member since: Sep 24, 2010
    #6
  7. MikeJ

    MikeJ UKBF Big Shot Free Member

    Posts: 5,060 Likes: 1,447
    This is a joke, isn't it?

    I'm not the only one that thinks you're being serious?
     
    Posted: Jan 31, 2011 By: MikeJ Member since: Jan 15, 2008
    #7
  8. davezzr

    davezzr UKBF Newcomer Free Member

    Posts: 610 Likes: 75
    Isnt this physics 101 first thing we did at secondary school. The little wooden car rolling down a thirty degree slope and had to work out is speed based on the angle of slope and weight of the wooden car.
    Glasgow to London via gravity on a slope!! I guess your math is right except where energy is lost from breaking ,friction and wind resistance.
    How are the weights controlled on the return journey and what energy used.
    Sorry but we are not physicists, even still it sounds unsustainable
     
    Posted: Jan 31, 2011 By: davezzr Member since: Jan 24, 2007
    #8
  9. Swisaw

    Swisaw UKBF Ace Full Member

    Posts: 1,825 Likes: 148
    Long distances like between London and Glasgow will need energy but it should be a small fraction of the energy needed for trains and aeroplanes between both points. This is because the vehicle moves on a slope from a higher point to a lower point and it is very light. It doesn't have engine, wheels, gear box and other assaciated parts. It glides on rollers fixed on the way. These rollers act as driving wheels. It can be made shuttle between London and Glasgow in under an hour, which is faster than trains and aeroplanes with less fuell and wear and tear.
     
    Posted: Jan 31, 2011 By: Swisaw Member since: Sep 24, 2010
    #9
  10. Swisaw

    Swisaw UKBF Ace Full Member

    Posts: 1,825 Likes: 148
    This is not a joke dear friend. I am very serious about it.
     
    Posted: Jan 31, 2011 By: Swisaw Member since: Sep 24, 2010
    #10
  11. MikeJ

    MikeJ UKBF Big Shot Free Member

    Posts: 5,060 Likes: 1,447
    It can run at 500mph? :D Downhill? :D:D
     
    Posted: Jan 31, 2011 By: MikeJ Member since: Jan 15, 2008
    #11
  12. roydmoorian

    roydmoorian UKBF Ace Full Member - Verified Business

    Posts: 1,923 Likes: 337
    Going the other way would that be downhill as well :|

    I'll bet there isn't 50 metres difference in height above sea level (taken at Newlyn) between London and Glasgow. It won't be a very steep hill over 347 miles :D
     
    Posted: Jan 31, 2011 By: roydmoorian Member since: Nov 6, 2009
    #12
  13. Jeff FV

    Jeff FV UKBF Big Shot Staff Member

    Posts: 3,346 Likes: 1,563
    Perhaps I've mis-understood something, but this 'aint going to work.

    Conservation of energy is a fundemental principle in physics. At the top of a system, when the vehicle is at rest, it has gravitational potential energy: mgh

    If it is then released, at the bottom of its fall, all this potential energy has been converted into kinetic energy 0.5mvsauqred - assuming no losses. To raise the vehicle back to the same height it started from needs the same amount of energy.

    So in an ideal, loss-less, system, the truck could start from rest, go down the slope and then back up, coming to a rest at the top.

    You correctly state that if passengers travel one way (on the down hill) then less energy will be needed to raise the empty vehicle back up to the top, but this means you need to some how capture & store that excess energy (not easy) and also that passengers will only ever want to travel one way (down hill)

    I was beginning to get a little bogged down with the detail, but you say you are going to use the turning of a roller to pump water to store energy. This may be feasible (but I remain to be convinced) then this will absorb some of the potential energy, reducing the kinetic energy that is transfered to the vehicle, thereby lowering the final speed of the vehicle, so it would not now have the kinetic energy to get back up the slope.

    You can't get 'free' energy. This won't work, sorry. Was an interesting exercise in energy transfer, though.

    Jeff
     
    Posted: Jan 31, 2011 By: Jeff FV Member since: Jan 10, 2009
    #13
  14. MikeJ

    MikeJ UKBF Big Shot Free Member

    Posts: 5,060 Likes: 1,447
    To be fair, anyone that travels from Glasgow to London isn't likely to want to go back.
     
    Posted: Jan 31, 2011 By: MikeJ Member since: Jan 15, 2008
    #14
  15. Jeff FV

    Jeff FV UKBF Big Shot Staff Member

    Posts: 3,346 Likes: 1,563
    Spoken like a true resident of Edinburgh!
     
    Posted: Jan 31, 2011 By: Jeff FV Member since: Jan 10, 2009
    #15
  16. Swisaw

    Swisaw UKBF Ace Full Member

    Posts: 1,825 Likes: 148
    yes, if it is energised. :)
     
    Posted: Feb 1, 2011 By: Swisaw Member since: Sep 24, 2010
    #16
  17. Swisaw

    Swisaw UKBF Ace Full Member

    Posts: 1,825 Likes: 148
    It doesn't lower the speed. If it does so, it will stop. As long as the vehicle is heavier than the resistance, it slides downward. If it slides downward, it will accelerate. It is like two lifts acting as counter weights to each other operated by two operators one on the top of building and one on the ground. One of the lifts used to carry loads and the other used to carry counter weights.


    When the loading lift is on the top, the counter weight carrying lift is going to be on the ground. To let the loading lift to come down, the counter weight carrying lift made a bit lighter than the loading lift. When potential energy of the gross weight of loading lift becomes more than the energy needed to pull the counter weight carrying lift and friction, the loading lift comes down and accelerates unless controlled. To take the loading lift back to the top, you have to make the counter weight carrying lift on the top heavier. In this way, with use of the counter weight carrying lift, you should save as much as over 95% energy, theoretically, well, at least 70% practically. That is not bad.


    Instead of the counter weight carrying lift, let the loading lift operates a water pump to pump up water to the top of the building when it comes down. To take it back to the top, use the water on the top as a counter weight. The same logic applies on Nerissa Gliders although they move on the slope.
     
    Posted: Feb 1, 2011 By: Swisaw Member since: Sep 24, 2010
    #17
  18. MikeJ

    MikeJ UKBF Big Shot Free Member

    Posts: 5,060 Likes: 1,447
    The counter weights on a lift are to stop the lift moving as fast as gravity would like it to. The weights "recover" that energy and reuse it later.

    On your system, you're setting the slope to overcome the friction of the moving object. There's no "lost" energy for you to recover.
     
    Posted: Feb 1, 2011 By: MikeJ Member since: Jan 15, 2008
    #18
  19. Swisaw

    Swisaw UKBF Ace Full Member

    Posts: 1,825 Likes: 148
    Not so! because equal opposing counter weights cancel each other, both behave as they don't exist. So the heavier side accelerates as fast as the gravity wants minus the friction, which is made negligibale with the use of lubricated rollers.
     
    Posted: Feb 2, 2011 By: Swisaw Member since: Sep 24, 2010
    #19
  20. vvaannmmaann

    vvaannmmaann UKBF Legend Free Member

    Posts: 13,117 Likes: 3,369
    Has the OP calculated the costs of building this thing? Then consider the endless planning wrangles,the Nimbys,costs of compulsory purchase etc etc,
     
    Posted: Feb 2, 2011 By: vvaannmmaann Member since: Nov 6, 2007
    #20