Atmosphere Powered Car 

Wow what a smart reply

Oh btw first reply!!

the winding up of the car can use any power, but as long as what makes it go is air it is air powered

Make it a submarine Tom! Put in whatever energy it takes to draw the vacuum, then drop it into a pool. Next rig it up to a propeller and I think you can figure out the rest. Technical caveat: if one pulls hard enough, the rubber plunger cap will pull off. This has many applications for offshore energy generation. Think of the thousands of pounds of pressure which deep water exerts. This should be explored.

"Atmosphere powered" strongly implies that it derives its power from the atmosphere, not that it uses the atmosphere as a temporary energy storage. It basically implies something like the Atmos Clock. "Rubber band powered" doesn't imply the same thing even though it is worded identically because it's obvious that there is no way to extract energy from a rubber band without putting energy in yourself first. With the atmosphere you can (admittedly it's a tiny amount but still).

I'm pretty sure absolutely nothing would happen or, depending on the vacuum in the syringe, it might pop the plunger out would be interesting to see.

What I'd be really interested in seeing would be a vacuum chamber large enough to disprove the "theory" (and I use that word very loosely in this context) that rockets can't work in a vacuum.

Sure Cody! I can send one to your UPS box? Any maximum size constraints to fit your vacuum chamber?

Cody'sLab yay cody is here

Is there an update to this? :P

We need a real one

Legitimate reason

lol

That would only apply to a combustion engine. Low atmosphic change would charge the atmosphere car. Combustion on the other hand does not favour low pressure. Electric would be fine too. And solar works on sunny and cloudy days double to half, at any pressure... only the combustion suffers, at low pressure.

*atmosphere power* I'll let myself out

That’d mean there are live horses powering your car. Uh oh

@@diamondtermite2187 you still use horses to power your car? I assume its very expensive.

Insert Tokyo Drift music XD

@@austin3013 ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-XCiDuy4mrWU.html

Deja vu

That chattering sounds like it's mostly just understeering to me... However cool it would be if it did actually drift 😅 Good luck recovering from that with your throttle literally stuck wide open.

Front wheels are not perfectly parallel, and with ruber they are fighting each other. He should put ruber only on one front wheel (for example right wheel if the turns are left), so the left wheel can slide a bit.

knoxieman His job is my dream

Roll model is very right.

Heck I'm 32 and I'm inspired. :P

*role

You're

Explain?

Tamahagane understeer is the term for when you try to turn a given amount but there is not enough grip and you just slide instead of turning

@@bobmcboblin can be solved by braking before turns yes

His front wheels also turned the same angle in a curve even though the outside wheel has to turn less far than the inner wheel so it starts to slip sideways

@@manitoba-op4jx ye but its next level when you manage to understeer and oversteer at the same time and I see that he was using some tiny Scandinavian flicks to turn that was pretty cheeky

0-0

pp joke

Ingeneers when they finaly get a social life afger their long studies :

Are you calling me fat?!? :D

Cameron Sours do we weigh less when the moon is overhead?

@@FunnygalsproductionsAnd do we weigh more when the moon is underneath? And what about the sun? Do I weigh less at midday in the tropics than at 6 o'clock or more at 12 midnight? Can Tom 3D print an engine that uses this differential? Good question ;)

@@Funnygalsproductions According to my calculations, a person of 100 kg would produce approximately 0.3 fewer grams of force (3 milli-newtons) with the moon overhead. In other words a normal breath (0.5 grams) is more than the force of the moon (but, that same breath would have almost no net effect on the scales, again due to the buoyant force).

An interesting fact for sure. But, given that the majority of scales that are used to measure people with are accurate to within a single kilogram to at best 100 grams, that's well within the margin of measurement error. XD Add in the errors introduced by wearing clothing which can add anything from 500 grams to 5+ kilograms, and unless you're willing to go naked, or weigh your clothes separately is a value that has to be estimated, and you can definitely assume that most attempts at weighing a human being have a margin for error of several kilograms. Plus the weight of a human being can fluctuate quite quickly - going to the toilet for instance can cause the loss of 3-500 grams at least, and eating or drinking something... Well, everything you eat doesn't just magically vanish, so that can add hundreds of grams to a kilogram or more in a short space of time. For that matter, height is equally variable. - given the effects of gravity a person tends to be taller in the morning after getting up than in the evening, and the variation possible in a single day is in the order of 5 cm of height difference. Which in effect means that giving your height accurate to a single centimetre is actually meaningless and only kind of an average. (for those playing along with Imperial units that means a person's height fluctuates by about 2 inches in any given day.) OK, so the range in which it fluctuates is fairly stable, but it's still a pretty large amount of variability relative to how tall a person typically is...

Haha I noticed that too. Random cat paw lol.

haha i thought it was him

or belts, belts a easier to implement

I'd build it out of legos, it'd be heavier and need more gear.. stages? But it would work

Had the same idea I had

IVAN love what you do mate!

Atmosphere powered tank! Haha

@@localsms Thanks!!

@@TomStantonEngineering There's a challenge...

Guys Tom Stanton ​ Ivan Miranda you are great inspiration,keep up the good work! :D

petition to have him build another, more efficient and stream lined version

Sharpe guy, thank you.

@@Butterkin make the Bugatti of syringe cars, 16 cylinders

see at 6:00 and after. the front wheels have each their own axle. but the hint for "Ackerman" is right. as a first approximation, the steering rod connection points should head towards the rear wheel rather than being rectangular to the wheel axle. the vehicle is relatively long so the deviation might not be that much - still it could make a noticeable difference. the other thing that brought control loss in was definitely the hard and slippery grounds. that sees already best compensation with soft rubber gum wheels and extra weight. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ackermann_steering_geometry

He should've gone with a rubber band on the outside front only.

"Did a young man accidentally discover the future of transportation?"

"the energy problems are solved!"

Facebook in a nutshell.

There's already a vacuum energy meme. As in, virtual particles are always popping in and out of existence in the vacuum.

That's NOT atmospheric energy, it's simply a ay to store energy. The same energy YOU spend by creating a pressure differential...

Thanks! You too!

This coment deserves more likes, SOLID 10/10

Waaaaaaah!

Onin D. Bruh you waluigi

Subscribed after watching the compilation. I'd forgotten how many of these I watched.

I believe he has done it already, can't really remember if it was him or some other youtuber.

@@pauliusgaivenis2665 I think you mean the air pressure engine,right?

Do I sense a Peter Sripol collab?

That's roughly how some Air Hogs planes work, albeit with the opposite pressure

@Skott yeah judging from that video I think it is possible

So I've been thinking and I'm only guessing based on theory. But if you were to follow Boyle’s Law, where P1V1 = P2V2 (Pressure1 x Volume1 = Pressure2 x Volume2), and V1 = 0, then P2V2 = 0, so P2 = 0? Does that make sense? Hahaha love those puns! I hope you have a great Christmas too!! (yeah I couldn't think of any puns)

@@TomStantonEngineering I just finished physics course of that thing on my junior year in finnish high school and it was lots of fun! I haven't thought about that force thing at all... What if you got that cylinder and made the piston divide it into two individual spaces, other having no air like in that test, and other having normal air pressure when piston is fully closed? That would give much more force, there would be vacuum pulling and high pressure pushing the piston.

There are several potential real world issues not covered by Tom's maths (so as to not confuse the bejebus out of people I suspect) and there are two issues which are easily understood but not easily calculated. 1 There is not a perfect vacuum in the syringe so even though the force does not change by much over the length of the draw it does change a little. 2 The reason for the issue with the vacuum is that for example water vapour sticks to the surface of pretty much anything at atmospheric pressure (Cody's lab discusses this to some extent) due to several things including van der waals forces. That tiny amount of water outgasses as the pressure drops meaning an equilibrium has to be reached as the water vapour pressure in effect increases.

@@gordonlawrence4749 This isn't like a vacuum pump that progressively tries to evacuate an already full chamber containing humid air - the syringe starts with all the air expelled, apart from a tiny bit left in the nozzle. So, theoretically you could achieve a virtually perfect vacuum if the initial volume is 0.

​@@TomStantonEngineering Well that's not really the whole picture; Boyle's law should hold for any extention along the way. Halfway through, p*V should also be 0, while none of both p nore V are 0. Ergo, problem. I think this can't be modelled as a mere force-pressure problem, but more like a pneumatic spring via Hooke's law: in equilibrium, weight=k*extention. No idea what k would be, but hey, at least it doesn't return 0 :p PS: You could calculate k via reverse engineering it: w=1.25kg*9.81N/kg=12.26N; d=0.045m. Therefore: k=w/d=272.5N/m, which might be plausible but might as well be of by miles.

It is... but I'm not

@@TomStantonEngineering Glad you saw the humor in there. Merry Christmas mate.

Nope. NASCAR!

*_NEXT GEN NASCAR FOOTAGE REVEALED??? IT'S AMAZING?!?_*

No it's a NASCAR

multi-pulley drifting!

69th like

@@tomasferreira3415 i will ruin it into 70

Muahahaha

I think this was more of a "proof of concept".. The bearings you mentioned in harddisks was very useful to me though, I have plenty of old dead ones that I could salvage, cheers!

Marinus I had the same thoughts when I saw those wobbly front wheels. Using 💿 player bearings is brilliant! I’m sure it would work very well leaving the back wheel grip as the remaining issue. Thanks for sharing!

As long as as the rear wheel doesnt slip or spin in place , then no energy is lost.

@@Conservator. Hi Eduard, just make sure you use Harddisk bearings instead of CD drive bearings haha ;) Small difference. I use them for small hobby projects when the HDD has 4 pins. I normally only use the 4-pin HDD motors as a motor for a small project so the ones with 5 pins I take apart and salvage the bearings from.

@@RCinginSC Energy is never lost, it's just spread out more along the universe. But to stay within the scope of this project: the friction of the wheels is a big energy eater for the car. Friction with the ground, as well as the friction of the wheel and the axis.

Wont work well. Not enough energy released.

Gorm Auslander the problem with atmospheric potentio-storage is that compared to other types of similar storage, it is impractical. However, I can see potential if used in conjunction with atmospheric descent/ascension. Take the kinetic electromagnetic suspension dynamo battery: can hold insane amounts of energy with minimal loss, but is not useable on anything that moves. The greatest advantages to atmospheric batteries would be extreme cheapness and simplicity.

Seconding this. The second string seems redundant when a belt can do that job.

Later tonight but much more basic, just one of my rubber band cars converted to the syringe and just running direct drive, no gearing so much shorter run 🙂😊 Tom's work is so much more professional.

@@GrandadIsAnOldMan Really nice! 😃

the force would be stronger but a very very little bit unless it is very deep in the water like 1km

interesting idea, to really take advantage of the hydrostastic pressure of water it would need to be more of a submarine, few inches of water just wont provide enough pressure.

@@Sikorsky66 i will say though that even a few inches of water on a surface the size of a door will make quite the force. you just need a larger piston (of course that will increase drag, especially in water.

Or submarine, the deeper in the water, the more force.

Even if it did have more force, wouldn't it be net neutral or even net negative due to the increased resistance and friction from the water?

im p sure his steering was on/off so giv the man some credit

You know this could totally work, atmosphere powered clock! Wonder how long it could run for.

This! An atmospheric powered clock!

@@redsquirrelftw they do work and can run until the mechanism breaks! The channel "British Museum" has a great little series on clocks. I think it was on one of those videos that a guy showed an atmospheric clock. Imagine inflating a balloon in a warm room. Overnight the temperature drops, the ballon shrinks. Next day it warms up and the balloon swells. Attach a lever and a precision ratchet to wind a light mainspring. Bingo! It uses air pressure variation to wind itself up. No good for centrally heated homes, but they were made in the old days. Amazing.

@@raykent3211 i bet one of those would work in my home ~5F variation every day, and if placed in the correct location more than that.

Yes, however there is a limit to how small a gear can be before the teeth can't handle the torque and this will therefore limit how small the larger gear could be. I think the smallest gear I've been able to 3D print with a decent tooth definition is about 18mm in diameter, which would mean I'd need a pulley 700mm in diameter for the first stage (instead of the current 150mm) and a rear wheel 750mm in diameter (instead of current 170mm). So using the string/pulley method helps keep everything more compact and simple.

@@TomStantonEngineering I guess that same problem also applies to a planetary gearbox?

You could skip the small gear by having a toothed shaft coming out the back of the syringe instead

Tom Stanton Have you tried a worm wheel setup, given that the syringe provides plenty of torque to overcome the friction of a worm wheel and pinion.

Blubberbub Yes but x100 ;-)

I would love to see something like this ridiculously over engineered

you can do that yourself :^)

I don't know about you, but the dental floss I've seen is kind of like plumber's tape and would stretch and break easily.

@@SuperFrodo95 The dental floss I know is very resistant to stretching and tearing. Where are you from?

uummmm. Dentil floss can be ripped with a single tug on blunt metal, I don’t think that is very resistant to tearing.

fishing line. There are 1.5 mm monofilament fishing lines that can withstand roughly 200 lbs of tension force.

*smells minty*

I take your hmm and raise you another hmm. It's actually solar powered, via the food that Tom ate to power his muscles in winding it up. The rest is just temporary energy storage, using the tugging of gravity on all them bits of air out there to push the piston back in.

Ray Kent OO yes. I didn’t think of that😄

@@raykent3211 Have a look at my comments under Tom's first comment. I talk a lot about this.

@@lio1234234 ta for the response Elliott, I agree with what you said. I think that "atmosphere powered" is a reasonable name for this. My comment was playful. I'm sure you don't need telling that there are other contexts where it is important to trace through a bit. Electric cars are advertised as zero emissions irrespective of whether the owner recharges the batteries from hydro or coal fired. In that case the difference between the two ways that solar energy is captured and released is mightily significant. So I don't quite agree with tom saying, in effect, that it's useless circular argument. Though in the context of this toy car, yeah, it's insignificant.

@@raykent3211 of course. I knew that what you said was playful. I was just explaining my thoughts to people.

Justin Thorne Good on you, principals above all.

I'm not arguing Your case, I'm just curious as to why You call it "ghost-Banning" as the "ghost"-prefix usually means that someone is "freezing/disabling/nerfing" an account without informing the account "owner". But I thought that Patreon literally informed the account holders in question that they wouldn't allow them to use their services anymore ? Have I misunderstood this ? Just curious regarding the to me "odd" choice of words. Best regards.

@@GglSux I think he might be referring to how they banned multiple people without them breaking any of patreons own guidelines, and they provided no proper explanation when this was explained to them

British aerospace engineer here: I explained why I chose to expand the syringe rather than contract it. Expanding it applies a 'more constant' force (obviously not constant due to it not being a perfect vacuum, as explained when I hung the weight from it) on the system which is easier to manage. The calculations were carried out in high school detail to help with convey the theory, therefore it was assumed there was a perfect vacuum. Using P1V1 = P2V2... if P1 = 0 --> P2 = 0, therefore theoretically, if there is a perfect vacuum, the force is constant.

Phil Swift here!

@@IlIlIIIIlIlIIlIll with flex seal to seal your ego

@@TomStantonEngineering P1V1 = P2V2 is an isothermic assumption, which is alright (id prefer isentropic because the temperature decreases when expanding but ok) but as you know from thermodynamics using the ideal gas law and integrating: The volume change work released in your process would be W=-m*Ri*T*ln(V2/V1), and not just W=p_atm*A*s It´s just wrong mate Let me calculate an example for you: Assumptions: T=293K, Ri_air=287J/kg*K, Density at Point 2=1,3kg/m^3 -> m_air=1,3*10^-6kg Before) V1=20ml=2*10^-5m^3, p1=1bar=10^5(relative to the outside) After) V2=1ml, p2=0bar, absolute pressure is then 1bar We get W = 0,327J You on the other hand assumed that we can mechanically use the entirety of the hydraulic energy stored, which is W = p_atm*V1 = 2J, which is a completely wrong assumption because its actually W = integral of (p_atm-p_system(s))*V(s). If you remember thermodynamics: this is the volume change work, W=-integral of p*dV So congratulations, in this case you would be off by 512%

@@ch98hb I didnt follow your calculation but isnt toms assumption based on the atmosphere volume being almost infinitely huge while the syringe volume is a tiny tiny fraction of it so the force coming from the atmosphere is constant because atmospheric pressure will change by an amount so small its even impossible to measure... It makes total sense to me what he did. Or did I completely miss your point? Seems like you ignored the fact that he pulled a vacuum instead of pressurizing it. So even if made a syringe 100 times longer the atmospheric pressure and therefore the force would be the same as with the small syringe over the entire length of the syringe