powernoodle
Flashlight Enthusiast
I saw one on Gilligan's Island. The Professor is still alive. You could track him down and maybe he would make one for you.
best regards
best regards
Pedal powered generator?
- Thread starter paulr
- Start date
Help Support Candle Power Flashlight Forum
UncleFester
Flashaholic*,
markdi
Power is the rate of energy transfer (or "consumption"). A watt is a unit of RATE of energy transfer. Even instanteous power. Power is rated in watts; heaters, amplifiers, etc.
Something like a watt second or kilowatt hour is a "piece" of ENERGY. It is basically a transfer rate multiplied by time. Hence the name watt-hour.
Power is the rate of energy transfer (or "consumption"). A watt is a unit of RATE of energy transfer. Even instanteous power. Power is rated in watts; heaters, amplifiers, etc.
Something like a watt second or kilowatt hour is a "piece" of ENERGY. It is basically a transfer rate multiplied by time. Hence the name watt-hour.
UncleFester
Flashaholic*,
I think that one on Gilligans Island could generate enough power to make artificial lightning. Impressive.
markdi
Flashlight Enthusiast
gee thank's guys in high scool all I studied was basket weaving.
and in college I studied advanced basket weaving
so now I know what a watt is thank you
and in college I studied advanced basket weaving
so now I know what a watt is thank you
turbodog
Flashaholic
[ QUOTE ]
markdi said:
gee thank's guys in high scool all I studied was basket weaving.
and in college I studied advanced basket weaving
so now I know what a watt is thank you
[/ QUOTE ]
Maybe now you can move onto punctuation.
/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/tongue.gif
markdi said:
gee thank's guys in high scool all I studied was basket weaving.
and in college I studied advanced basket weaving
so now I know what a watt is thank you
[/ QUOTE ]
Maybe now you can move onto punctuation.
/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/tongue.gif
KevinL
Flashlight Enthusiast
[ QUOTE ]
3rd_shift said:
I would suggest a laptop for this idea to work.
#1 It uses less power than a desktop, which would be better suited for the majority of us couch potatos. /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/wink.gif
Pedaling would be just easy enough to allow typing and mousing around while exercising.
#2 It comes with a rechargeable battery already.
#3 It's portable for outdoor exercising too.
#4 Ideal for places where there is no other power source.
[/ QUOTE ]
And it has what is effectively an uninterruptible power supply, because the moment you get too tired and decide to quit pedaling, the power will go out, but the laptop will automatically transition to battery power so you don't lose the post you were composing /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grinser2.gif
3rd_shift said:
I would suggest a laptop for this idea to work.
#1 It uses less power than a desktop, which would be better suited for the majority of us couch potatos. /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/wink.gif
Pedaling would be just easy enough to allow typing and mousing around while exercising.
#2 It comes with a rechargeable battery already.
#3 It's portable for outdoor exercising too.
#4 Ideal for places where there is no other power source.
[/ QUOTE ]
And it has what is effectively an uninterruptible power supply, because the moment you get too tired and decide to quit pedaling, the power will go out, but the laptop will automatically transition to battery power so you don't lose the post you were composing /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grinser2.gif
markdi
Flashlight Enthusiast
i can weave a hell of a basket
turbodog
Flashaholic
[ QUOTE ]
markdi said:
i can weave a hell of a basket
[/ QUOTE ]
/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/buttrock.gif
markdi said:
i can weave a hell of a basket
[/ QUOTE ]
/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/buttrock.gif
Darell
Flashaholic
Never mind. I guess the question was rhetorical.
UncleFester
Flashaholic*,
Darell, I believe you're right.
yuandrew
Flashlight Enthusiast
Great thread, reminds me of something.
I went to a home/garden show a while back and So-Cal Edison was there with a Demostration trailer. One of the things I recalled was a bicycle generator. The generator itself was some sort of alternator with a roller pressed against the back wheel of the bike and there was a frame that held the bike up stationary while you pedal.
Now, the generator iteslf was hooked directly (No batteries for a buffer) to a switchboard that had 4 incandescent bulbs and 4 flourescent bulbs on it. The thing is that it is "easier" to power the flourescent lamps than the incandescent bulbs. You would pedal and a partner starts switching on the lights one at a time and you could "feel" the load increasing as more lights are turned on.
As I've stated earlier, running 4 CFLS uses less energy than 4 incandescents. Of course, I fliped on all the lights to see what happens (All 4 cfls and all 4 incandescents) and that made the bike extreamly hard to pedal.
I went to a home/garden show a while back and So-Cal Edison was there with a Demostration trailer. One of the things I recalled was a bicycle generator. The generator itself was some sort of alternator with a roller pressed against the back wheel of the bike and there was a frame that held the bike up stationary while you pedal.
Now, the generator iteslf was hooked directly (No batteries for a buffer) to a switchboard that had 4 incandescent bulbs and 4 flourescent bulbs on it. The thing is that it is "easier" to power the flourescent lamps than the incandescent bulbs. You would pedal and a partner starts switching on the lights one at a time and you could "feel" the load increasing as more lights are turned on.
As I've stated earlier, running 4 CFLS uses less energy than 4 incandescents. Of course, I fliped on all the lights to see what happens (All 4 cfls and all 4 incandescents) and that made the bike extreamly hard to pedal.
jtr1962
Flashaholic
[ QUOTE ]
turbodog said:
I person in decent shape can output about 175 watts or so on a bike for an hour or more.
I consider myself a "sport" class racer and have measured output of 325 watts or so for 8+ hours at a stretch.
Lance would likely hit 50% above that level.
[/ QUOTE ]
All of that is quite true based on my personal experiences-I'm 41 and consider myself a strong amateur rider. I've never raced so I have no idea where I would be compared to professionals. As of late (the last year or two) I'll admit to getting somewhat out of shape thanks to long periods of bad weather (ice, snow, heat) where I couldn't ride, but I can get back to my peak with a few months of consistent riding.
I've never measured my output on one of those fancy machines but I usually ride in the 20 to 25 mph range, and I don't go into any kind of aerodynamic position because it's hurts my back for any length of time. Based on my coast-down rates and the combined mass of myself and my bicycle it takes roughly 8 lbs of force to maintain 22 mph in the position I usually ride in. This equates to 0.47 HP, or about 350 watts. When I'm feeling good and riding regularly I can more or less ride in the low 20s for at least an hour. Of course, I never average that on a ride thanks to stoplights and other obstacles. Accounting for all that, I might average 19 mph on a very good ride, and 14 or 15 on an average one. Anyway, this more or less confirms that someone in decent shape can put out far more than the 0.1 HP mentioned earlier in this thread.
As for peak power, I've accelerated from a dead stop to 30 mph in 11 seconds. Kinetic energy at 30 mph for a mass of 95 kg (myself + my bike) is 8540 joules. Thus, I'm peaking at 8540/11 or 777 watts, not even accounting for wind drag. Accounting for that, I'd put my peak at closer to 1000 to 1100 watts. BTW, I do go into a more aero position for these acceleration tests. If not, I'd be using on the order of 750 watts or more just overcoming the resistance at 30 mph.
The only thing I take issue with is the part about Lance (or anyone else) being able to output 50% more than you do. Most of the top professional riders seem to be able to maintain 31 or 32 mph for 1 hour. They also have much better aerodynamics than the average person can afford, including bike, helmets, and clothing fine tuned for their exact size, shape, and riding style. Because of that, I'd say we're probably looking at closer to 400 watts to maintain the speeds they do. Not a whole lot of difference between you, turbodog, and Lance in terms of power output, but then again often races are won by margins of seconds. A difference in output of only 10 watts could easily mean those few seconds. A difference of 50 watts would mean you're blown out of the water, at least in terms of professional racing.
Probably no difference at all in terms of peak power between you, I, or Lance. The only difference might be that he could maintain it longer than you, or especially I, could.
turbodog said:
I person in decent shape can output about 175 watts or so on a bike for an hour or more.
I consider myself a "sport" class racer and have measured output of 325 watts or so for 8+ hours at a stretch.
Lance would likely hit 50% above that level.
[/ QUOTE ]
All of that is quite true based on my personal experiences-I'm 41 and consider myself a strong amateur rider. I've never raced so I have no idea where I would be compared to professionals. As of late (the last year or two) I'll admit to getting somewhat out of shape thanks to long periods of bad weather (ice, snow, heat) where I couldn't ride, but I can get back to my peak with a few months of consistent riding.
I've never measured my output on one of those fancy machines but I usually ride in the 20 to 25 mph range, and I don't go into any kind of aerodynamic position because it's hurts my back for any length of time. Based on my coast-down rates and the combined mass of myself and my bicycle it takes roughly 8 lbs of force to maintain 22 mph in the position I usually ride in. This equates to 0.47 HP, or about 350 watts. When I'm feeling good and riding regularly I can more or less ride in the low 20s for at least an hour. Of course, I never average that on a ride thanks to stoplights and other obstacles. Accounting for all that, I might average 19 mph on a very good ride, and 14 or 15 on an average one. Anyway, this more or less confirms that someone in decent shape can put out far more than the 0.1 HP mentioned earlier in this thread.
As for peak power, I've accelerated from a dead stop to 30 mph in 11 seconds. Kinetic energy at 30 mph for a mass of 95 kg (myself + my bike) is 8540 joules. Thus, I'm peaking at 8540/11 or 777 watts, not even accounting for wind drag. Accounting for that, I'd put my peak at closer to 1000 to 1100 watts. BTW, I do go into a more aero position for these acceleration tests. If not, I'd be using on the order of 750 watts or more just overcoming the resistance at 30 mph.
The only thing I take issue with is the part about Lance (or anyone else) being able to output 50% more than you do. Most of the top professional riders seem to be able to maintain 31 or 32 mph for 1 hour. They also have much better aerodynamics than the average person can afford, including bike, helmets, and clothing fine tuned for their exact size, shape, and riding style. Because of that, I'd say we're probably looking at closer to 400 watts to maintain the speeds they do. Not a whole lot of difference between you, turbodog, and Lance in terms of power output, but then again often races are won by margins of seconds. A difference in output of only 10 watts could easily mean those few seconds. A difference of 50 watts would mean you're blown out of the water, at least in terms of professional racing.
Probably no difference at all in terms of peak power between you, I, or Lance. The only difference might be that he could maintain it longer than you, or especially I, could.
idleprocess
Flashaholic
I believe that the "0.10 HP" figure was determined comparing the work done in a day by a horse vs a human in a variety of agricultural situations (the origin of the term "horsepower").
Continuous cycling is very advantageous for humans as opposed to digging holes, operating wheat mills, pulling loads, plowing fields, etc.
Continuous cycling is very advantageous for humans as opposed to digging holes, operating wheat mills, pulling loads, plowing fields, etc.
jtr1962
Flashaholic
Yes, cycling is more advantageous because you're not expending energy standing up or moving your entire body up and down, as in the other activities. 0.10 HP average over an entire day sounds about right for a reasonably fit but non-athletic person.
1 HP was similarly derived from the power output an average horse could do continuously. Like humans, the horse can exceed its average power by an order of magnitude or more, but only for fairly short durations. As I calculated in my last post, I can manage perhaps close to 1.5 HP, but only for maybe 15 seconds. A strong horse could put out 1.5 HP for quite a few hours before tiring.
1 HP was similarly derived from the power output an average horse could do continuously. Like humans, the horse can exceed its average power by an order of magnitude or more, but only for fairly short durations. As I calculated in my last post, I can manage perhaps close to 1.5 HP, but only for maybe 15 seconds. A strong horse could put out 1.5 HP for quite a few hours before tiring.
Mark_van_Gorkom
Enlightened
Bear in mind that you get much warmer on a stationary bike! 5 minutes at 300 Watt leaves me utterly drenched in sweat. Best to keep at a steady and sedate pace, and get a mesh seat for your computer (as found on many recumbents).
That 600 dollar machine looks hugely overpriced: methinks any halfway competent mechanic (sadly, that excludes me) can construct something for a fraction of that price, and from better components too (those cranks look especialy cr*ppy).
There's another (even more expensive, I'm afraid) ready made contraption, wich includes a work table with bike saddle attached, but I've lost the link.
Mark van Gorkom.
That 600 dollar machine looks hugely overpriced: methinks any halfway competent mechanic (sadly, that excludes me) can construct something for a fraction of that price, and from better components too (those cranks look especialy cr*ppy).
There's another (even more expensive, I'm afraid) ready made contraption, wich includes a work table with bike saddle attached, but I've lost the link.
Mark van Gorkom.
I'm still interested in this, I just let it go by for a while because of other stuff I've been doing. I never got around to checking libraries for that book, so I just decided to take a chance and order it from one of the online dealers ($9.45 including shipping). I hope it's the right book. If it's not, maybe it will be interesting anyway.
Yeah, I agree that the $600 thing is ridiculous. It would be a good deal at $49.95 and I'd probably buy it at $100. As it is, I'll look towards homemade possibilities.
Yeah, I agree that the $600 thing is ridiculous. It would be a good deal at $49.95 and I'd probably buy it at $100. As it is, I'll look towards homemade possibilities.
Similar threads
Latest posts
-
-
Thrunite rocks !!! Whats your favorite brand ?!?- Latest: Chauncey Gardiner
-
-
-
-
-
