-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On Tue, May 13, 2008 at 11:27:50PM +1200, Apptech wrote:
> Russell musings:    A design which lifted "buckets" rather
> than using the pipe as a seal would allow a rate related
> only to speed and bucket spacing.A deep well could have
> greater bucket spacing. Buckets could be added or removed
> depending on pumper's strength (subject to rope strength)
> and no smooth bore pipe would be needed to retain water.
> Buckets would use more material volume than sealing cups but
> no more than pipe. Buckets could be lower thickness than
> pipe in deep wells as no hydraulic head needs to be
> supported. In a deep well (say 50 metres) pipe strength
> probably is an issue at the bottom.

When I read the subject line, "rope pumps", I thought of an even simpler
design:

Have a thick, water absorbent rope be dipped into water at the bottom,
raised, and then squeezed between rollers to extract the absorbed water.
It'd even act somewhat as a filter. Alternatively, just let the rope
hang and collect the water dripping off of it.

Efficiency would be atrocious, maximum head would depend on how fast the
water falls off the rope. But then again, there isn't any other way one
can make a well pump armed with nothing more than 60m of climbing
rope...

- -- 
http://petertodd.org 'peter'[:-1]@petertodd.org 
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQFIKiaz3bMhDbI9xWQRAg2fAJ0WI2t/Tx4zvxzCmzyvg3K45xmSKQCdEaHj
ARsbd3BfYk+nxvvhVNXYciE=
=eOCj
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
-- 
http://www.piclist.com PIC/SX FAQ & list archive
View/change your membership options at
http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclist