Skip to comments.Chinese farmer invents 'wind-powered' car
Posted on 05/18/2012 5:15:42 AM PDT by TurboZamboni
BANJIEHE, China -- A Chinese farmer has invented a wind-powered, electric car that he says could save his country from the pollution caused by its rapidly growing car market.
An hour from downtown Beijing, the dusty village of Banjiehe looks an unlikely place to produce scientific innovation. Its rows of brick, utilitarian houses are surrounded by cornfields and fruit trees.
But in a small tractor workshop, 55-year-old farmer Tang Zhenping has invented the prototype of a car that he believes could revolutionize China's auto industry.
Tang's model -- built in just three months for around US$1,600 -- is electric
(Excerpt) Read more at foxnews.com ...
It isn’t a “perpetual motion” vehicle. It is designed to recover some of the energy otherwise lost to friction when moving through the air. What that amounts to is hard to say. Maybe 5%?
Every fluidics or aerodynamics engineer knows that spinning a fan blade or prop blade consumes energy.
Even if it is free wheeling it creates drag which means it takes more power to move the vehicle forward.
A fan blade connected to a generator as in this case will consume more power than it generates.
It might provide a small benefit if you only use the vehicle in an area where all of the roads are downhill.
This idiotic device is engaged over 40mph at times when the driver's desire is to go forward.
What is then happening is the motor has to run a bit harder to not only push the car but turn the fan blades.
So you end up taking extra energy out of the battery running it through a couple of lossy conversions and putting a fraction of it back into the battery.
This is embarrassing, this is basic conservation of energy, physics 101. Please!
—This is embarrassing, this is basic conservation of energy, physics 101. Please!—
Precisely. I don’t come down hard so fast on these stories normally, but sometimes it is just necessary.
Sorry, no! It is designed to ADD more friction to the system and to recover a bit of what it ADDED to begin with.
(Warning! graphic pic!)
We live in an over regulated and bureaucratized system that cannot manage undirected inovation.
This is just the kind of thing that was prevelent in my great grandfather’s generation. A lot didnt work well but some things became more and more refined and become products.
We live in an overregulated and beurcratized system that cannot manage undirected inovation.
You are correct that we are over-regulated and every inventor is encumbered by regulation and paperwork, but this is NOT an example of that.
That turbine up front is a violation of the laws of physics and no amount of refinement will ever let him get past that.
It really depends on how much air resistance there is in the car to begin with. The more resitance the more likely it is to convert some back into energy. His design looks inefficient to begin with so I think there is a chance to capture energy here. Say you had a flat cross-section with 100% reistance and then compared it to a flat cross-section with a hole in it where a turbine was mounted. You would both reduce air resistance to some extent and increase energy capture by driving the air past the turbine. But the less resistance you have to start with in the body design, the more likely you are to add resistance by adding on a turbine.
In order to analyze the inefficiency of that contraption you have to compare his vehicle with an identical one where the turbine has been removed.
The turbine-less car will consume less energy for the same trip, not more as he claims.