Generating Power 24/7 by using Tides
- Thread starter Generator
- Start date
Hillhater
100 TW
Somehow, my (normally reliable) gut feeling tells me that a simple “pile wall” Is not going to hold back a 2+ mtr tide height....let alone anything bigger...and Tidal generators work better with high tidal ranges and flows.
JackFlorey
100 kW
Sure. But that is going to be one very thick and very expensive wall. On the Thames, a 1700 foot wall to hold back a 2 meter tide cost half a billion dollars - and took ten years to build.Generator said:
That design don't need that thick wall. That's the principle of design. Divide and Conquer kind of philosophy. If it is continuous wall, then your statement is valid. If you partition wall, the forces are not propagated along its length, that's the point of that design. You see a unit area of water force will always act on a unit are of wall, if it is not connected to next section. So you will never have to design wall for total force of water being hold.
Hillhater
100 TW
You are not a civil engineer , are you ? 
Build one to prove the concept !
Build one to prove the concept !
No, I'm not Civil engineer, but I know Engineers are those people, who can accurately learn and repeat the things invented by non-engineers. Sometimes they are unable to think outside the box, because that was not taught to them while getting that degree.
So I'd like to know what is the issue or gap you see in that technology or I'm not able to see it? Because I know, now a days, you don't have to build it to prove it. Simulation world exists too or simple calculation may work in this case.
So I'd like to know what is the issue or gap you see in that technology or I'm not able to see it? Because I know, now a days, you don't have to build it to prove it. Simulation world exists too or simple calculation may work in this case.
Hillhater
100 TW
Well, since you are so smart, why dont you develop a simulation or run the FEA maths to check the viability.
...or did you miss out on those techniques....unlike real engineers who use them every day as part of their skill set.
Do it, it will save you wasting time and money building a pilot that would be doomed to fail.
...or did you miss out on those techniques....unlike real engineers who use them every day as part of their skill set.
Do it, it will save you wasting time and money building a pilot that would be doomed to fail.
JackFlorey
100 kW
The Thames barrier is not a continuous wall, either. It's made of 10 separate gates.Generator said:
You have to resist exactly the same forces, whether it is made of a single piece or 100 pieces.
Thames wall / implementation proves the same thing mentioned in the video. Check the actual thickness of the moving barrier at the bottom, it is very very thin, that means you can have thin member all the way up and it will still hold the water e.g. think of vertical column or panel or sluice gate coming up from ground instead of Rotary Gate with thickness of existing gate at the bottom.
I did little experiment on this. Face your Palm facing you. Make all fingers straight. Push any finger using other hand finger (you can use any finger). Do you see force transfer from one finger to other? Now take pen, place it horizontally across fingers, push it against the fingers. Do you see only one finger being pushed of all of them? Now, do you experience the same total force on each finger or is it distributed equally and is four times less than total force exerted by Pen?
I did little experiment on this. Face your Palm facing you. Make all fingers straight. Push any finger using other hand finger (you can use any finger). Do you see force transfer from one finger to other? Now take pen, place it horizontally across fingers, push it against the fingers. Do you see only one finger being pushed of all of them? Now, do you experience the same total force on each finger or is it distributed equally and is four times less than total force exerted by Pen?
e-beach
10 MW
Pile walls can work. They are still effective around the Santa Monica Pier after 80+ years. However they are sand and rocks that need to be maintained or they eventually degrade due to tidal forces. The concept looks like it would generate electricity, the question is if it would be enough to justify the cost of building and maintaining it. Somebody would have to take a long hard look at costs to answer that. Not to mention the environmental impact of it.
JackFlorey
100 kW
You don't understand basic physics.Generator said:
Well, here is another experiment. Place a pressure measuring device in a tank on side wall at the bottom. Measure the pressure or force at that point. Pressure is constant all across the wall in that horizontal line. Let's say pressure you measure was 1000 pascal. So lets say the wall is 100 unit long, which makes total pressure = 1000 X 100 pascal on that particular strip. Now make a hole in same place, water will start flowing from there... How much counter pressure do you need to apply to stop that flow? 1000 pascal or 100000 Pascal?
JackFlorey said:
They mention it as portable and costs less than existing methods. Imagine the transportation cost of transferring the gravel to build the lagoon vs using pre fabricated piles, which are 100 times smaller in volume and weight.
e-beach said:Pile walls can work. They are still effective around the Santa Monica Pier after 80+ years. However they are sand and rocks that need to be maintained or they eventually degrade due to tidal forces. The concept looks like it would generate electricity, the question is if it would be enough to justify the cost of building and maintaining it. Somebody would have to take a long hard look at costs to answer that. Not to mention the environmental impact of it.
JackFlorey
100 kW
It doesn't matter.Generator said:
If you have a wall X meters long, and it will have to withstand Y height of water, the amount of force each section of wall has to withstand is exactly the same when summed over the entire wall. Let's say the force you have to withstand is a thousand metric tons. If the wall is 1000 meters long, that's a ton per meter of foundation. (Which is how you are going to be rating, and designing, the foundation.) If it's a single wall, it's a ton per meter of foundation. If it's 1000 tiny little separate walls, it is (wait for it) a ton per meter of foundation. If each wall is just a millimeter across, the force is . . . . . a ton per meter of foundation.
There are no clever tricks that get you away from that requirement.
"If you have a wall X meters long, and it will have to withstand Y height of water, the amount of force each section of wall has to withstand is exactly the same when summed over the entire wall." ONLY If it is continuous wall, without sections. When the wall is divided into sections, this doesn't apply.
"If the wall is 1000 meters long, that's a ton per meter of foundation. (Which is how you are going to be rating, and designing, the foundation.) If it's a single wall, it's a ton per meter of foundation." [[[I think this would be 1000 tons per meter and not just a ton per meter]]] [Otherwise it is contradicting your first statement]
"If it's 1000 tiny little separate walls, it is (wait for it) a ton per meter of foundation [[[Yes this is correct, which means not 1000 tons total as Sum of whole wall]]]. If each wall is just a millimeter across, the force is . . . . . a ton per meter of foundation. [[[No this is not correct]]]"
Remember we are talking of Liquid pressure as force and not Solid material as force, they both act differently on the surface. Your theory is correct, if we consider Solid body as force creator and not liquid. And the design is for forces generated by liquid, not solid material.
"If the wall is 1000 meters long, that's a ton per meter of foundation. (Which is how you are going to be rating, and designing, the foundation.) If it's a single wall, it's a ton per meter of foundation." [[[I think this would be 1000 tons per meter and not just a ton per meter]]] [Otherwise it is contradicting your first statement]
"If it's 1000 tiny little separate walls, it is (wait for it) a ton per meter of foundation [[[Yes this is correct, which means not 1000 tons total as Sum of whole wall]]]. If each wall is just a millimeter across, the force is . . . . . a ton per meter of foundation. [[[No this is not correct]]]"
Remember we are talking of Liquid pressure as force and not Solid material as force, they both act differently on the surface. Your theory is correct, if we consider Solid body as force creator and not liquid. And the design is for forces generated by liquid, not solid material.
JackFlorey said:
JackFlorey
100 kW
If what you claim is true, then you could divide ANY wall, dam, berm or levee into tiny sections and it would become much, much stronger and easier to build to withstand the same force. Thirty seconds of experimentation proves this false.Generator said:
MJSfoto1956
10 kW
I think something like this (Energy to go: the world’s smallest hydropower plant | Eco-at-Africa) is more interesting to me: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iNuZaaJZd3w
JackFlorey
100 kW
There are a lot of things on Youtube. Magnet motors are fun; they generate energy from magnetism and give you free energy forever! If you believe the video, of course.Generator said:
Build a dam across a nearby stream. Anchor it at the bottom. Then cut it into pieces and see if it becomes stronger.
Your conclusion is based on existing knowledge you have. But let me tell you how Air, Liquid and Solids work differently. Throw 100 ton Solid block on electric Pole. It will act exactly according to your theory and you are right. If the pole can't withstand against the force exerted by that solid object, it will be crushed even when it touches 1 mm surface area. The reason is every particle of that solid object have same amount of force impacting capacity, no matter what particle touches the other object, it imparts whole load on it.
Now if you do same experiment with Water or Air, you will notice that the force exerted by either of them doesn't behave the way it behaved in case of Solid object. Note if there were 10 poles side by side, they will experience force of 1/10 magnitude than actual load or force exerted by water. If you still don't think this is correct, then try to jump in water pool from 10 ft high, if you survive, then thank to the water you jumped in. Now do same experiment but this time jump into empty pool. Notice how hard it hits you back. If you survive, thank to me, because I just explained you how forces act differently when the acting body is changed.
You cannot apply same force or pressure principles to different types of materials, especially Solid, Liquid and Air category.
Now if you do same experiment with Water or Air, you will notice that the force exerted by either of them doesn't behave the way it behaved in case of Solid object. Note if there were 10 poles side by side, they will experience force of 1/10 magnitude than actual load or force exerted by water. If you still don't think this is correct, then try to jump in water pool from 10 ft high, if you survive, then thank to the water you jumped in. Now do same experiment but this time jump into empty pool. Notice how hard it hits you back. If you survive, thank to me, because I just explained you how forces act differently when the acting body is changed.
You cannot apply same force or pressure principles to different types of materials, especially Solid, Liquid and Air category.
Hillhater
100 TW
We are not, We are applying hydrostatic theory, and basic physics to a well known situation.
It is you who seem confused and lacking in relavent knowledge .
Read this to start to understand some of the issues and solutions’’
https://www.ijser.org/researchpaper/COFFERDAMS-FORCES-ANALYSIS-AND-DESIGN-CRITERIA.pdf
Then consider that your “unsupported pile wall” is a much more complex load situation.
Anyway to get picture of this structure?
May be people who don't believe will have some sort of proof of it. The sand and rock just help to reduce the erosion but they don't support the piles.
I think it is cheaper to build if we consider the amount of material transported on the site from far than just transporting readymade piles and support bars for it.
May be people who don't believe will have some sort of proof of it. The sand and rock just help to reduce the erosion but they don't support the piles.
I think it is cheaper to build if we consider the amount of material transported on the site from far than just transporting readymade piles and support bars for it.
e-beach said:Pile walls can work. They are still effective around the Santa Monica Pier after 80+ years. However they are sand and rocks that need to be maintained or they eventually degrade due to tidal forces. The concept looks like it would generate electricity, the question is if it would be enough to justify the cost of building and maintaining it. Somebody would have to take a long hard look at costs to answer that. Not to mention the environmental impact of it.
Hillhater
100 TW
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Santa_Monica_Pier#/media/File%3ASantamonicapierandbeachpanorama.jpgGenerator said:
A totally different type of use for “Piles” ..
Those are simply individual construction support piles, (or “Piers”), designed to support a vertical load, and carefully spaced apart from each other so as to provide MINIMAL RESISTANCE TO TIDES AND WAVES !
Similar threads
- Question
