hmmmm let me see
"I think that this issue came about originally because there was no basic concept of what was being compared and the issue is still with us" I think jerry had a basic concept, but i dont think it has been properly seen from that point on weather what he was trying to had any relevance to what he thought he was going to achieve.
As I see it, you cannot directly compare jerry, delt, star, extended delta or any other topology in the isolation of the lab.
What Hugh, the Dans and most other people want, is the maximum AH in their battery pack, for the prop they have up the pole. simple really..........or is it?
It would be easy to test for the efficiency of each system in the lab, in fact I think you have done a very good job of that in your graphical presentation (even the magenta). The reason I took issue with that comparison, was that it did not ring true with what we see in real world. (not because you failed, on the contrary your results were very credible ie power into dynamic matched loads ).
In practice however the systems converge at some point, and then diverge opposite to their original positions of which was the best. This led to ed looking at star delta switching systems (and others as well) in order to get better AHours in the battery pack... It turns out that it may well be just as simple not too for the extra power gained v's the complexity it introduced. But the fact that it was touted in the first place shows us that something else is at work here. Star for low start up was good, but for the SAME stator, delta was better at higher speeds. We wont bother to explian why, thats been done to death.
That tells us that there is a dynamic at work here. The results of each system seem to all have their place in the sun at some charge rate.
What we have to really deal with is.
- a big fat static low impedance load that barely changes. we'll call this a battery pack
- An incredibly dymanic "power proportional to v cubed" resource that we need to capture. otherwise known as wind
- The transducer. This needs to match a wildy variable power source to an incredibly static load. this is our beloved windmill/alternator device.
Not an easy ask is it?
For ease of building with common materials, hugh and then the dans, have prommulgated the dual axial flux wind gennie to do that task. And it does it very well..... mostly
However, it is static in its construction. It cannot change its flux to match slow/fast wind speeds, it cant change its stator windings as power requirements change between dynamic power input, and static load, in fact it cant change any specification within its construction except turn out of the wind if it all gets too scary.
Just to complicate matters, the blades are only partly forgiving. Air is an elastic driver, it can give you a fair amount of latitude for forgivness with power matching, but then if we get too stiff in our alternator, we stall the blades.
So low restance or too many turns whilst good for alternator output bode poorly for system efficiency.
So the only thing left we have at our disposal is the one thing we try and get rid of....winding resistance. Without this, our useful range of operation would be stymied significantly. Without it, we would wind for nice cut in, only to find blade stall just down the road. Thats why we tend not to wind for low cut in speed in delta...it's good for alt efficiency, but the blades stall very soon after...poor system efficiency. So were dammned if we do ie. wind coil for 0 resistance-the blades stall. And we're dammned if we dont- to high resistance and the power out goes down and ends up heating up the stator instead.
So what the relevant efficiencies are between the different wiring systems becomes secondary to what actually gives the most bounce to the ounce for real world winds, site locations, blade design, blade nos. All thigs in the system can be called into question. One thing we can use as a weather vane, is that people who's livlyhood depend on building and selling wind turbimes for the serious hardnosed decision makers will try much harder to solve the no-mans land between the wind and the load.
Variable flux, variable blades variable load switching, all kinds of cunning things i don't even know about, they will all have been tried. For Jerry, so long as he's still enjoying the "pursuit of excellence" with his infectious enthusiasm that he seems to exude, then go jerry.
I can't imagine any solid data will ever emerge, given the swag of soft frames of reference that swirl around the ever dynamic jerrybuild, so many unanswerable variables. but the journey has been fun for all concerned, and i've no doubt that if and when the results do come out, then the basis of appeal for wrongful conviction will be plentiful for devotee's of any other system than the chosen one
"I hope this clears the issue of what we are trying to compare, if we can't agree on this then there will never be an answer.
Flux"
I think I agree with your general thrust, if that thrust is...the answer is a pine apple. It always has been a pine apple and It will always be a pineapple. or sentiment to that effect.
and Jerry, ignore all this and keep havin fun..........oztules
ps I have my own idiot things to prove at the moment (36 poles..you jest surley), and I can feel the quicksand between my toes already.......havent even got my shoes off yet
