Author Topic: start of machine #2  (Read 1639 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

jacquesm

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 467
start of machine #2
« on: December 24, 2004, 06:10:05 AM »
So, we have now officially started on machine #2 ! This project will probably occupy us during the next weeks / months, and I would like to invite you all to comment on it as it goes along.



A few decisions about this new machine have been made, but plenty of stuff is still up for grabs.



We have learned a lot from our previous experience, and we'd like to put those lessons into practice somehow and get a grip on a more complicated machine in order to help us to learn faster (we'd learn nothing by repeating the same thing over and over again).



Here are the things we are sure about:




  • this will also be a 16 ' machine
  • we will again aim for 2400 watts at maximum rotor speed (before feathering kicks in)
  • it will be a 3 blader
  • it will be an upwind machine
  • it will have a frame rather than a tubular housing
  • low wind and high wind performance should be maximized (#1 will do the one or the ohter but not with the same configuration)
  • it should operate totally safe unattended
  • it will have active pitch control
  • it will - eventually, not at first - be a tailless machine
  • it will be a 'zubbly' style conversion machine at heart




The reasoning behind the various choices is not always driven by 'keep it simple' here, that much is obvious, we want to learn as much as we can and what we're trying to do here is to make a scale model of a 'large' utility type windmill.



These machines are usually in the 1...2 megawat range, and obviously we will not be able to get that much power out of a 16' rotor, but we do believe that it is possible to make a fully functional model of a machine like that.



The biggest advantages compared to the 'current' machine are that the active pitch control will allow you total control over the pitch of the blades at any given RPM, it will even allow dynamic adjustment of the pitch from the ground as the machine is turning.



This will also allow you to start up 'coarse' and then to move to finer pitch as the rotor speeds up and gets more efficient.



To start this project we decided to go and look for a suitable motor to convert, and then to make a new shaft (much thicker than the original) and rotor for that motor.



After talking to Zubbly he suggested we look for a 215 T nema frame, and while shopping around we found one just like that in the local motor rewinding shop (a 215 TC actually) with burned out windings that we could take home for free. It has an aluminum housing which should facilitate cooling, and a 'through' shaft, which will make it easier to attache the pitch control unit to the back of the shaft.



We spent a day and a half to remove the old burned out windings and clean it up, and in parallel to that we have started the fabrication of one half of the rotor.



The rotor is going to be a 12 pole job, with 1x2x.5" magnets on them in two sets of 12, for 24 magnets in total.



The rotor will have 13 flat sections (drawing is here), the 13th is a half section to reduce cogging.



The rotor is split into two parts to allow us to rotate the halves with respect to each other to pick the least cogging configuration.



The first half is now ready to be milled on our newly acquired little indexing table, which we hope to get to tomorow.



pictures follow:



The industrial motor (10 HP, 4 pole, Lincoln Electric 440/220)







The front side bell







The rotor (fan & end bell still attached) notice the fire damage on the back side!







The burned out guts:







Stripping out the wiring (we couldn't put it over a fire because it's aluminum!)











Now how did that pile come out of those little slots ??







machining the inside bore for the shaft in the new rotor: (to 50 mm)











Cleaning up the outside:











The finished rotor blank, ready for milling (sitting on the index table, but not yet attached to it, I still need to drill some holes for that):





« Last Edit: December 24, 2004, 06:10:05 AM by (unknown) »

Victor

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 93
Re: start of machine #2
« Reply #1 on: December 24, 2004, 10:44:35 AM »
1 The rotor will have 13 flat sections (drawing is here), the 13th is a half section to reduce cogging.


I could not open the drawing, but the 13th should be a third of a section.


2 The rotor is split into two parts to allow us to rotate the halves with respect to each other to pick the least cogging configuration.


 If 1 is done correctly there will be no cogging and 2 will only reduce the output.


Victor

« Last Edit: December 24, 2004, 10:44:35 AM by Victor »

jacquesm

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 467
Re: start of machine #2
« Reply #2 on: December 24, 2004, 03:33:04 PM »
ouch... yes, Victor you are absolutely right, it's 1/3rd not 1/2 (it's a slot you're skewing, not a magnet... )



Wonder what I was smoking. The real problem is that I started working as soon as I got up (checked fieldlines, no comments...) so now I have a rotor that is off by a bit and that will probably cog pretty badly!



This sucks... but lesson learned.



What really bugs me is that I got it right on the 'blue' machine, but the lesson just didn't stick in the right way. When I skewed the laminations I made it so one laminations start ended up above the 'end' of the next one so there is exactly a full 'finger' + 'gap' twist in the stack.



I should have simply reversed that, instead I started thinking I want half a magnet offset. Pretty dumb...



I'm torn between trying it anyway - see how bad it is - and tossing the piece and machining a new one right away (which is a lot of work, and I just about finished when TomW alerted me to your posting).

« Last Edit: December 24, 2004, 03:33:04 PM by jacquesm »

Gary D

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 442
Re: start of machine #2
« Reply #3 on: December 25, 2004, 08:06:27 AM »
Jacquesm, I wonder if pillow blocks for the front and rear of the motor might take the stress off? It looks like the ends of the motor housing is a bit flimsy for hanging a 16 foot blade assembly with pitch control on... (possibly mount pillow block mounts front and rear with the motor all on a steel plate) just a thought... great work on the first prototype, the fins on this unit look like they will disapate a lot of heat! Good luck on your bet! Probably not worth 2 cents.... Merry Christmas  Gary D.  
« Last Edit: December 25, 2004, 08:06:27 AM by Gary D »

jacquesm

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 467
Re: start of machine #2
« Reply #4 on: December 25, 2004, 08:29:51 AM »
Good point Gary, originally I was going to do just that.



One problem is that pillow blocks are sold in 'imperial' units and that motor shafts, bearings and so on are in 'metric', this causes all kinds of problems.



I had already bought the pillow blocks because originally we were going to do a 'jack shaft' arrangement with a belt drive, but it seems that this might actually work as direct drive.



I've talked over your suggestion with zubbly, and he thinks that it should hold up, so I'll take my chances, but thanks for the feedback anyway. The front 'bell' is cast iron, the webbing is about 3/8 thick in the thinnest of spots and considerably thicker where the ribs are.



The governing system should work a lot more gentle than the current weight based system, also it will be a lot lighter.



« Last Edit: December 25, 2004, 08:29:51 AM by jacquesm »

monte350c

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 228
Re: start of machine #2
« Reply #5 on: December 25, 2004, 12:18:59 PM »
Hi Jacques,


Nice looking rig!


The 50mm shaft probably will handle the loading from the prop etc. - not to belabour the point, but an elegant solution for divorcing the prop loads from the motor would be to use a hub and bearing assembly from a full size front wheel drive car. They're flanged with bolt holes for mounting, hollow with a splined shaft inside, and plenty strong enough to handle lots of torque, axial, and radial loads. Also cheap from the wreckers.


You could use half of the driveshaft with a flex coupler to the motor.


Or if this was used in a jackshaft arrangement, you could arrange a hollow splined shaft for the low speed shaft, and pass a rod up through the middle to do the active pitch control. The activator could then be on the non rotating side of the prop.


This is an example from a GM FWD car:





Out of curiousity, are you going to fill in the airgap between the flats on the magnets and the round ID of the stator - or with that much magnet will it matter??


Good luck with the project!


Ted.

« Last Edit: December 25, 2004, 12:18:59 PM by monte350c »

jacquesm

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 467
Re: start of machine #2
« Reply #6 on: December 25, 2004, 03:50:49 PM »
no, the space will be whatever it will be, about 1.4 mm maximum, and .80 mm minimum.



I will try to go 'trough' the motor directly, I agree, a jackshaft would be nice (it has other advantages too, I already have the pillow blocks and it was what I was going to do originally) but it also costs about 50 watts in power for the drivetrain, and that 50 watts comes right off the low end. So, we'll try to kepe this direct drive for now. If it turns out that's not powerfull enough then we may switch that.



We probably will do that with the next machine, which will be Zubbly's conversion unit, this will allow us to compare those two architectures side by side.



The pillow blocks I bought are pretty heavy duty, 1 15/16 shaft cast iron monsters.

« Last Edit: December 25, 2004, 03:50:49 PM by jacquesm »

monte350c

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 228
Re: start of machine #2
« Reply #7 on: December 25, 2004, 06:57:40 PM »
Thanks for the info Jacques,


You're in good company these days with the direct drive idea - I just had an interesting read on the Enercon site.


http://www.enercon.de/www/en/broschueren.nsf/d9598b84d04a590ec1256ee80049a077/ec043d5840b87458c1256f
240042877d?OpenDocument#


(click on the pdf link)


is the well illustrated brochure for their E-70 model which is a 2 MW direct drive machine. Page 7 shows a neat pic of the approx. 15 foot diameter stator.


Another interesting pic is the pole shoe arrangement which looks to be shaped like a V - probably to cut down on cogging.


They're using winglets on their rotor blade tips too.


Altogether a pretty neat looking machine. And the COP according to their chart is 50!!


Now if all that stuff would just scale down...


Ted.

« Last Edit: December 25, 2004, 06:57:40 PM by monte350c »