Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: [AMBIENTENERGY] Horsepower

Expand Messages
  • Charles Ford
    At 10:33 AM 5/31/01 -0700, you wrote: Charles, In message 102 you said that a Horsepower can take place in one second. I have been wrestling with this
    Message 1 of 2 , May 31 7:46 PM
    • 0 Attachment
      At 10:33 AM 5/31/01 -0700, you wrote:
      >Charles,
      >
      >In message 102 you said that a Horsepower can take place in one second. I
      >have been wrestling with this and I guess I'm finally accepting it. I had
      >always thought that lifting 33,000 pounds one foot in one minute actually
      >mint "one minute" or else the rate of power would be different. I knew of
      >course that it could have been lifted in ½ minute but thought the energy
      >expended would then have to be at the rate of 2 Horsepower for ½ minute.

      Although James Watt conducted his tests with actual horses and something on
      the order of 650lbs it was the math that produced the 33000 ft lbs /
      min. IT is more popular these days to use the second as a measure of
      time. So the math offers us the number 550 ft lbs/sec

      >If it turns out that one square yard of the earth's surface actually
      >receives over a thousand watts per second constantly, then it's about 60
      >times what I had always thought. I had thought that the Sun had to shine
      >on it for a full minute to be one Horsepower. Now I find that it only
      >takes one second.

      I don't know the actual power of solar exposure. I do know that the
      silicon cells that I am using produce about 14W / ft^2 That is about 126W
      / yd^2 however they do not convert 450nm blue through UV or anything in
      the long wave IR (>1000nm) or heat.

      >I don't know the efficiency of today's solar cells but 30 years ago they
      >were about 6%. So 6% of 1000 watts per second is about the heat of a 60
      >watt incandescent light bulb continuous.
      >Even with the above losses of around 94% this is still a lot of free
      >energy. Do you know the efficiencies of today's solar cells?

      Just a point of interest. Another list pointed me to a source of screw in
      white LED bulbs for the home. A bulb that consumes 3W and is 50%
      efficient laminates comparabley to a 30W incandescent 5% efficient. This
      is great news although they are a bit costy.
      http://www.theledlight.com/120-VAC-LEDbulbs.html

      >Anyway, I'm trying to accept that 746 Joules per second is the same as 746
      >watts per second.

      OK... 746 joules per second is a rate of change of energy which is
      power at 746W or one horse power.

      A watt per second would be a rate of change in power. Sort of like miles
      per hour is a rate of change in distance. Energy is more like the
      distance. power is more like the speed.




      _________________________________________________________
      Do You Yahoo!?
      Get your free @... address at http://mail.yahoo.com
    • Vikrant Suri
      Dear Sir , ******************************************* Do you know the efficiencies of today s solar cells ******************************************** To only
      Message 2 of 2 , Jun 1, 2001
      • 0 Attachment
        Dear Sir ,

        *******************************************
        Do you know the efficiencies of today's solar cells
        ********************************************

        To only partly participate please check

        http://www.benwiens.com/energy1.html

        I am pasting the relevant portion for your quick view

        *************************************************
        The light from the sun has an average temperament of
        about 6300°K. The carnot-ratio diagram of Fig 26 shows
        that the helmholtz-ratio of sunlight is about 95%.
        This means that theoretically it should be possible to
        convert 95% of the radiant-energy to electricity. In
        actual practice, present day solar cells only convert
        about 11% of the radiant-energy into electricity at
        most. This means that 89% of the remaining sunlight is
        converted into thermal-energy
        *************************************************

        Regards .

        Vikrant Suri


        --- Boyd Cantrell <bmc@...> wrote: > Charles,
        >
        > In message 102 you said that a Horsepower can take
        > place in one second. I
        > have been wrestling with this and I guess I'm
        > finally accepting it. I had
        > always thought that lifting 33,000 pounds one foot
        > in one minute actually
        > mint "one minute" or else the rate of power would be
        > different. I knew of
        > course that it could have been lifted in ½ minute
        > but thought the energy
        > expended would then have to be at the rate of 2
        > Horsepower for ½ minute.
        >
        > If it turns out that one square yard of the earth's
        > surface actually
        > receives over a thousand watts per second
        > constantly, then it's about 60
        > times what I had always thought. I had thought that
        > the Sun had to shine
        > on it for a full minute to be one Horsepower. Now I
        > find that it only
        > takes one second.
        >
        > I don't know the efficiency of today's solar cells
        > but 30 years ago they
        > were about 6%. So 6% of 1000 watts per second is
        > about the heat of a 60
        > watt incandescent light bulb continuous.
        > Even with the above losses of around 94% this is
        > still a lot of free
        > energy. Do you know the efficiencies of today's
        > solar cells?
        >
        > My interest here does not mean that I could prefer
        > solar energy over
        > converting the heat in a single reservoir it into
        > work. That will always
        > be paramount to me simply because the world teaches
        > that it can't be done
        > and I don't believe them.
        >
        > My new interest in Solar energy is finding out that
        > the rate is 1.5
        > Horsepower every single second instead of every
        > minute. This extrapolates
        > out to visualizing what my would-be Apparatus
        > (which is to work in the
        > shade) would do if the input heat exchanger were put
        > out into the sunlight.
        >
        > Anyway, I'm trying to accept that 746 Joules per
        > second is the same as 746
        > watts per second.
        >
        >
        > Boyd
        >
        >
        > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
        > AMBIENTENERGY-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
        >
        >
        >
        > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
        > http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
        >
        >


        =====
        http://www.geocities.com/vikrantsuri3/index.html
        vikrantsuri@...

        ____________________________________________________________
        Do You Yahoo!?
        For regular News updates go to http://in.news.yahoo.com
      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.