It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Sound-powered Device?

page: 1
0
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 8 2004 @ 11:49 AM
link   
I had another one of my thoughts today...

I was wondering about a sound-powered device.
Sound is all around us and, in a way it is energy (vibrating particles in the air). Is there any way of harnessing the energy from sound and say, making a small device work (I dunno - light, watch, anything). Or is the energy there to minute to be harnessed and used in any useful way?

Thoughts?




posted on Jan, 8 2004 @ 12:54 PM
link   
A friend and I were in the process of making a sound powered radio... laugh all you want, it did work (we went on to make self powered electrical motors, too... they're still running with no energy lose).

Anyway, about the sound powered radio... we were almost finished when I saw an article, I believe in Popular Mechanics, the scientists did in fact make one already... consisted of a helium filled cylinder, and a few other details. Bastards beat me to the punch... so we scrapped our design.

I still have that article... I'll post it later tonight, if you'd like.



posted on Jan, 8 2004 @ 01:02 PM
link   

Originally posted by soothsayer
A friend and I were in the process of making a sound powered radio... laugh all you want, it did work (we went on to make self powered electrical motors, too... they're still running with no energy lose).


Just a clarification, are you claiming to have built a perpetual motion machine? Apologies if I read this incorrectly.



posted on Jan, 8 2004 @ 01:05 PM
link   
Soothsayer,

please put up the info, I have a great deal of interest in acoustics.

I don't think a device using alternative energy source is a perpetual motion machine?



posted on Jan, 8 2004 @ 01:23 PM
link   
yeah that does sound real interesting



posted on Jan, 11 2004 @ 08:51 AM
link   
Sorry it took so long, busy couple days... anyway...

SEPTEMBER 1999, Popular Mechanics

ENGINE HAS NO MOVING PARTS

An engine with no moving parts has been developed by scientists as the Los Alamos National Laboratory in New Mexico.

Called a thermoacoustic Stiriling engine, it works by using externally applied heat to create traveling acoustic waves in helium. The resulting pressure fluctuations cause a resonator to vibrate at 80 Hz. This "sound" is then converted into electricity by a microphonelike electracoustic transducer.

The 700-watt prototype is as efficient as an automobile engine.

************************************

Yes, my friend and I did create a perpetual engine... it was rather simple. Anyone can do it!

Take one boat/marine battery (these are good because they recharge on a slow trickle method). Hook it up to any small engine; we used an electric motor from a table saw. This is the tricky part: somehow afix a pulley onto a rod, onto the motor's spindle. Mount this motor assembly onto something sturdy. Using an automotive belt, attach pulley/belt/ automotive alternator (an alternator from a car is used because it recharges at a higher rate). Attach alternator back to the marine battery!

So what you have now is a constantly recharging motor. The Battery slow trickles, the alternator recharges at a higher rate (thus, producing more electricity). The alternator will only recharge what it has to, so there is no worry about having the battery explode.

We are in the process of adding additional pulleys, for more alternators, but are figuring if we'd need a larger motor for the extra load. The way I see it, we could run alot of basic house hold items off of one small motor!

************************************

The sound powered engine we were going to make was simply parts from a radio and a telephone. Ever hear the feedback from a microphone being too close to a connected speaker? This is the effect we were going after.



posted on Jan, 11 2004 @ 08:56 AM
link   
i think the subject says it all. why hasn't an evil corporation or more specifically, micr0$0ft, bought you out and then turned your innovation into something crappy or labelled it as their own.



posted on Jan, 11 2004 @ 09:05 AM
link   
We started on this venture, becuase we recalled hearing about water-powered engines designed in the 1970's... and the fact our science teacher from high school said a self-powered engine could not work.

It has been running for quite some time, but the more we thought into it, the more we realized that someone else surely must have come up with the same design as us. It is too easy of a motor to build, you know?

We were planning on advertising it to major corporate offices, but figured would they really buy it? Wouldn't they already have one? And, what would be to say that they wouldn't copy our idea, make it their own, and remove the evidence?

At least now or motor is open in the public records, to prove we did it first... Thank you ATS!



posted on Jan, 11 2004 @ 09:16 AM
link   
That isnt a perpetual motion machine. Its just running down a battery slowly.



posted on Jan, 11 2004 @ 09:27 AM
link   
Technically speaking any microphone or speaker transducer should always be generating a small amount of energy from ambient sounds.

The problem is that a speaker transducer is a very inefficient motor, a microphone or headphone is more efficient but results in lower energy output.

I think the typical speaker transducer is only about 10% efficient eg. power output vs. power input. Although I can conceive of a more efficient transducer being produced such as those that detect earthquakes for example.

what would be interesting is to reverse the process whereby the transducer is put near a sea shore for example with high ambient sound results in heat being produced within the helium.

Actually gases have been used in past as exotic types of high fidelity speakers but the cost and complexity and unreliability quashed the idea for the most part.



posted on Jan, 11 2004 @ 09:35 AM
link   
I once thought of an idea for perpetual motion. Although due to friction nothing can be truly perpetual, right? Well my idea, as a 13 year old, was to have either a triangular setup of magnets and in the centre have rotating four magnets and ninety degrees to each other. Or it may have been a square with magnets in the right angles and a triangular kind of set up. Personally, for anywhere near perpetual motion I think magnets must be the key. And does anyone feel like pointing out why my designs wouldn't work?



posted on Jan, 11 2004 @ 09:52 AM
link   
Any design were there is energy expended or consumed would not achieve the desired outcome of perpetual device.

In terms of sound energy which this thread started discussing, I see no reason why that device would not work but it seems a round about way to achieve an ends and it does not look very efficient. Remember that heat is an energy source that is not very portable and is also usually a high energy consumer itself. In the case of using geothermal for example the best model known is simply that of a steam engine or turbine using steam. I am not aware of a better system.

My understanding is that these are the major energy sources: motion, heat, light, sound, magnetic, and gravity. Whenever you convert from one energy source to annother you incur loses of course.



posted on Jan, 11 2004 @ 09:59 AM
link   
I'm not sure I understand what you are explaining stevo, How do you propose the magnets would keep it moving?

As far as as using sound as a means to generate electricity. Neo is right, this technically happens in Dynamic Mics all the time. But these are extremely low outputs.

A possible reason that sound-powered generators are not really practical is that sound generally carries very little energy with it. Solar/wind/tidal power would seem to have a higher energy output.



posted on Jan, 11 2004 @ 10:01 AM
link   
lol what about a moving, bright, noisy, hot magnet suspended in a vacuum? sorry...






posted on Jan, 11 2004 @ 10:12 AM
link   
I know they created a fridge that cools by using only sounds waves.
WEll a tiny amount of electricity to use the speakers. You cant hear the sound waves i dont think....i'm pretty sure they are outside teh human ability to hear them...but they make the molecules/atoms vibrate and they get colder. So it's a fridge that cools via sound.


But there is some things i dont trust with sound even sound we cant hear becasue it still damages our bodies non-the-less



posted on Jan, 11 2004 @ 10:13 AM
link   
You mean a magnet suspended above another magnet steve?


(Neo, if we go further there is only 2 types of energy, Potential and Kinetic.)



posted on Jan, 11 2004 @ 10:34 AM
link   


You mean a magnet suspended above another magnet steve?


Think of it in two dimensions. A square with a magnet in each corner with a triangle with magnets on the outside of every corner. The triangle is suspended in the exact centre by some kind of pinwheel / axle... whatever... the theory behind it was that the magnet would never be going slow enough to stop at one point. And the forces of the other magnets behind/in front of it would cause it to keep spinning. Hmm... the more I type, the less it makes sense.



posted on Jan, 11 2004 @ 10:46 AM
link   
Energy loss points would be the friction from the axle (obviously) and as the magnets spun they would induce eddy currents in each other, which would in turn be lost as heat.



posted on Jan, 11 2004 @ 10:57 AM
link   
you are able to make generators...that make more energy than they use.
Either in Nexus or NewDawn magazine.
There are Magneic generators that produce osmethingl ike 3.75 times more energy than they use.

Even in high school i knew it would be possible to make it work.



posted on Jan, 11 2004 @ 11:22 AM
link   


you are able to make generators...that make more energy than they use.


Can you explain to me how you can gain energy from one these things? The way I see it... y = x - friction
where x = initial energy expended
friction = ummm... i'll let you think about that one
y = the final energy, after heat and friction have taken their toll...
so this is like saying there is negative friction... unless I have the whole idea badly wrong



about time i got my signature organised too




top topics



 
0
<<   2 >>

log in

join