Jeju National University, South Korea
Jan192010
Posted under News by Iskandar Makhmudov at 06:24 on Jan 19 2010
www.greenpowerscience.com A simple wind turbine all around you. Alternative energy green job training. Wind power.
'solar 2009 2011 Alternative Ashden Ausra's Award China Clean Electric Energy Farm first Free from Future global Green Home hydro hydropower industry Installation More News PANEL Panels Part plant Power Project Renewable Solar Sources Sustainable System Systems Technology Thermal TURBINE Video water Wind winner world
Renewable Energy Laboratory Copyright © 2012. All Rights Reserved.
1 FelixTheHouseFreakon 19 Jan 2010 at 06:32
Nice job there ikedasquid.
2 Anvilshockon 19 Jan 2010 at 07:30
Why do all the treehuggers wear hats that look like exploded sheep?
3 krrrruptidsolesson 19 Jan 2010 at 08:11
This could work better if the vanes were to create either a downward slight pressure or upwards which could put a tower of these to work together. Where wind was blowing through them they could lock together creating more power when the wind was gusty. It could also have a system that directs the wind current into a more efficient direction. Along with balancing and alignment remedies and turbulance redirection Could actually power more than a science guys original mathmatical presumptions.
4 bigshugdormanon 19 Jan 2010 at 08:43
Shes hot
5 ikedasquidon 19 Jan 2010 at 09:03
I was wondering if anyone on this channel knew enough to call me on that. I wasn’t 100% sure about that assumption. Alas, not a mech eng and Reynolds numbers and much of fluid mechanics are not my strong suite. Thanks for the info!
6 n0thingm4non 19 Jan 2010 at 09:51
Your rant is mostly correct, but the suggestion of a circular wind turbine like that is completely missed. The theory behind it comes from an inviscid assumption at high Reynolds numbers from Navier-Stokes. In a free stream on a cylinder there are two low pressure points perpendicular to the flow where the fluid is moving at double the velocity. Although this is proved by neglecting viscosity, leaving it in the calculation only adds a boundary layer, which doesn’t change the calculation much.
7 AI2fleshon 19 Jan 2010 at 10:15
easy now mr invisible particle, one day you will love and seek for the normaility again, but i know you gotta go down there from event hahahahaha. thoose who don´t have that need live i am dead at least inside. there is now escape from hardcore gravity.
8 UTubeStarrron 19 Jan 2010 at 10:56
Hey ike, why are you taking the time to tell people what they Can’t do….you are using a very small % of you power, for the wrong reason…Don’t show off with your Hands off math ! Do something good, we both know you are more than a grumpy old man ? The world is NOT flat, & they can Now grow new body parts in a lab. That math will lock you down, and removes chance. Don’t close any doors ! CRAFTS !? Thanks ike. Keep trying EVERYONE ! :>)
9 powdermonkey1111on 19 Jan 2010 at 10:57
Why is Everyone kicking on Ike and giving him thumbs down for stating the mathematics behind why this really isn’t that great of a model of wind power generation? I mean aren’t these things designed to suck air into the center from all sides? I personally don’t know much about then, but from the fact they are referred to as “blowers” and looking at their design that is a far different usage than being spun by a single directional wind. It pretty much throws away the mechanical usage that it had.
10 ikedasquidon 19 Jan 2010 at 11:52
Ok, last piece of rant.
You want to make something without understanding the underlying principles…try crafts, because you will not be successful at science, engineering or inventing, and certainly not at “green power”.
11 ikedasquidon 19 Jan 2010 at 12:27
In other words, why would you vote down a logical, mathematical analysis? Whether you do the analysis or not, you are engineering something when you build one…and the great majority of successful engineering projects are analyzed first using mathematical models. You can’t say if something will work for sure but you can usually rule things out. Optimization is huge also. It’s one thing to get a tiny 12v bulb to light, something else to make useful power. The difference is analysis.
12 ikedasquidon 19 Jan 2010 at 13:23
…see this turbine spinning at a paltry 170 rpm. There’s branches waving all over the place yet this thing can barely overcome the friction in it’s one bearing (see 2:10). It’s not driving a load, the only load is friction! There are so many hints in this vid that this approach is a waste of time.
Why is it that when talking about “green power” as soon as you throw out some math – the same stuff that is used on the big MW turbines – you get a minus score?
13 ikedasquidon 19 Jan 2010 at 14:18
“you math people are so smart” maybe. There’s not much math up there. A couple of unit conversions, maybe a trivial amount of algebra. I’ve only looked at this because I want to build a VAWT. I think wind power could be useful to me in a grid-tied setting. There are VAWT units out there producing renewable power right now, this blower rig-job just isn’t a very good way to do it.
I do the math to see if an approach is worth trying. With a serious breeze in the background I can see this…
14 ikedasquidon 19 Jan 2010 at 14:23
Realistic assumptions:
Wind is 11 mph.
Turbine efficiency is 35% (the huge MW wind turbines are about here).
DC generator efficiency 60%.
Converter? Not really sure – lets just say it’s still less than the number I’m about to give you…
32w * (11/20)^3 * .35 * .60 = 1.1 watt
So 10 strung together might just barely light a standard CFL. I would be surprised if you could even get that much out – as it’s loaded the generator will slow decreasing its efficiency more.
15 ikedasquidon 19 Jan 2010 at 14:47
Pw = 0.5 * 1.23 * 0.075 * 8.9^3 = 32 watts of wind power.
A really smart guy named Albert Betz (a wind energy expert from Germany) figured the best possible wind turbine efficiency is 59%. The best possible electrical generator efficiency is about 80% (if you use 3 phase AC – good luck finding one of these at this power level!).
32w * .80 * .59 = 15.3 watts. This is about as much of a best case analysis you could imagine. If you had a 100% efficient converter you could light a standard CFL.
16 ikedasquidon 19 Jan 2010 at 14:49
…continued for krrrr….
Savonious, height is 1ft and diameter is 1ft. Blade area is circ * height * 0.25 = pi*d*h*0.25
0.25 because air acts on only one quarter of the blades at a time (others are either blocked by blades being acted on or are returning and therefore spinning towards the wind in a Savonious).
Neglect air friction from returning blades.
1 meter = 39 in & 1ft = 0.31m.
Ab = pi * 0.31 * 0.31 * 0.25 = 0.075 sq meters
17 ikedasquidon 19 Jan 2010 at 15:03
@krrrr….
Sure, it could turn a very small generator.
Pw = 0.5 * Da * Ab * Vwind^3
Pw = power of wind in Watts
Da = air density (1.23 Kg/m^3 at sea level)
Ab = area of blades in sq meters
Vwind = wind velocity in m/sec
Assumptions:
At sea level.
Wind is 20mph average (this is super windy, 10-12 is a better estimate but I’m humoring you) or 8.9m/sec on average.
Blade area – this is a little rougher to get. Assume your turbine is savonious – air is pushing the blades…
18 krrrruptidsolesson 19 Jan 2010 at 15:15
@ikedasquid
So your saying these could turn extremely small generators.
And a bunch of these linked to a storage source could actually work.
Good job.
So 10 small generators from 10 seperate blower fans could produce how much exactly?
And that would be able to charge or make how much power?
You math people are soo smart.
19 conspiracy777on 19 Jan 2010 at 15:26
Vertical Wind Turbines do show promise. However the example of the blower fan is not a good comparison.
It shows a concept but not a proper power generating design.
It’s much like a prop on a boat.
When the prop is used for powering the boat it works fine, but if the boat is dragged through the water (as on a sailboat) it doesn’t give back near the power.
It has to be designed differently to do so, the same with this concept. But it CAN be done and it’s not junk.
20 ikedasquidon 19 Jan 2010 at 16:10
It’s called POWER. No arrangement of gears will increase power (gears induce friction, lowering power). Efficient generators turn quickly, and for wind generators this is faster than the turbine spins.
This lowers torque to the generator.
P = T * w (power=torque * angular velocity)
If the gear train turns the generator faster than the turbine, causing w to go up, T must come down to keep P constant.
P in KW, T in N*M, w in RPM
P=T*w*2pi/60
P in HP, T in Ft*lbf, w in RPM
P=T*w/5252
JUNK!
21 MrBladeCrashon 19 Jan 2010 at 16:47
@ikedasquid Its called gearing…..proper gearing is what makes any wind turbine work. They other wise don’t produce enough torque to spin a generator properly
22 OnnomonnomonnOon 19 Jan 2010 at 17:21
100 mph???? are you crazy?? thats totally shaking ….unballanced….the strong vibes will destroy it….
23 ikedasquidon 19 Jan 2010 at 17:34
Overall, I like this channel…but this vid is horrible.
Types of centrifugal blowers like these are a cheap & inefficient way to move air. When freewheeling like this they are savonius turbines with poorly shaped blades.
A connected generator will produce a force opposite that produced by the wind. Generating more power increases this force. If you can stop the turbine with your hand (like you can here) you can only produce as much power as you could produce with a hand crank!
JUNK!
24 68plymouthmuscleon 19 Jan 2010 at 17:51
Cool idea I love your video!
25 Raykenn1on 19 Jan 2010 at 17:55
Thanks for sharing this. Other commenters are right, these ideas have been in use for ages and they are not dependent on having the latest technology. So, you have to wonder why, for some people, these concepts are on the verge of magic? I truly believe it’s because generations have been systematically “dumbed down”. Pleease keep the vids coming. You are forcing people to think.