Questions about the technique - all ideas under license - CC0 1.0

General Forums Off-topic Chat
1

Hello.
When it was still in the distant USSR, we had a “Vityaz” vacuumcleaner at home, and I was surprised that the outlet hose was movingfrom the air pressure. By this principle, an inflatable ball flies,if you open the hole - jet thrust.

  • what’s the point, you ask?
  • everything is simple - heavy hum, complexity and dimensions of modern quadrocopters. To reduce the heavy hum from the screws, it is necessary to lower the engine speed, increasing the torque, and to increase the screws. And this is a big design, and quite complicated. So - why not make one powerful engine in the body (the turbine is soundproofed), and let out the pumped air through four branch pipes, narrowed at the end? The hum is less, the complexity is smaller, and the size is smaller, like the cost of the whole design. Ideal solution for a copter carrying a human… as well as simple.
    Do you think this is a constructively better option, or is it better to have a strong hum with four screws (or more)?

It occurred to me when I looked at this video:

It is a pity that Leonardo da Vinci did not live to see these days.

I realized that the hum from the screws from 1:11 is not very big. Butcame out in thinkingon a smaller size with a small hum - jet thrust of compressed air.

Thank you for attention.

p.s. and the man flew into the air, kicking the pedals with his feet.

2

Starting launch platform for rockets.
Once upon a time, even in my Soviet childhood, I was interested in cosmonautics … I even wanted to make my rocket - well, like all the boys. Then read about the project (theoretical) of Konstantin Eduardovich Tsiolkovsky, perhaps already a contemporary of the developed - a space elevator. Even NASA is developing such a topic. But the problem with the weight / strength of the ropes, is now virtually indecisive, and very expensive.
Theoretically, it is possible to raise the platform to the stratosphere, even the launching platform - but this is only 40 km, but need more than 300 km. Cables, of course, to facilitate their weight, can be supported by helium balls - after a certain distance. But this is only a theory … and only up to the stratosphere, where helium has a lift force, and above the earth’s gravity it decreases not so much as to think about a significant reduction in the weight of the cables.
So I saw the rocket’s fuel consumption for 1s of flight - more than 2 tons. And now imagine the launch platform with a height of 1 km, on which the primary acceleration engines are installed - ground, platform. And when the rocket starts, those few seconds can be taken away from the Earth. A few seconds for the rocket, it’s a few extra tons of cargo in space - and that’s a lot of money. Fuel for 1, and then it is possible and 2 km is spent at the expense of land / platform rocket boosters. 5 seconds saved - at least 10 tons of weight in the rocket. The price of fuel on Earth is tens of thousands of times less than the same weight on a rocket. And this project is already real. In the world there is a building of almost 1 km high, but this is a residential building, but for the cosmodrome, it is possible to make an initial launching platform with a mine - 2, 3 km.

The principle is simple - in the height of the platform, the rocket is accelerated by the platform rocket jet engines, and then the rocket goes on its own. This is like a pre-elevator or pre-stratospheric project for saving space flights.
This terrible struggle for seconds for a rocket, at the cost of billions on Earth.

How do you think, how cost-effective and real it is? - you were all children, everyone wanted (or half) to fly away.

3

Hello.
Peace to you.

I’ll tell you how this World could look different for a long time, and qualitatively differently.
As you know, modern cars, these are more internal combustion engines, and only a small fraction - electric cars.
The car with ICE is not only a complicated design of the engine itself, but also quite complex - the clutch mechanism, the gearbox (all types), and the transmission with the differential. And about the expenditure of Earth resources and problems with ecology - the question deserves a separate and expanded topic.
The problems of modern electric cars are also very weighty - a long battery charge, and a very complicated design, like the price.
Exit - electric cars with the principle of the motor-wheel - the electric motor in the wheel itself, and the electric differential on the steering cardan according to the principle of the accelerator knobs in the electric scooter (I myself came up with such a solution) - two back-expanded regulators on the semiconductor. And … removable batteries that can change at gas stations, such as refueling with gasoline or diesel fuel.
Even with inexpensive lead-acid (gel) traction batteries with 500 recharge cycles, the savings will be like benefits, but the batteries have a better quality - up to 1000 recharge cycles. But after guaranteed recharge cycles, they continue to serve, just gradually the total capacity is lost.
For the buyer, you only need to buy a car once, and changing the battery is permanent - in the price of the battery charge (shift) include dumping batteries, electricity itself and personnel services (profit). In this case, the buyer only changes the battery quickly - like the wheels on a sports car (an electric forklift), and does not worry about their wear and tear - in general. The battery packs can be of different types, as well as the price category - can even ionolithium - premium class (less weight, and more volume) - for cool cars.
The hull for starters can be manufactured on the principle of modern Lamborghini or Porsche - plastic, simply instead of carbon fiber, not expensive fiberglass. And then pure aluminum.
The question is also the kinetic charge in the case of accidents - the more speed and heavier the object, the greater the fracture strength in case of accidents. And then there is an easy body, few details, and only battery heavy, but they can be in the shuttle and dive under the car in a collision. If even at high speed to push light objects, the force of destruction will be minimal.
I’ve already counted the resource of one car for a light city taxi by a minimum, and laid it out on blender3d.org.ua, but as the topic got lost, I can not even find it.
Basic electric car, the price is 10 - 12K $. And no costs for oil, gasoline, maintenance (battery servicing refueling), filters, wear of complex mechanics … The very motor - wheel is very simple and reliable enough and not expensive - if it burns out, you will not spend much.
On this principle, you can do sports cars, and the dynamics of electric motors (torque at the start) on the head above the mechanics (basic and advanced models) - it is issued all actually at the start.
With the manufacture of such a car, any small company can handle, and not just megaconcern. A bit more complicated than gyro-scooter.

I think you guessed it yourself, after reading this, why there is no such thing - oil, oil, money, money, mega corporations and oil tycoons …

Thank you for attention.

p.s. then I’ll try to calculate the profitability on the basis of inexpensive Chinese batteries with 500 cycles, and profitability is in everything - from saving on fuel and maintenance, and right up to the global Ecology. You can try to calculate yourself, this is middle-class mathematics, if only your forearms do not scratched and you do not want to leave …

4

Hello.
Peace to you.
Here I describe my idea more broadly, and it seems to me that this makes sense. License for the idea of CC0 1.0, if it is needed.

ARM modular desktop PC
As you know, the main computer processors are on the x386 architecture. But for a long time already there are productive ARM processors. They are used in smartphones, tablets, and quite powerful for 3d graphics in compatibility with graphics chips.
So, if develop a single universal case, the size of the start is slightly more than 15.4 "(laptop screen), then it can put a board with the principle of replacing components, as in classic computers - a removable processor, RAM, video accelerator, SSD in the form of simple SD drives, and even with a RAID0 disk array controller (2x64GB flash drive in parallel mode = 128GB double data transfer (bus) drive - DDR principle).
On the body make the technological holes for - the camera main (back cover), front camera (web), microphone, for touchpad (back cover), speakers, mini jack, USB … and at the bottom connector for dock station, for - with additional battery (solution - laptop), and for power transfer and can even data - audio, video …
A person can buy a case, a motherboard, a processor, RAM, a video card, and flash memory, a screen not expensive, and a keyboard with mice - at a minimum. Everything, for him, a personal computer for the office is ready. But since the 4x core ARM processor is not very expensive, it can even play computer games, not top-end graphics.
If you buy a touchpad module on the back cover, you get a tablet, even without a touch screen. Which is cheaper - a 15.4 “touch module, or technically a touchpad? Probably the last one.” Such a solution was already a long time ago in some kind of laptop (placing a touchpad on the laptop’s body (screen), it seems like a copyrite note for lawyers). That is, you can get a 15.4 "tablet similarity and not expensive, but you can also buy a screen with the same body, even with AMOLED® matrix, and a sensor module, as well as more powerful components - which is generally super.
Alas, for mobile, especially top-end smartphone solutions, this is actually not possible - very high density of integration schemes, but if you do not produce more than ergonomic models, then the modular principle can be there, but not from desktop solutions.
That is, to develop a single platform for everyone and to give people the opportunity to upgrade (modules / modules) - both main (CPU, RAM, SSD, Video card) and additional (microphone, cameras, wireless modules …) and even change over time the screen, for a better and optimal solution for yourself.
Saving the Earth’s resources, due to the frequent change of the main bearing parts, as well as the creation of a secondary market for second-hand components - this is a plus. Creating a unique and flexible solution is also a plus, due to the choice from the most inexpensive, and right up to the top solution. Super transformability - from a monoblock PC, like a tablet (with a touchpad), a laptop (in the version with a keyboard dock station, and even with an additional battery), and right up to a steep tablet with all wireless modules, even a cell phone - and this is a very big plus and huge prospects in the market, and already up to mini servers in the top solution. And a small plus - energy saving, ARM solution as you know, always takes less electricity …
I think that such a decision has long been brewing in the market, I just sounded it - it happens that because of many competitions the thread of logic (True way) is lost with the concepts of a common platform, a common standard. If everyone starts to make their own platform for themselves, it will not be for the benefit of consumers, and will result in unjustified competition, and as a result - the inhibition of development.
What program framework can there be for such a solution? From Microsoft® Windows®, Android®, and right up to Linux® of all versions - this question is not relevant now, as decisive.
There is nothing super-grand, but not petty - the market would have universal ARM modular PCs, with a price range from the starting (office), and right up to the TOP (gaming) with a cool audio system. And everything is very promising. And to take into account not yet the cutback of microelectronics, as in modern smartphones, for a limited space (hull) - and other processors, like video cards - more transistors on the crystal, the bus is always developed with a margin.

Thank you for attention.

p.s. Blender 3d 2.79 who then has an ARM solution;).