Interesting new Wind Turbine idea

[Doggle Avaddit]

Originally Posted by John_M

Interesting looking concept, but it says a 112m diameter lens will supply enough energy for an average household, which doesn't seem much for a device that size.

Look at the size of the thing it is competing against, and this one is only 3MWatts, not the biggest available!



Astonishing really.

[Dorts]

Originally Posted by nightshade

Now that is original! it would have to be vertical axis because of the restriction of the cables. Of course the pylon owners will winge about their share of revenue and the expense of upgrading/strengthening the pylons.

I was thinking of a relatively small, wind directional turbine, so that the pylons would not need any upgrading. There are an esimated 22,000 pylons in the uk.
Someone knowing the output of such a turbine may be able to do the sums and viability.
But I do get your point about revenue sharing etc.
Dorts.

[Doggle Avaddit]

Originally Posted by Dorts

I was thinking of a relatively small, wind directional turbine, so that the pylons would not need any upgrading. There are an esimated 22,000 pylons in the uk.
Someone knowing the output of such a turbine may be able to do the sums and viability.
But I do get your point about revenue sharing etc.
Dorts.

I'm no High Voltage Engineer, but connecting anything to a 400,000 volt power line is not that easy to safely acomplish.
I suspect the interfacing hardware required would cost way more than the benefits this idea may provide.

[Lancashire Lad]

Originally Posted by Doggle Avaddit

Look at the size of the thing it is competing against, and this one is only 3MWatts, not the biggest available!



Astonishing really.

Actually Doggle, your photo shows a WinWind 3Mw turbine, the largest of which is 103m in diameter - a minimum of 9m smaller overall, than the stated size of the "Wind Lens" units referred to in original post: -
3 MW wind turbine - WinWinD

Something just doesn't add up with the quoted figures for these Wind Lens units.

If what is stated is correct, that these are expected to provide enough electricity for an average household, they would only be generating about 20Kw (i.e. 84Amps @240Volts sp&n). – No one in their right mind would spend the amounts of money that would be involved in building these structures for that amount of power.

I base my assumption on the fact that most terraced houses in this country are fitted with a 63amp sp&n incomer, and most semi-detached and detached domestic dwellings are fitted with 100amp sp&n incomers. Therefore, taking the average gives 80amps sp&n i.e. approx 20Kw.

Which is roughly some 150 times less powerful than the more standard design WinWind 3Mw units of your example photo above.

Regards,
Mike.

[Lancashire Lad]

Originally Posted by Doggle Avaddit

I'm no High Voltage Engineer, but connecting anything to a 400,000 volt power line is not that easy to safely acomplish.
I suspect the interfacing hardware required would cost way more than the benefits this idea may provide.

Agreed. It just wouldn't be practical or economically viable to try to do this for the amount of electricity that could potentially be generated by such pylon mounted units.

Regards,
Mike.

[John_M]

Originally Posted by Lancashire Lad

Agreed. It just wouldn't be practical or economically viable to try to do this for the amount of electricity that could potentially be generated by such pylon mounted units.

Regards,
Mike.

And think of the nightmare it would be trying to keep thousands of units functioning...
Back to economies of scale then, and fewer, more powerful power stations...

[Doggle Avaddit]

Originally Posted by Lancashire Lad

Actually Doggle, your photo shows a WinWind 3Mw turbine, the largest of which is 103m in diameter - a minimum of 9m smaller overall, than the stated size of the "Wind Lens" units referred to in original post: -
3 MW wind turbine - WinWinD

Something just doesn't add up with the quoted figures for these Wind Lens units.

If what is stated is correct, that these are expected to provide enough electricity for an average household, they would only be generating about 20Kw (i.e. 84Amps @240Volts sp&n). – No one in their right mind would spend the amounts of money that would be involved in building these structures for that amount of power.

I base my assumption on the fact that most terraced houses in this country are fitted with a 63amp sp&n incomer, and most semi-detached and detached domestic dwellings are fitted with 100amp sp&n incomers. Therefore, taking the average gives 80amps sp&n i.e. approx 20Kw.

Which is roughly some 150 times less powerful than the more standard design WinWind 3Mw units of your example photo above.

Regards,
Mike.

I'd agree, and can only assume something has got seriously lost in translation.

I don't see this as anything more than an interesting design concept. Whether it can be improved enough to compete with the current technology, which is decades ahead in development, remains to be seen.

[Lancashire Lad]

Originally Posted by Doggle Avaddit

Well, this is what the inventor is claiiming.
http://www.riam.kyushu-u.ac.jp/winde...se/English.htm
Perhaps you can enlighten us as to why you think these claims are spurious.

The data provided on that page (from 2008? – in itself odd that two year old data is displayed) shows, in the example of the 1Kw unit, the depth of the “diffuser” as being “Lt = 0.22D”, and brim height as 0.15D. It further states that D was 1.38m.

So, everything being equal, if those figures were multiplied up to full scale, where D becomes 112 metres, then: -

If we now take Lt at 0.22 of 112 metres, we get Lt = 24.64 metres.

If we take brim height at 0.15 of 112 metres, we get brim height = 16.8 metres.

So the comparative size of diffuser for the 112 metre rotor becomes 24.64 metres in length, and 16.8 metres in height (i.e additional radius, above the radius of the rotor blades themselves). All of which structure, needs to be continually orientated with the blades, into the wind.

OK, perhaps the math for the full size units might need to incorporate other data, details of which aren’t provided. In which regard it may not be a straight forward case of size for size upscaling the diffuser. But at 24.64 x 16.8 metres, these sizes are becoming of the orders of magnitude similar to what has been used for previous designs of diffuser vortexed units which never amounted to anything at the end of the day.

I remain sceptical!

Regards,
Mike.

[Doggle Avaddit]

Originally Posted by Lancashire Lad

The data provided on that page (from 2008? – in itself odd that two year old data is displayed) shows, in the example of the 1Kw unit, the depth of the “diffuser” as being “Lt = 0.22D”, and brim height as 0.15D. It further states that D was 1.38m.

So, everything being equal, if those figures were multiplied up to full scale, where D becomes 112 metres, then: -

If we now take Lt at 0.22 of 112 metres, we get Lt = 24.64 metres.

If we take brim height at 0.15 of 112 metres, we get brim height = 16.8 metres.

So the comparative size of diffuser for the 112 metre rotor becomes 24.64 metres in length, and 16.8 metres in height (i.e additional radius, above the radius of the rotor blades themselves). All of which structure, needs to be continually orientated with the blades, into the wind.

OK, perhaps the math for the full size units might need to incorporate other data, details of which aren’t provided. In which regard it may not be a straight forward case of size for size upscaling the diffuser. But at 24.64 x 16.8 metres, these sizes are becoming of the orders of magnitude similar to what has been used for previous designs of diffuser vortexed units which never amounted to anything at the end of the day.

I remain sceptical!

Regards,
Mike.

Oh dear, poor old Kyushu University professor Yuji Ohya sems to have got his sums all wrong. What a pity.

Are you going to tell him, or shall I?

[Doggle Avaddit]

I think you'll find the quoted figure is a typo.

Happens all the tiem.



I recently came accross a Broadsheet Headline that substituted "billions" with "millions". Wish I could find it now, but you'll just have to take my word for that one.