Wind turbine: because we all need a laugh.

Cariboocoot

I know nothing more about this absurdity other than the picture.

Ralph Day

Re: Wind turbine: because we all need a laugh.

That's screwey looking, for sure.

nsaspook

Re: Wind turbine: because we all need a laugh.

Looks like this gizmo.
http://dearchimedes.com/

waynefromnscanada

Re: Wind turbine: because we all need a laugh.

Hahaha I'm laughing now, but the guy selling these abortions will be having the last laugh when he heads to the bank with all the money people gladly passed over to him.

solarix

Re: Wind turbine: because we all need a laugh.

He'll be laughing at us when he raises 1.9Mil with crowdfunding like the solar pavement people did.

vtmaps

Re: Wind turbine: because we all need a laugh.

OK... I'll reveal how little i know about wind... what's so absurd about the turbine? I looked at the web page that nsaspook linked... they claim it is meant to work in turbulent conditions.

It is my understanding that a tower may be more than half the cost of a wind system... If it doesn't need a tower to escape turbulence, couldn't it possibly be cost effective in some locations?

--vtMaps

Cariboocoot

Re: Wind turbine: because we all need a laugh.

That thing will not make use of turbulent air (practically impossible to do so), it will create turbulent air. When the wind stream hit that air is going to deflect off it at many angles, changing as the 'blade' revolves, sending air back at the stream deflecting it away from the blade.

I'd love to see a 'smoke test' on this but I guarantee they'd never do it.

There's no reason to believe this would be any more efficient than the same diameter 'standard' blade would be. And every reason to expect it to be less so.

BB.

Re: Wind turbine: because we all need a laugh.

It is almost impossible to harvest useful energy from turbulent flows. It does not matter how efficient the turbine is. Turbulence is a "rolling" cell in the linear stream. Not easy to extract energy from the "rolling air pockets".

And turbulence is very hard on any mechanical device--The buffeting and torque will stress a tracking turbine.

The Vertical Axis Wind Turbines are supposed to work much better in turbulent air flow--But on average, they are so much less efficient (and usually mounted much closer to the ground), that in many installations, they hardly produce any useful amount of power at all.

This wind turbine uses a lot of material (and support wires) per square foot/meter of size--Lots of drag and difficulty scaling to anything larger.

And, Archimedes screws--Have you seen any used anywhere (other than, water pumps or low head turbines--And even those work by lifting "buckets" of water--Not by total flow like propeller or turbine would)?

http://www.renewablesfirst.co.uk/hydro-learning-centre/archimedean-screw/

Attachment not found.


We have not seen any helicopters with this design flying yet:

Attachment not found.

Harvesting wind requires lots of swept area--Basically the amount of energy harvested goes up with the square of the diameter. The Skystream (RIP) has a 3.7 meter diameter (Skystreams, when they were working well, were one of the most efficient/meet specifications small wind turbine out there):

BB. wrote: »

There was one Skystream owner (blog.keepturning.com website long since abandoned) (near Lake Erie?) during the good months, as I remember:

JANES HOUSEHOLD SKYSTREAM kWh RECORD

JAN

FEB

MAR

APR

MAY

JUN

JUL

AUG

SEP

OCT

NOV

DEC

Total

2007

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

175

225

0*

400

2008

98*

292

308
246
228
153
92
84
97
164
246
472
2,480

2009

265
348
244
371
182
86
90
84
250
100
194
131*
2,345

2010

101
130
























* December, 2007 - Skystream shut down from software problem with cold and would not restart.
* January, 2008 - Skystream down until the 27th. Produce 98kWh in the 5 days remaining in the month.
* December, 2009 - Skystream shut down several times and would not restart on it's own, production very low for wind speeds.
* January, 2010 - Production very low for wind speeds.
* February, 2010 - Production very low for wind speeds.

-Bill

Looking at there website:

http://dearchimedes.com

It looks like their products range from 0.3 to 0.75 to 1.5 meter diameter units... Using the above numbers (~60' tower in reasonably windy conditions), the likely output would be in the range of:

• 371 kWH per month * (1.5 meter / 3.7 meter)² = 61 kWH per month
• 2,480 kWH per year * (1.5 meter / 3.7 meter)² = 408 kWH per year

For a Grid Tied solar power system:

• 408,000 WH per year * 1/0.77 Grid Tied solar inverter eff * 1/5.45 hours per day average sun (SFO airport) * 1/365 days per year = 266 Solar "array"

Using the Betz limit which says you can only extract ~60% of the wind energy, and real life which says a very good wind turbine can only extract ~50% of the energy:

http://www.ndsu.nodak.edu/ndsu/klemen/Perfect_Turbine.htm

Using a 10 MPH (4.7 m/s) wind and a 1.5 meter diameter turbine, a good horizontal turbine output would be (scaling against a known good installation):

• 22.36 kWH/Month/sqmeter * pi (1.5 meter dia/2)² = 40 kWH per month (very good 35% efficient turbine)
• 37.70 kWH/Month/sqmeter * pi (1.5 meter dia/2)² = 67 kWH per month (perfect 59.6% Betz turbine)

From their 1.5 meter data sheet:

http://dearchimedes.com/pdf/Spec_Sheet_Liam_F1_UWT_UK.pdf

We get ~125 watts at 10 mph / 4.7 m/s wind:

125 Watts * 24 hours per day * 30 days per month = 90,000 WH = 90 kWH per month

Over the Betz limit and over twice that of typical "good peforming" turbine.

Their press release:

De Urban Wind Turbine Liam F1 is een kleine windturbine met een diameter van 1,5 meter en weegt ca. 55 kilogram. Vanwege zijn kleine formaat en gewicht kan hij daarom op bijna elke gevel of dak geïnstalleerd worden. Hij zal in Nederland bij een windsnelheid van 4,5 m/s gemiddeld tussen de 300 en 2500 kilowatt per jaar opwekken. Dit is gemeten op ca. 10 meter hoogte – de gemiddelde hoogte van een dak van een rijtjeshuis).

Google Translate

The Urban Wind Turbine Liam F1 is a small wind turbine with a diameter of 1.5 meters and weighs about 55 kilograms. Because of its small size and weight, it can therefore be installed on almost any wall or roof. He will raise the 300 and 2,500 kilowatts per year in the Netherlands at a wind speed of 4.5 m / s on average between. This is measured at 10 meters height - the average height of a roof of a terraced house).

2,500 kWH / 12 months = 208 kWH per month
300 kWH / 12 month = 25 kWH per month (not sure of translation--300 to 2,500 kWH per year???)
2,500 kWH * 1/365 days per year * 1/24 hours per day = 0.285 kWatt = 285 Watt output best case average output?

According to their spec. sheet, it was ~90 kWH per month at ~4.5 m/s... So--What does the range mean (perhaps not 4.5 m/s average wind?).

285 Watt average output works out to something around 6-7 m/s wind (13.4 to 15.7 MPH). Pretty high average winds for 24 hours per day / 365 days per year.

Anyway--The numbers don't seem to be working out based on either real life or according to math.

-Bill

BB.

Re: Wind turbine: because we all need a laugh.

For Marc, some smoke test images of turbines:

http://www.arising.com.au/aviation/windturbines/wind-turbine.html

Attachment not found.

Very humid air and turbulence from turbines:

http://artsandsciences.colorado.edu/magazine/2013/12/cu-study-a-step-toward-more-efficient-wind-farms/

Attachment not found.

Flow visualization from Stanford University, 1935:

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

-Bill

niel

Re: Wind turbine: because we all need a laugh.

i've got a good question. how does that thing stay turned into the wind? it is not being used as a vawt as they turned it onto a horizontal axis and would need a vane to turn it into the wind. from what i see it would create turbulence even if there wasn't any to begin with as most of the air is not free to pass without backing up or sidetracking too much. they have much to prove.

BB.

Re: Wind turbine: because we all need a laugh.

From their website, it appears to use a tracking motor.

-Bill

inetdog

Re: Wind turbine: because we all need a laugh.

niel wrote: »

i've got a good question. how does that thing stay turned into the wind? it is not being used as a vawt as they turned it onto a horizontal axis and would need a vane to turn it into the wind. from what i see it would create turbulence even if there wasn't any to begin with as most of the air is not free to pass without backing up or sidetracking too much. they have much to prove.

The pivot is offset from to the center of pressure of the turbine wheel which should allow it to yaw naturally to follow the wind direction if I am analyzing it correctly. Any powered yaw might just be for furling in high winds. But from the look of the rotor, it might start acting like a Savonius when crosswise to the wind.
My concern is that even with ideal air flow the boundary friction on the enormous sail surface of the rotor would kill the efficiency.
But that is just a gut feeling, not a calculation.

Since they have to be shipped with the rotor already deployed and shaped, that will be a limit on transportation and installation too.

AuricTech

Re: Wind turbine: because we all need a laugh.

~tongue-in-cheek~

Is it just me, or does that thing look as though it could be some mad scientist's attempt to build an antenna that narrowcasts focused mind-control rays? Something one might see in a 1950s B-movie?

~tongue-in-cheek~

westbranch

Re: Wind turbine: because we all need a laugh.

Or , was it Dr. No...?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dr._No_%28film%29 middle of para #2

BB.

Re: Wind turbine: because we all need a laugh.

Yea--I was wrong, from the data sheet in my earlier post:

Yaw Control: None yawing by rotorshape

-Bill

niel

Re: Wind turbine: because we all need a laugh.

AuricTech wrote: »

~tongue-in-cheek~

Is it just me, or does that thing look as though it could be some mad scientist's attempt to build an antenna that narrowcasts focused mind-control rays? Something one might see in a 1950s B-movie?

~tongue-in-cheek~

guess what? such an antenna does exist as it is called a spiral antenna. it is a circularly polarized antenna that would be directional from the larger portion toward the smaller point.