The Implosion Motor Based on the Clem Engine

Are you saying you're getting more energy out than you put in? That's not legal you know.

No not yet, I'm saying that the hydraulic motor is causing the input load to decrease due to vacuum that pulls fluid through the hydraulic motor acting on it's own power.

You're going to expend more energy creating your vacuum than you will get out of the vacuum "pulling" your fluid. No free lunch.

Look, there's wires, meters, wooden contraptions, pulleys and belts, it must be true!

Sorry but no wires on this implosion motor.

That looks a lot like that transmission someone was trying to sell....limited slip differential.... It takes energy to create a vacuum....

We've already had this discussion. Is there anything new to add since last time?

Restarting the Richard Clem Engine Project

Richard Clem Engine

Henway and Hammerfor should be able to patent that!

You forgot to add in the power it takes to pump fluid into the upper centrifugal pump. More than 77.8W, I bet.

There is someone who makes money selling you this kit.

Someone who has clearly solved the over unity money yield problem....

Maybe you can get the "turboencabulator guy" to pitch this for you???

Don't know why you voted yourself OT? There are a lot of well educated women and men here. Unfortunately, there are few who thinks the world revolves around them and threatens anyone who doesn't bow down to them.

Don't you ever mention the system needs exerts extra 100w for that 77.8w difference.

Geez, is there an echo in the room?

Don't feed the trolls!

There is no need to repeat what was given in the original post.

What is unclear is the reason for posting it. Over-unity devices simply do not work in this universe; if a system does not have the capacity to do work, then it would be folly to expect work to come out of it at a rate other than zero.

B.S.

So what is BS?

A tornado that creates more energy then anyone can calculate due to very little information of temperature changes and vortex.

Or is it that maybe you can created the same effect in a rotating cyclone that have the same effect as a tornado.

Clearly your comments are so closed minded that no need to make a fool out of yourself!

Move on, don't waste my time kid!

Next!

Tornado's is a poor example of what your wanting to do with your contraption. Tornado's are powered from external forces.

It's time for you to go bye bye

I don't know if anyone else has, but I've just reported to the Admin. for not only rude and insulting but also threatening to "kick ass" on anybody that doesn't agree with him.

Hello,

I came back to see if the battle was still raging.

You can help me answer a question.

I'm having difficulty determining if you are a sadist or a masochist.

On the one hand, you've come here for a third time to inflict this ridiculously outrageous fantasy on the same forum who dismissed you as a fool the first two times you came here, and yet here you are again with the same old worn out BS that got you laughed at twice before, and now again.

Perhaps we are the masochists for participating again.

Anyway, as Nick pointed out, I have nothing better to do all day than sit in front of a screen (not exactly true) and play your silly games.

You'll have to admit that you do offer interesting study to a psychologist or whoever those people are who study deviant behavior.

I stand by my claim that you very likely are the illegitimate offspring of Donald Trump, as I said last year.

I don't know why I let myself feed into his BS other than a good distraction from my mother passing away Dec.20th and now my girlfriend's mother is stage 3(+) cervical cancer. This guy is a real pain in the

Got's to go now as mom in law is on the way to the ER

Sorry to hear of your loss.

He will implode soon enough.

Take care of business.

Good luck.

Here's one for Tommey:

Another abusive and nonsensical post. I recommend that Admin close both the thread and this poster's account.

I just PM Lyn about him, "He has to hit an all time low with his attacks, bring my dead mother and my girlfriend's mom into the subject. I guess I wouldn't be a very good quality control inspector if I didn't have someone p***** off at me, huh?

Another reported post.

Likewise.

This is interesting. I'll take a look as soon as I get a chance. I talked to Richard on the phone back in...hmm. Can't remember exactly now, but it was probably in the early 80s. I'd heard an interview with him on the radio (KRLD, Dallas?) and he was fine to talk to anyone who believed in what he was doing. He was mostly looking for investors, but talked to me anyway. A lot of things have changed with me since then, but I never forgot him.

Do you recognize this headline?

"The Clem engine can not be closed looped according to Tommy Reed"

What breakthrough made you change your mind after three years?

Hi RamConsult,

You're right at that time I did say the Clem engine can not be looped.

What I discover was that the Rim jet theory would not have enough thrust while producing enough PSI and GPM of input energy.

A few months back I discover that it could not be a head pressure but a vacuum that could have pull the fluid through the hydraulic motor like a tornado water spout.

What calculations and/or measurements do you have on any of that?

Agreed, a vacuum will decrease the back pressure on the incoming fluid, in effect pulling the liquid through the rotor. The problem is how does the vacuum get there and how is it maintained? Unfortunately the energy required to drive a vacuum pump that will maintain a decent vacuum has to come from an external source, and that energy comes at the expense of the overall efficiency of the system.

Also you can't just pull a vacuum and expect it to be maintained; after all, a vacuum is the absence of any fluid in the space, and once your working fluid enters the space the vacuum is replaced by water vapor and evaporated oil therefore there is no more vacuum.

If this discussion continues to deteriorate we will have to close it. Please try to keep your comments on topic. Insults and derogatory comments will not be tolerated. Please see the CR4 Rules of Conduct.

I agree, but you also have to turn off your dogs making the first insults!

You have called people "boys", "girls", "jerks", etc. Other people questioned your highly questionable ideas, but few if any have called you personal names. You would be well advised to quit your deceptions about that. Another of your lies is to say "your dogs" to a moderator.

In fact I pitty you working for YEARS on this impossible project is such a loss of energy which you could have invested in something more profitable to you and may be for all of us.

I understand you frustration and I am SINCERELY sorry for you.

Please answer my following question: have you been in school? up to which degree ?

The reason I ask it is the following. During my career as consultant I had many times contacts with inventors presenting ideas which apparently were fantastic and were not feasible as soon as quantitative analysis was done. ALL of them came from not technical activities were NEVER in a technical environment and -as you - believed in their idea. Only ONE of them an older man was correct he payed for the consulting and after a quite long explanation (done at his technical level) accepted and even thanked me for I made him "free" of his obsessions.

Some reacted as you do, considered that I do not understand their thinking which was too deep for a limited mind as mine (according to them).

I am not surprised of your reaction but I do not understand why you perseverate.

Lyn is on the true path asking himself if you are a masochist.

In front of such a resistance I would stopped to stay in touch with those "stupid guys and girls and..." but you, you continue. Does it make you happy to insult?

A true psychologist would ask himself about your mental health.

Another report.

20140130 - presentation by Tommey Reed

Richard Clem's Engine Experiment

The Clem Engine

Gee, that's too bad. A vane motor would probably have been cheaper, too.

BTW, how did it become a "Claim" engine?

And where's the math?

If you want to insult, you know what will happen.

;-)

Those were legitimate comments and questions. Falsely calling them "insults" does not relieve you of any obligation to answer them cogently.

The winky face is insincere.

Do not ask more let him present his quantitative explanations and we can judge after where his errors are.

Ok I will have to take this by steps, so everyone can agree or disagree.

First I like calculated thrust with a simple formula: F=1.57*psi*d*d

So in other words if you have a pressure of 100 psi and a jet id of 0.25

Total thrust would be: 1.57*100*0.25*0.25=9.81lb per jet.

To calculate ft/sec sqrt(32+32*(100*.434)= 52.7ft/sec.

GPM = (pi*r^2)*(52.7*12") = 31.04 cu/in *60 =1862cu/in min/231=8.06GPM per jet.

If all of my calculation are correct and if I had a 18" diameter with 2 jets:

Total for 2 jets=16.12 gpm

Peek rpms = (18" *pi)=56.55in or 4.71ft

Top speed of the diameter of say drum would be:

(52.7ft/sec*60)/4.71ft=671.34 rpms at 100% free spin.

Or at 50% 335.67 rpm with a constant load of 9.81in/lb*9"=7.36ft/lb

Total HP at 50% load =7.36*335.67/5252=0.47 hp

This does not include air friction.

For starters, the first formula is incorrect. It should have the factor (pi)/4, which is about 0.7854 rather than 1.57.

Not! pressure in a fluid is mass moving out word based on water rockets math.

http://www.angelfire.com/ab8/expert00/pop_bottle_rocket.html

My test to verify the mathematics.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1XBOQ8aoJ-s

Seems like someone is having problem with liquid pressure thrust already.

Tom 1, you are 0.

bring it on...

I have to be correct in this case you are wrong. Put on paper the equation and you will see that it is π/2.

F= d(m*v)/dt → F=ρ*Q*v → F= A*ρ*v^2 = π/4*d^2*ρ*v^2=π/4*d^2*(2*Δp)

But neither the vena contracta nor the loss coefficient are considered and for sharp orifices they are in the range of 0.6.

So that all the rest is based on an error this being at the 1st line.

Yeah, I looked at that later and saw the discrepancy between thrust and pressure. Maybe the genius will capitalize on that, in which case you may regret this post.

Nice move. You just rejected a post that actually supported your position. Not that you would ever know the difference.

Good answer (the voting system seems to be saturated at the moment; no one has ever explained why.)

CR4 Admin - Deleted Post

Personal attacks are not tolerated on CR4, and add nothing to the conversation.

CR4 Admin - Deleted Post

Personal attacks are not tolerated on CR4, and add nothing to the conversation.

If I understand correctly,in the second photo you show an impeller, a closed impeller, in that there in no fluid outlet?

I'm assuming that the fluid comes in from the back side through the slots and drives the impeller, but:

1. does the fluid travel up the funnel shape?

2. where does it go?

3. what work does it do?

You seem to have reduced the power consumed by 78W. But the device has done no work.

Where is the work?

I hope this leads somewhere productive, soon.

Hi Lyn,

The extra power is coming from my design that pulls fluid upward from the lower support shaft.

Almost like a vacuum where the first impeller primes the hydraulic motor and exits up the the upper centrifugal pump that creates a vacuum on the lower section of the system.

The vacuum acts like a tornado that creates a negative pressure on the fluid and pulls more then the pump is producing at the same speed.

This vacuum acts on the motor and wants to increase it's rpm due to match the GPM coming out in the upper centrifugal pump.

One important fact is that it's not rotating in a fluid, so the only drag is air.

Tom.

There IS NO "extra power" here. None. You have reduced the power required to pump the fluid by some miniscule amount.

Nothing more, and I'm not too sure of that.

The contraption is not doing any work.

Hear is the special pump that only allows the lower tube to pick up the fluid only as the lower pump moves fluid into the hydraulic motor.

This is like a flywheel effect, all the negative is created in the rotation inertia with out effecting fluid pump load.

This is the lower pump that pick up fluid and created centrifugal inertia without any fluid loads.

Tom.

Question, do you all think a torque converter takes a lot of energy to rotate while it's filled with transmission fluid?

How about if you allow fluid to exit at 90deg while sucking up more fluid from the center?

It take no more energy due to the fact it's not a pump as you may think it is.

Tom

That is not true--not really how pumps work. Also, you appear to be confusing pumps with motors. (Although some devices can be used either way.)

I disagree.

Most hydraulic motor can act as a pump as well.

That's what I said, so why do you disagree? The problem is that you don't seem to know which usage is which.

It's both, when starting the system the motor act as a pump, once then fluid reach a point of saturation the centrifugal inertia increase the fluid speed to fly outward at 90deg.

These is where the tornado effect is created.

This was seen in many of my past experiment, but it was using rim jets pressure instead of vacuum.

Once the rpms reach a point equal to the thrust speed, the gear pump dropped by a fact of 75% while jet thrust was a constant.

Simple test prove my point at a constant head pressure while not moving, and drops after rotating.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D2L_PBGgHZw

Tom.

More pure gibberish. You keep using nonstandard and meaningless terms.

YOU ARE NOT DOING ANY WORK, and you are putting .45 HP into the front end.

Show me some output!

Other wise, it's Laws of Physics 1; Tommey 0.

You are not gaining any supporters here.