wind assisted flying (Chevy) brick

Being that these older vans (mine is a G10 from the early 80s) are so
not aerodynamic, shouldn't there be a way of utilizing the oncoming
wind (through a series of fans mounted strategically on the front,
sides and roof of the vehicle) to increase the amount of mileage you
get from a gallon?

On Aug 9, 2:13*pm, JustMe > wrote:
> Being that these older vans (mine is a G10 from the early 80s) are so
> not aerodynamic, shouldn't there be a way of utilizing the oncoming
> wind (through a series of fans mounted strategically on the front,
> sides and roof of the vehicle) to increase the amount of mileage you
> get from a gallon?

Sure sounds like a perpetual motion device to me.

On Aug 9, 12:53 pm, Don Stauffer in Minnesota >
wrote:
> On Aug 9, 2:13 pm, JustMe > wrote:
>
> > Being that these older vans (mine is a G10 from the early 80s) are so
> > not aerodynamic, shouldn't there be a way of utilizing the oncoming
> > wind (through a series of fans mounted strategically on the front,
> > sides and roof of the vehicle) to increase the amount of mileage you
> > get from a gallon?
>
> Sure sounds like a perpetual motion device to me.

The electric motor in a hybrid assists the ic engine. Why can't wind
generators do the same?

JustMe > wrote in news:b18cf2fd-9852-4e68-
:

> On Aug 9, 12:53 pm, Don Stauffer in Minnesota >
> wrote:
>> On Aug 9, 2:13 pm, JustMe > wrote:
>>
>> > Being that these older vans (mine is a G10 from the early 80s) are so
>> > not aerodynamic, shouldn't there be a way of utilizing the oncoming
>> > wind (through a series of fans mounted strategically on the front,
>> > sides and roof of the vehicle) to increase the amount of mileage you
>> > get from a gallon?
>>
>> Sure sounds like a perpetual motion device to me.
>
> The electric motor in a hybrid assists the ic engine. Why can't wind
> generators do the same?
>



You probably could do that, but would the gains outweigh the costs? Look
how expensive gas/electric hybrids are compared to regular cars.

Plus, how big would those fans have to be in order to generate enough
torque to drive a generator at the speeds you'd actually drive? Those giant
bird-chopper turbine blades you see at "wind farms" are that big for a big
reason.


--
Tegger

In article >,
Tegger > wrote:

> JustMe > wrote in news:b18cf2fd-9852-4e68-
> :
>
> > On Aug 9, 12:53 pm, Don Stauffer in Minnesota >
> > wrote:
> >> On Aug 9, 2:13 pm, JustMe > wrote:
> >>
> >> > Being that these older vans (mine is a G10 from the early 80s) are so
> >> > not aerodynamic, shouldn't there be a way of utilizing the oncoming
> >> > wind (through a series of fans mounted strategically on the front,
> >> > sides and roof of the vehicle) to increase the amount of mileage you
> >> > get from a gallon?
> >>
> >> Sure sounds like a perpetual motion device to me.
> >
> > The electric motor in a hybrid assists the ic engine. Why can't wind
> > generators do the same?
> >
>
>
>
> You probably could do that, but would the gains outweigh the costs? Look
> how expensive gas/electric hybrids are compared to regular cars.
>
> Plus, how big would those fans have to be in order to generate enough
> torque to drive a generator at the speeds you'd actually drive? Those giant
> bird-chopper turbine blades you see at "wind farms" are that big for a big
> reason.

But of course, the point is moot - There just isn't any way to make it
"pay off".

Where is the energy that turns these hypothetical fans coming from?

Unless you're always driving into the wind (the wind one would measure
if one were sitting still, not that caused by the fact that you're in
motion) then the "wind" driving the fan(s) is a direct result of the
engine burning fuel and moving the vehicle. Which means that, if any,
the juice made by a generator attached to the fan is going to be the
result of burning fuel, with AT LEAST three layers of lossy conversion
between the gasoline and any "help" that might be created - Burning fuel
to spin the engine - Conversion 1. And a pretty inefficient conversion,
at that. Rotation of engine converted to forward motion - Conversion 2.
Also lossy, if only (and it's *NOT* "only", but for the sake of
simplicity, let's ignore that fact) due to friction in the gear-train
that takes the rotation from the engine to the tires. Relative motion of
the vehicle pushing through the (relatively) still air - Conversion 3.
Even worse losses there to MANY factors - friction, turbulence, possibly
even the fact that the wind is from behind, and therefore cuts the
effective speed that the fan blades "see". The inefficiency of the
pseudo-wind as it tries to drive the fan blades is going to introduce
even more loss. The frictional losses to the shaft bearings of both fan
and generator (and let's skip how much MORE loss will come from trying
to multiply the speed of the fan through gearing or belts/pulleys if
somebody mistakenly thinks that might make up for all the losses so
far...) and finally, the losses of converting the rotation of the fan(s)
into electricity in the genny, etc, etc, etc...

In a nutshell, you'd be better off, if only from a "conversion losses"
standpoint, by simply driving a genny straight off the engine - Which
pretty well defeats the purpose of using fans/turbines to try to help
with gas consumption.

--
Don Bruder - - If your "From:" address isn't on my whitelist,
or the subject of the message doesn't contain the exact text "PopperAndShadow"
somewhere, any message sent to this address will go in the garbage without my
ever knowing it arrived. Sorry... <http://www.sonic.net/~dakidd> for more info

On Aug 9, 8:25*pm, Don Bruder > wrote:
> In article >,
>
>
>
>
>
> *Tegger > wrote:
> > JustMe > wrote in news:b18cf2fd-9852-4e68-
> > :
>
> > > On Aug 9, 12:53 pm, Don Stauffer in Minnesota >
> > > wrote:
> > >> On Aug 9, 2:13 pm, JustMe > wrote:
>
> > >> > Being that these older vans (mine is a G10 from the early 80s) are so
> > >> > not aerodynamic, shouldn't there be a way of utilizing the oncoming
> > >> > wind (through a series of fans mounted strategically on the front,
> > >> > sides and roof of the vehicle) to increase the amount of mileage you
> > >> > get from a gallon?
>
> > >> Sure sounds like a perpetual motion device to me.
>
> > > *The electric motor in a hybrid assists the ic engine. Why can't wind
> > > generators do the same?
>
> > You probably could do that, but would the gains outweigh the costs? Look
> > how expensive gas/electric hybrids are compared to regular cars.
>
> > Plus, how big would those fans have to be in order to generate enough
> > torque to drive a generator at the speeds you'd actually drive? Those giant
> > bird-chopper turbine blades you see at "wind farms" are that big for a big
> > reason.
>
> But of course, the point is moot - There just isn't any way to make it
> "pay off".
>
> Where is the energy that turns these hypothetical fans coming from?
>
> Unless you're always driving into the wind (the wind one would measure
> if one were sitting still, not that caused by the fact that you're in
> motion) then the "wind" driving the fan(s) is a direct result of the
> engine burning fuel and moving the vehicle. Which means that, if any,
> the juice made by a generator attached to the fan is going to be the
> result of burning fuel, with AT LEAST three layers of lossy conversion
> between the gasoline and any "help" that might be created - Burning fuel
> to spin the engine - Conversion 1. And a pretty inefficient conversion,
> at that. Rotation of engine converted to forward motion - Conversion 2.
> Also lossy, if only (and it's *NOT* "only", but for the sake of
> simplicity, let's ignore that fact) due to friction in the gear-train
> that takes the rotation from the engine to the tires. Relative motion of
> the vehicle pushing through the (relatively) still air - Conversion 3.
> Even worse losses there to MANY factors - friction, turbulence, possibly
> even the fact that the wind is from behind, and therefore cuts the
> effective speed that the fan blades "see". The inefficiency of the
> pseudo-wind as it tries to drive the fan blades is going to introduce
> even more loss. The frictional losses to the shaft bearings of both fan
> and generator (and let's skip how much MORE loss will come from trying
> to multiply the speed of the fan through gearing or belts/pulleys if
> somebody mistakenly thinks that might make up for all the losses so
> far...) and finally, the losses of converting the rotation of the fan(s)
> into electricity in the genny, etc, etc, etc...
>
> In a nutshell, you'd be better off, if only from a "conversion losses"
> standpoint, by simply driving a genny straight off the engine - Which
> pretty well defeats the purpose of using fans/turbines to try to help
> with gas consumption.
>
> --
> Don Bruder - - If your "From:" address isn't on my whitelist,
> or the subject of the message doesn't contain the exact text "PopperAndShadow"
> somewhere, any message sent to this address will go in the garbage without my
> ever knowing it arrived. Sorry... <http://www.sonic.net/~dakidd> for more info- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

perhaps we could erect large, movable vanes to grab energy from the
wind; perhaps made out of some fabric substance. of course, to afford
such a large expanse of material, we would have to buy it on sale, so
we could call them "sales". we'd need some tall poles to suspend them
from; we could call those ... ah never mind, you can see where i'm
going with this.

Don Bruder wrote:
> In article >,
> Tegger > wrote:
>
>> JustMe > wrote in news:b18cf2fd-9852-4e68-
>> :
>>
>>> On Aug 9, 12:53 pm, Don Stauffer in Minnesota >
>>> wrote:
>>>> On Aug 9, 2:13 pm, JustMe > wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Being that these older vans (mine is a G10 from the early 80s) are so
>>>>> not aerodynamic, shouldn't there be a way of utilizing the oncoming
>>>>> wind (through a series of fans mounted strategically on the front,
>>>>> sides and roof of the vehicle) to increase the amount of mileage you
>>>>> get from a gallon?
>>>> Sure sounds like a perpetual motion device to me.
>>> The electric motor in a hybrid assists the ic engine. Why can't wind
>>> generators do the same?
>>>
>>
>>
>> You probably could do that, but would the gains outweigh the costs? Look
>> how expensive gas/electric hybrids are compared to regular cars.
>>
>> Plus, how big would those fans have to be in order to generate enough
>> torque to drive a generator at the speeds you'd actually drive? Those giant
>> bird-chopper turbine blades you see at "wind farms" are that big for a big
>> reason.
>
> But of course, the point is moot - There just isn't any way to make it
> "pay off".
>
> Where is the energy that turns these hypothetical fans coming from?
>
> Unless you're always driving into the wind (the wind one would measure
> if one were sitting still, not that caused by the fact that you're in
> motion) then the "wind" driving the fan(s) is a direct result of the
> engine burning fuel and moving the vehicle. Which means that, if any,
> the juice made by a generator attached to the fan is going to be the
> result of burning fuel, with AT LEAST three layers of lossy conversion
> between the gasoline and any "help" that might be created - Burning fuel
> to spin the engine - Conversion 1. And a pretty inefficient conversion,
> at that. Rotation of engine converted to forward motion - Conversion 2.
> Also lossy, if only (and it's *NOT* "only", but for the sake of
> simplicity, let's ignore that fact) due to friction in the gear-train
> that takes the rotation from the engine to the tires. Relative motion of
> the vehicle pushing through the (relatively) still air - Conversion 3.
> Even worse losses there to MANY factors - friction, turbulence, possibly
> even the fact that the wind is from behind, and therefore cuts the
> effective speed that the fan blades "see". The inefficiency of the
> pseudo-wind as it tries to drive the fan blades is going to introduce
> even more loss. The frictional losses to the shaft bearings of both fan
> and generator (and let's skip how much MORE loss will come from trying
> to multiply the speed of the fan through gearing or belts/pulleys if
> somebody mistakenly thinks that might make up for all the losses so
> far...) and finally, the losses of converting the rotation of the fan(s)
> into electricity in the genny, etc, etc, etc...
>
> In a nutshell, you'd be better off, if only from a "conversion losses"
> standpoint, by simply driving a genny straight off the engine - Which
> pretty well defeats the purpose of using fans/turbines to try to help
> with gas consumption.

The important point here is, that in order to get some additional
energy out of the wind, for a non-aerodynamic car, one needs to
/replace/ the drag force with fan spinning force. If you just add fans
and whatever, for example on the roof, if this increases the total drag,
it will /not/ produce any improvement - exactly for the conversion
reasons that Don Bruder outlines. If one wants improved efficiency by
fan generators, one must keep the total aerodynamic drag the same. This
can happen only if you decrease the drag of the car itself - by
installing an aerodynamic snout, for instance - and catch the wind in a
fan inlet, so the total drag stays the same. But, by the same Don Bruder
reasoning, it will be even better if you just install an aerodynamic
snout and spoilers, and do /not/ install any fans. This will insure
maximum improvement in gas mileage.

On Aug 9, 3:19*pm, JustMe > wrote:
> On Aug 9, 12:53 pm, Don Stauffer in Minnesota >
> wrote:
>
> > On Aug 9, 2:13 pm, JustMe > wrote:
>
> > > Being that these older vans (mine is a G10 from the early 80s) are so
> > > not aerodynamic, shouldn't there be a way of utilizing the oncoming
> > > wind (through a series of fans mounted strategically on the front,
> > > sides and roof of the vehicle) to increase the amount of mileage you
> > > get from a gallon?
>
> > Sure sounds like a perpetual motion device to me.
>
> *The electric motor in a hybrid assists the ic engine. Why can't wind
> generators do the same?

Difference between dissipative and non-dissipative forces. The
generator part of a hybrid has very low losses (generators and
electric motors can be VERY efficient). Unfortunately, a wind turbine
has some drag of its own, and it is almost impossible for the design
of a wind turbine to reduce the inherent drag of the vehicle (the
inherent drag CANNOT be recovered).

Another way to look at this. Regenerative braking does NOT recover
the energy from normal coasting, only that due to braking. It is
replacing the normally dissipative friction brake with a generator.
When you use a generator do generate electricity, the torque needed to
turn the generator increases greatly. This increased torque is used
as a brake. The energy involved in the braking is recovered as
electricity that CAN be stored in a battery.

Note that a Prius has a very low drag coefficient. One cannot make a
very good hybrid from a car with a lot of aero drag (or ANY form of
drag).

JustMe wrote:
> Being that these older vans (mine is a G10 from the early 80s) are so
> not aerodynamic, shouldn't there be a way of utilizing the oncoming
> wind (through a series of fans mounted strategically on the front,
> sides and roof of the vehicle) to increase the amount of mileage you
> get from a gallon?

Why not put up a mast and a sail?

"Steve Austin" wrote

> JustMe wrote:
> > Being that these older vans (mine is a G10 from the early 80s) are so
> > not aerodynamic, shouldn't there be a way of utilizing the oncoming
> > wind (through a series of fans mounted strategically on the front,
> > sides and roof of the vehicle) to increase the amount of mileage you
> > get from a gallon?
>
> Why not put up a mast and a sail?

Line 3+4... "oncoming wind".
Great for backing up, not so good for going forward.