New Wind Turbine Design Can Triple Energy Production

Initiate
Posts: 291
Joined: Sun Oct 11, 2009 11:22 pm

PostSat Nov 10, 2012 1:11 pm » by Spikey


I'm surprised someone hasn't incorporated the 'air multiplier' technology of something like the Dyson bladeless fan, which is said to increase or concentrate the force of the air up to 18 times, into a convention VAWT design...if a series of these Dyson annulus air multiplier rings were placed around a vawt turbine, or even a traditional Hawt design turbine, the effect should be that the force of moving air delivered to the turbine (of whatever design) is amplified or multiplied up to 18 times.

Up to 18 X the force of moving air delivered to a turbine = Up to 18 X the energy being generated.

Conspirator
Posts: 1053
Joined: Sat Jun 27, 2009 5:39 pm

PostSat Nov 10, 2012 1:45 pm » by Blotto


Spikey wrote:I'm surprised someone hasn't incorporated the 'air multiplier' technology of something like the Dyson bladeless fan, which is said to increase or concentrate the force of the air up to 18 times, into a convention VAWT design...if a series of these Dyson annulus air multiplier rings were placed around a vawt turbine, or even a traditional Hawt design turbine, the effect should be that the force of moving air delivered to the turbine (of whatever design) is amplified or multiplied up to 18 times.

Up to 18 X the force of moving air delivered to a turbine = Up to 18 X the energy being generated.

Read more: posting.php?mode=reply&f=14&t=80714#preview#ixzz2BorGhj9s





when i first looked at this turbine, and they're claims, it triggered a thought in my head, about another improved technology i seen. about lithium battery's, i thought why not combine the 2, since this turbine can be used to store energy. thats if the claims of its potential are true , given cia's research, but laws are there to be broken, and they usually are through technology.

Researchers at Rice University and Lockheed Martin may have developed a low-cost method of creating longer-lasting, high-capacity lithium-ion batteries. Currently graphite is used as the anode in commercial li-ion products, despite the fact that a silicon anode could potentially store ten times more lithium ions. The team says it has solved one of the problems associated with silicon, which nearly triples the energy density of current li-ion designs.

Engineer Sibani Lisa Biswal and research scientist Madhuri Thakur had been working on a porous silicon film with sponge-like properties, but wanted to create something more applicable to the current battery manufacturing process.

They discovered that by crushing the film, the resulting powder had a surface area 50 times that of regular crushed silicon. The result is an anode material that can hold a charge of 1,000 milliamp hours per gram compared to graphite anodes, which store 350 mAh/g – and that's only a third of its theoretical capacity.

Read more: posting.php?mode=reply&f=14&t=80714#preview#ixzz2BorZ4rn8



http://www.gizmag.com/crushed-silicon-l ... ery/24885/

i like your train of thought, spikey, i to think like you, take one idea and merge it with another, to create a more efficient device, or even a new technology.
Top

Read more: new-wind-turbine-design-can-triple-energy-production-t54114-10.html#ixzz2Boqy2Xhs

Initiate
Posts: 291
Joined: Sun Oct 11, 2009 11:22 pm

PostSat Nov 10, 2012 2:03 pm » by Spikey


Thanks for the battery info Blotto...first i'd heard of it.

It looks pretty good doesn't it. Wonder why it hasn't been done before though? Everyone in battery technology research has always known about the electrical properties of Silicon..wondering why nano-silicon particles, perhaps doped with Graphite (or even better Graphene) particles hasn't been at least tried before now?

If the Silicon is doped, it should perform more like a regular Anode, attracting Ions, but have a much greater energy density per cubic cm from the Silicon.

Looks good for batt tech.

Cheers mate.

I've just had thought how to manufacture these Silicon anodes more effectively and cheaply, that might have an even greater surface area than producing a thin film of Silicon and then crushing it into a powder or granules...take the silicon, add graphene and graphite in relatively small %'s, (up to 10% volume) mix, heat to molton and inject into the mix 1 or 2 % by volume of sodium bicarbonate...this will have the same effect on the Silicon/graphite/graphene mix, as it does on sugar and caramel...it turn it into a complex honeycomb structure...

If you have a porus honeycomb, you end up with a stable anode in one go, but with a huge surface area.

Might work.

Conspirator
Posts: 2313
Joined: Wed Jul 01, 2009 11:34 pm

PostSat Nov 10, 2012 2:22 pm » by Cia212


Blotto wrote:
Spikey wrote:I'm surprised someone hasn't incorporated the 'air multiplier' technology of something like the Dyson bladeless fan, which is said to increase or concentrate the force of the air up to 18 times, into a convention VAWT design...if a series of these Dyson annulus air multiplier rings were placed around a vawt turbine, or even a traditional Hawt design turbine, the effect should be that the force of moving air delivered to the turbine (of whatever design) is amplified or multiplied up to 18 times.

Up to 18 X the force of moving air delivered to a turbine = Up to 18 X the energy being generated.



That's not what is meant by "multiplier". They are talking about volume, not force. The total kinetic energy is no different than a conventional airflow. The ring would help since it catches air bleeding off the edge of a blade - similar to how winglets work.


when i first looked at this turbine, and they're claims, it triggered a thought in my head, about another improved technology i seen. about lithium battery's, i thought why not combine the 2, since this turbine can be used to store energy. thats if the claims of its potential are true , given cia's research, but laws are there to be broken, and they usually are through technology.

Using lithium batteries would be overkill for this application. Contrary to the claim in the video, it's easy (and cheaper) to store the electricity in a conventional car battery or bank of batteries.



Spikey wrote:The scaling problem is only a problem if you are thinking of a single generating unit...as opposed to a single pedestal with multi-turbine genertinging 'heads' affixed to the pedestal.

Then imagine a field of closely spaced (much more closely spaced than traditional designs) pedestals, each carrying 6-12 of these dish heads, then you get an idea of how to effectively scale this up to higher electrical generating values.


No, for this to be scaled up you have to add surface area, no matter how it's configured on a pedestal it's not going to be structurally sound. You could just put thousands of them on separate pedestals (or a few on each as you suggest) but that gets to be cost-prohibitive...and it would have to be thousands to replace one conventional wind generator.

Conspirator
Posts: 2313
Joined: Wed Jul 01, 2009 11:34 pm

PostSat Nov 10, 2012 2:25 pm » by Cia212


Spikey wrote:I'm surprised someone hasn't incorporated the 'air multiplier' technology of something like the Dyson bladeless fan, which is said to increase or concentrate the force of the air up to 18 times, into a convention VAWT design...if a series of these Dyson annulus air multiplier rings were placed around a vawt turbine, or even a traditional Hawt design turbine, the effect should be that the force of moving air delivered to the turbine (of whatever design) is amplified or multiplied up to 18 times.

Up to 18 X the force of moving air delivered to a turbine = Up to 18 X the energy being generated.

That's not what is meant by "multiplier". They are talking about volume, not force. The total kinetic energy is no different than a conventional airflow. The ring would help since it catches air bleeding off the edge of a blade - similar to how winglets work.

Conspirator
Posts: 1053
Joined: Sat Jun 27, 2009 5:39 pm

PostSat Nov 10, 2012 2:27 pm » by Blotto


take no notice of cia, spikey , hes full of shit , if we all had his attitude , we would still be rubbing sticks together to make fire.

Initiate
Posts: 291
Joined: Sun Oct 11, 2009 11:22 pm

PostSat Nov 10, 2012 2:55 pm » by Spikey


But cia...an increase in 'volume of air' means...more air does it not?

If i had a swimming pool with a water volume of 10,000 liters...and then decided to increase the size of the pool X2, i'd now have 100% more water to swim around in..yes?

Surely a greater volume of air (up to 18X the volume of air entering) must logically create a greater amount of air pushing on the turbine blade per square inch?

Hence, up to 18X the turning force.

Another way to look at it would be;

If the wind was blowing on a turbine blade at 2 m/s, the force on the blade would be equivelent to a force of air striking the blade at 2 m/s multiplied by size of the surface area of the blade(s)...if the volume of air, or the amount of air was increased by (up to) 18X, as the annulus ring does, then the volume and the force or amount of air striking the same blade increases an equal amount.

If volume of air is increased, so too muct the force or the blade turning power of the air acting on the blade surface.

In scaling up this parabolic dish 'blade' type of turbine, by adding more parabola's or dishes to the same single mounting pole IS scaling up surface area! :-) The surface area is increased by 100% with every addition of another dish.

Think of sports ground flood light poles...they don't have many poles with a single light at the top, they have gantry mounted rows of multiple light fixtures, placed strategically, on a single pole.

Same principle should be used for these turbines IMO.

Car batteries are cheap and available, buit they are not the best thing to use in a commercial sized operation, even a small home unit would be better off with higher energy densities given by Li-Ion battery technology.

Lead is expensive, and the sulfuric electrolyte in them is polluting and corrosive...lead/acid an old tech, that still has it's use, but is really showing it's age and needs to be replaced with smaller, lighter more energy dense technologies...if this new Li-Ion anode tech is successful, it would allow for much smaller and lighter batteries, that can store much more energy and have a greater lifespan than the old stuff.

EDIT:

Just noticed i am answering points raised across two different (but similar) threads...sorry about that.

Conspirator
Posts: 1053
Joined: Sat Jun 27, 2009 5:39 pm

PostSat Nov 10, 2012 3:04 pm » by Blotto


yep thats the point of me posting about the battery tech, spikey the fact they claim it stores more energy, more energy stored is never over kill , of course thats if the tech is genuine, if someone tells me that something dosnt work, then i want to see it for myself, never except it until you try it yourself , theorize about it, then test and take it from there. is my motto , if it dont work then try find a solution to make it work.

Initiate
Posts: 291
Joined: Sun Oct 11, 2009 11:22 pm

PostSat Nov 10, 2012 3:16 pm » by Spikey


Couldn't agree more Blotto.

Too often innovation is held back because someone, somewhere claims something is theoretically not going to be of much use or simply won't work.

And the other side of that is that once someone tries the innovation, and finds that it indeed does work and is of use, the theoretical arguments are naturally adjusted to match the innovation.

Most of our achievements on this planet are pretty much like this...first an idea is ridiculed, then it's attacked, then when shown to work, it's accepted as self evident.

If only we could adopt mental attitudes and practices to find ways where something WILL work, as opposed to spending SO much energy and time finding ways that something WON'T work...we'd be so much better off as a species.

Conspirator
Posts: 1053
Joined: Sat Jun 27, 2009 5:39 pm

PostSat Nov 10, 2012 3:26 pm » by Blotto


Spikey wrote:Couldn't agree more Blotto.

Too often innovation is held back because someone, somewhere claims something is theoretically not going to be of much use or simply won't work.

And the other side of that is that once someone tries the innovation, and finds that it indeed does work and is of use, the theoretical arguments are naturally adjusted to match the innovation.

Most of our achievements on this planet are pretty much like this...first an idea is ridiculed, then it's attacked, then when shown to work, it's accepted as self evident.

If only we could adopt mental attitudes and practices to find ways where something WILL work, as opposed to spending SO much energy and time finding ways that something WON'T work...we'd be so much better off as a species.


i couldn't have put that better myself . your absolutely bang on the money, with the above statement.


PreviousNext

  • Related topics
    Replies
    Views
    Last post
Visit Disclose.tv on Facebook