Another company making impossible claims

[Titantornado]

This company, Stormblade Turbine, was brought to my attention on another board.  Their wild claims are so beyond reality, it's a wonder they are still in business.

Quote- "Stormblade Turbine can convert up to 70% of wind power into electricity, double the current average."

I guess they never heard of the Betz Limit.  This is the worst, blatent lie they have published.

Quote- "The propeller blades and all the moving parts are housed within the nacelle and therefore pose no danger to migrating birds or bats."

Not that I ever bought into turbines being a significant threat to birds and bats, but how can they claim "no danger" when you still have an open front end?  

Quote- "It produces more power per rotation, Increased electrical output"

Umm, no.  Maybe more torque, but not more power, which we know is a factor of swept area, wind velocity, and rotor effiency.

Quote- "It is smaller in size, Lower visual impact"

While not a lie, it certainly is deceptive, as it sort of implies that a smaller unit compared to a standard commercial turbine, can put out equal power.

Just thought I'd put this here to see what opinions come of it.

[stephent]

You have a good point, but just remember that 150 years ago even electricity sounded rather far fetched. Spaceflight was a distant dream in the future, and several things we now take for granted were not even being considered as a dream yet.

He "might" have a new approach, ya never know.

And then again he might be promoting a new company to sell shares of stock from to get his own Beemer to drive.

And it could be to drum up business for some more high dollar lecture tours he could give. (he does need more--see schedule--old and out of date)

He "could" be the new upcoming Edison of the Wind Power movement....

I'll with hold final judgement until he comes out with something concrete, but right now I'm more/less in your corner, but a lot of ideas were dismissed as crackpot that were later well proven. Like some of da Vinci's drawings.

I try to keep an open--but well guarded--mind about technology--ya just never know these days what's gonna pop up in technology.

[wdyasq]

"He "could" be the new upcoming Edison of the Wind Power movement...."

stephent - are you sure you didn't mean EDSEL?

Ron

[boB]

It looks like a giant commercial, sit down type hair dryer.

boB

[lohearth]

  Looks alot like another design I believe was made by an ex-jet pilot. It was a multiprop turbine inside a black ramscoop. He also made some questonable claims of power and the rest. Think it was 8-12 months ago and I haven't heard anything more about it. I think this one will have a similar fate.

                               Loharth  

[finnsawyer]

The Betz limit applies to the air passing through the blade assembly.  If you speed up the air before it gets to the blades, the Betz limit as related to the incident air stream does not apply.  The Betz limit applies to the faster moving air, which occurs due to the presence of the nacelle.  If you don't believe that this effect is real just consider the case of walking between two buildings when a wind is blowing from the proper direction.  That extra force you feel against your body compared to walking in an open field is real and implies the faster moving air carries more energy and hence could provide more power.  Of course, these people need to go beyond nice drawings.  They need to build a working prototype and do some wind tunnel tests.

[stephent]

Well, I know I'm gonna be ostracized. criticized, and possibly threatened with neutering, but I'm gonna side with finsawyer here on "possibilities".

Seems almost everyone can agree that the design with wind channeling "wings" for a vawt might help direct a bit more airflow across the blades--so what's so unspecial about a "round" shaped channeling deflector wing on a hawt? (same design used very successfully on a vawt--the chimney effect design--so just turn it horizontal in your mind and face it to the wind).

And it's VERY possible to use several sets of blades in  the same wind area envelope to extract more power then one set would do, although diminishing returns happens fast.

There hasn't been very much detrimental data disproving the new (?) Chinese MagLev generator that claims generation in 3 mph breezes yet. (Alton's wind/blade calc--do a 10 metre blade, and a 16 metre blade set just for grins)

We sure ain't at the very pinicale of wind generation developement yet.

But as the other 9X% of the websites tout of miracle generator developements--this one could be just another one of "THOSE" which hopes to garner a few $$ more from touting miracles then developements. And then again--is it? Is it the future Menlo Park or the sucking up naming of a particular style of auto?

Is this the same thinking as the world record 7' diameter blade set new King of the Hill or a pipedream? (ungainly looking thing, but very functional)

The figure of 70% wind power extraction? Umm, well, maybe on paper.

Bet Zub's crystal ball would help here.

[Stonebrain]

Haha,

imagine the size of the nacelle for a megawatt unit.

(and the cost of it).

70% or not,the idea is ridiculous.

Go to Wondermagnet.com Home Page

cheers,

stonebrain

[Stonebrain]

'Go to Wondermagnet.com Home Page'

Don't know where this line is coming from

it wasn't supposed to be there.

cheers,

stonebrain

[wind4Reg]

Notice a clue on the site: "I hold a PGCE, Computer Graphics from University of London..."

I wonder if that includes PhotoShop expertise? I am curious about what jet plane that so called wind turbine got photoshopped from? There are so many making claims like this, there must be money in it, I wonder how much one makes from something like this?  

[craig110]

I agree totally with you.  As history is filled with "limits" that are changed as the way of viewing the problem changes, I think the worst use of a limit is to use it as a reason to block research or to automatically claim that something can't be.  And no, I'm not saying the Betz limit is wrong or that this company's claims are correct.  I'm just saying that the dog, tech progress, should wag the tail; not the other way around.

[sPuDd]

I can see a bird/bat flying up to that thing and thinking,

"That would be a top little cave to fly into..." splat

sPuDd..

[finnsawyer]

I took another look at the drawing.  As usual they got the shape backwards.  If you want to maximize the speed up of the air you need to deflect it inward not outward.  Most of their deflection will be outward.  Seems everybody tends to do it that way.  In any case, a speed up of the air at and near the tips should have a profound effect.  After all, isn't that where everyone says the maximum power comes from?  This kind of design pops up from time to time, but no one seems to actually have been successful at it.  Might it be that they don't really understand what is going on?  If you speed up the air you need to change the angle of attack of the blade accordingly for best results.

[gordon01639]

One to watch maybe, he's not actually asking for anything at the moment. Most of these scams are usually pretty upfront at asking for investors.

Gordon.

[electrondady1]

it may be possible to form a tear drop shaped  interior nacell to force the air to the tips of the blades.

it might be possible to form the exterior shell in such a way to generate a venturi.

but what percentage of increase in power will these additions produce?

i like vawts but to what extent will the addition of a cowling make to the output.?

i look with envy at hawts that can generate perhaps 2x power with nothing more than

three cleverly shaped boards

i think if you take into account the use of materials and extra cost involved, it might be more expiedient to simply build more bare bones turbines.

[finnsawyer]

We have no idea what is going on inside the nacelle, but you are right about adding a "nose cone".  That will not so much force the air toward the tips as it will cause a further increase in the average air speed.  The whole structure would be a venturi anyway.  I don't think a 35% efficiency is all that impressive to start with.  The addition of the nacelle will eliminate tip vortices leaving drag as the destroyer of efficiency.  So, how close to the Betz Limit could one get without any speed up in the air (don't deflect any air inward, and don't have a nose cone)?  With the sped up air, as it passes through the blades and Betz' Limit applies, it will leave the nacelle at a speed in excess of the incident air.  This air must be reincorporated into the airstream.  The air passing over the outside of the nacelle may be moving still faster, so that the air leaving the nacelle is drawn to the sides by the lower pressure of that flow creating a partial vacuum and thereby helping the efficiency.      

[rotornuts]

I could be wrong but I think the motion of the rider adds momentum to the incoming air.