Honeywell/Earthtronics- anything worth considering

[Curbie]

1)    I've been pondering their hub, spoke, rim configuration which seems interesting at first blush.

2)    Driving the generator by the rim, out where the blades are widest and creating the most power seems to have some merit.

3)    I wondering if the cowl act the same way that the cowl on the Dyson bladeless fan does, to "induce air"? http://www.dyson.com/technology/airmultiplier.asp#HowItWorks

4)    I can't image that induced air serves to increase area or wind velocity, but maybe air density (rho)?

Set aside the marketing hype, is there anything worth considering for the home-builder?

Curbie

[Perry1]

I don't think there is much worth anything there.

Doesn't matter where that the alt is located around the rim. It's not capturing any more power at all. That is a wrong assumption. No merit in that, in fact, it probably creates more stresses having the rotating mass out far from the axis.

The cowl is pretty useless, no magic there. No special feature of inducing air. Something like that would take more power to induce the air than the turbine would reap.

Sorry to say it but I don't see any redeeming qualities to the Honeywell turbine.

Perry

[defed]

i posted links to this new turbine awhile back, but it was deleted.  it was invented locally to me, tho i have never actually seen one.  i will try to post it again, and maybe in the 'reviews' section.  i have no idea if it does what it claims.

http://thedailynewsonline.com/articles/2009/12/10/theme_pages/6264239.txt

http://www.windtamerturbines.com/

[Curbie]

defed,

Don't feel bad about you posts getting deleted, half of mine have been deleted, it's their board, they can do what they want.

This company builds a "Diffuser Augmented Wind Turbine (DAWT)" which claims to exceed the Betz limit by use of a duct around the HAWT that they claim increase mass flow through the blades and/or enabling a greater pressure drop across the rotor blades. (Incomplete or spotty research on the reason for exceeding Betz.)

I did a patent search for:

Inventor: Jerry Brock

All words & exact phrase: WindTamer

... and didn't turn up anything, (not good).

The professor who wrote their research paper http://www.windtamerturbines.com/pdf/IndependentTesting.pdf

Kenneth Visser, Ph.D.

Department of Mechanical and Aeronautical Engineering

Does exist there (good) and the research paper carries some references on this diffuser technology, which I'll try and track down.

There are a few recent research references on diffuser technology and all a sudden there are turbines employing the technology and citing energy claims that exceed Betz, so maybe it's just marketing BS, maybe not, I see if I can track down some math.

Thanks for the link.

Curbie

[defed]

i posted the links here because it was sort of similar to the honeywell in appearance.  i made another post in the reviews section and it is deleted again.  i just don't get why.  there is a big thread on the honeywell mill, but when i ask about the windtamer, apparently it's not allowed.

allegedly, there are several of these mills up and running at a local airport, and a couple of residences.  it has been in the local paper several times (not that that means anything).  somewhere on the windtamer site, there is a pdf about the research, but sounds like you already saw that.

the latest newspaper article talks to a guy who bought/is buying one, and it's only about 15 miles from me, so i might go see it when the WNY weather gets nice again.

thanks for the reply Curbie.

[Perry1]

I just read through that paper and there are holes everywhere in it. Right off the bat he uses a swept area for the blades instead of the diffuser. Put a 2X bigger negative pressure diffuser behind  (or a funnel in front) of a set of blades and the performance goes up, sure. You are getting more wind into the system. But in the Cp calc's he uses the smaller blade diameter.

Then look at his test data. Over 40% of his figures show a CP that is overunity! And not a mention of measurement error. as he states he is happy with that data and proves his assumptions with it.

Perry

[TomW]

Perry;

Always with the negative waves.

I bet you could not sell one ounce of Snake Oil. These Wind Scammers seem capable of selling tanker loads of it, however.

Why should reality enter into the discussion?

It is just such a downer when folks do that.

BTW to the "my post got deleted" complainers:

That is a Fully Documented Scoop Bug # 173947.11 Rev B.

Actually it is usually 100% user error from not realizing that Scoop rejected the post for some reason it doesn't always explain.

Posts simply go MIA, too for unknown reasons that it is not in my job description to discover why or explain.

I know its more fun to be victimized but it gets old seeing "my post was deleted" stated as fact when it is simply not true.

This pimping some cool new idea that Da Vinci had and failed to get to work is Diary material at best.

I saw it on the internet, it must be true!

There, a rant to make Damon happy!

Tom

[Perry1]

Yes Tom, my fault, you are right. After further investigation I found a vid on Youtube about it that proves me wrong. I will be ordering one of these tomorrow.

I hope they take Paypal.

Perry

[Curbie]

Defed,

Well don't sweat the small stuff, after all this is primarily a DIY board; if you have machines running by you, and your interested in one, run up and ask the folks that own it about it. Can't hurt.

Newspapers mostly just parrot what their told, in my view an independent owner would be a far better resource.

Curbie    

[Curbie]

In the windtamer marketing document references, the first one is:

"An investigation on diffuser augmented wind turbine design"

Phillips, Derek Grant (2003)

Which I tracked down to here:

http://researchspace.auckland.ac.nz/handle/2292/1940

I'm not really interested in windtamer's machine or claims, just if the technology they use has any DIY value (the notion of this thread); this link is to a thesis on this technology and is BIG so I haven't even started it, let along finished it, so who knows if anything is there.

The idea that all that will be known is known, in wind turbines or anything else, is a little counter-intuitive to me, but I suppose for those who know all that will ever be known, everything new is actually usually 100% (?) snake oil.

Curbie

[Perry1]

I just downloaded that doc and your right, it is long. That old Grumman work was pretty interesting back when they were doing it. Their testing shows they were able to get past Betz in some regimes. I have seen others that have done it as well. One researcher has a paper where he captures thermal energy from the airstream as well which allows him to get a point or two above Betz. Big question is 'does all the claptrap for a couple of points of efficiency make sense'?

I don't like the design philosophy myself, right or wrong. You can make a 10 meter DAWT with 15 meters dia of diffuser or a 13 meter 'bare' turbine and achieve the same performance. It's kinda a no brainer from a cost and complexity standpoint, that's why Grumman abandoned it and the company they licensed it to failed.

There is some cool stuff in the paper and reading work like that always seems to spur new ideas. Not sure how we can incorporate some of this stuff into a DIY turbine. But I guess that's the fun.

I'm just kinda turned off on the Windtamer site because it is void of any real performance data and I always am suspicious of companies that list their competitive advantages as 'needing a 20 foot tower instead of a 150 tower' and 'doesn't kill thousands of birds' as they list.

Perry

[defed]

seems a bit coincidental that my only 2 posts that have ever disappeared where when i was asking if anyone had seen this windtamer before.  just was curious as to why.  not really complaining.

nor am i really interested in the windtamer.  i just presented it here for discussion as it is 'new'...well, been out for a cpl yrs, but i've never seen it discussed.  i'm not that knowledgeable about digging into their data and finding the errors and or exaggerations.  that's why i posted it here so the smarter guys than me could have a look.  i've been reading this board long enough to know that most claims on commercial mills are exaggerated.

granted, if it really did what was claimed, i MIGHT be interested, but still, they are rather expensive.

[Curbie]

Perry,

Man, your way quicker than I am, I haven't even cracked that document, other than to see it was 350 pages, or so. Maybe today and I hoping there is some interesting math in that it is a thesis, I'd like to expand and cross-check my spread-sheets.

I feel your Windtamer turn off, I'm annoyed at all companies over-selling their good points, and hiding their bad points, I know it's only "good marketing", but to me, it seems without some honest balance the practice is at best deceitful, at worst akin to lying.

From a commercial stand point I understand the notion of chasing a couple points of efficiency, but from a DIY standpoint I agree with your cost and complexity analysis; I have the Dans book, therefore a "tried and true" way to go, but the more I figure out why an idea the won't work, seems to strengthen ideas that do.

FYI, a guy named Ken Forman who I think was on the original Grumman team, I think now also consults with Derek Grant Phillips, the guy who wrote that thesis. These two guys think they're on to something, whether that something will ever have any DIY application is unclear, but I agree, that's the fun.

Thanks for the feedback.

Curbie

[watermanhfl]

defed hello,

I am also close to Windtamer hometown of Geneseo NY.  They just installed one on 15A just North of Hemlock.  Unit was searching for wind and turning just at cut-in best I could tell from road.  5 minutes later at home my 10' Otherpower was more steady and putting out 100 watts.  tower 2x theirs.

Email me at a-pow-ell @ roche-ster.rr.com(no -s)

Ant