Author Topic: The most efficient type of wind generator?  (Read 2708 times)

0 Members and 2 Guests are viewing this topic.

DavidPV

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 10
The most efficient type of wind generator?
« on: May 14, 2008, 11:46:12 PM »
I am new to the wind generator terminologies, wondering if any internet site could explain the difference by comparing these different technologies.


Radial Air Core,

AirCore,

Iron Core,

Axial Gap,

Magnetically levitated,

Etc......................(Any others)


Which one of these are the most efficient for a Permanent Magnet Wind Generator? and also, which one is least & most economical?


Thanks. Dave.



Hmm, You want fries with that?

« Last Edit: May 14, 2008, 11:46:12 PM by (unknown) »

TomW

  • Super Hero Member Plus
  • *******
  • Posts: 5130
  • Country: us
Re: The most efficient type of wind generator?
« Reply #1 on: May 14, 2008, 08:14:49 PM »
Dave;


Some of those terms are new to me , at least as applied to DIY turbines and I have messed with this stuff for a long time. Looks more like a physics homework assignment than a genuine builders question to me. Good luck with getting answers.


Lots of folks here may be able  answer these questions so you can start building. I will leave it to them. You are building, right?


Tom

« Last Edit: May 14, 2008, 08:14:49 PM by TomW »

Flux

  • Super Hero Member Plus
  • *******
  • Posts: 6275
Re: The most efficient type of wind generator?
« Reply #2 on: May 15, 2008, 01:11:05 AM »
Some terms are in general use, others probably come from dreamland and are just confusing.


Electrical machines can be radial or axial depending on the direction of the flux path.


Most conventional machines are radial with the flux flowing in the radial direction.


A small number of commercial things using modern magnets are axial such as pancake motors. The axial construction seems mostly to be home built stuff as it removes a lot of mechanical constraints on the construction.


Traditionally for 100 years machines have been iron cored with the coils wound in slots.Some of the the very early ones were air cored (no iron) but the electromagnets of the day made this construction unattractive, with the coming of neodymium magnets it has now become more practical and has some advantages for wind power.


Magnetically levitated I had better not comment on its about as useful as your last one Etc.


Efficiency and economy are closely linked and generally the aim is more towards cost effective than the ultimate efficiency. Efficiency in a wind turbine alternator can be very confusing and striving for the highest efficiency may cramp your style.


Most electrical machines are designed for high efficiency at full load but wind things rarely run at full load so you may do better with high efficiency in low winds where power is scarce. This is one reason why air cored machines can compete with iron cored ones for wind and not generally for other forms of power generation .


Flux

« Last Edit: May 15, 2008, 01:11:05 AM by Flux »

finnsawyer

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1565
Re: The most efficient type of wind generator?
« Reply #3 on: May 15, 2008, 09:00:46 AM »
Hmm?  M'thinks you need a primer on how (axial) alternators work.  Check the following link.  After you study it you can then figure out how the regular three phase design works.  The basic principles are the same.  Namely, the net effect of the moving magnets on each coil is just the sum of the effects of each magnet that is affecting a given coil at a particular time.  This is known as the "Principle of Superposition" and is valid for linear processes.  The basic physical law that governs this interaction, Faraday's Law, is linear as far we know.


     http://www.fieldlines.com/story/2006/4/21/16237/9933    

« Last Edit: May 15, 2008, 09:00:46 AM by finnsawyer »

vawtman

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1425
Re: The most efficient type of wind generator?
« Reply #4 on: May 15, 2008, 05:06:28 PM »
Hi Dave

Are you familiar with(google search the board on your right?)You can switch to the net if you wish.

 Type in your words and see what happens.I would shy away from the last one though.(mag Lev)

 Different turbines need different designs


 Mark

« Last Edit: May 15, 2008, 05:06:28 PM by vawtman »

ghurd

  • Super Hero Member Plus
  • *******
  • Posts: 8059
Re: The most efficient type of wind generator?
« Reply #5 on: May 16, 2008, 08:58:35 PM »
I would like to say this again, in the same words...


"Efficiency and economy are closely linked and generally the aim is more towards cost effective than the ultimate efficiency. Efficiency in a wind turbine alternator can be very confusing and striving for the highest efficiency may cramp your style."


"Efficiency".

X watts in Y swept area?

X watts in Y swept area at 5MPH or 350MPH?

X watts for $20 or $20,000?


G-

« Last Edit: May 16, 2008, 08:58:35 PM by ghurd »
www.ghurd.info<<<-----Information on my Controller

spinningmagnets

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 600
Re: The most efficient type of wind generator?
« Reply #6 on: May 17, 2008, 10:07:06 PM »
Hi Dave, I am fairly new and haven't built anything yet.


A lot of sincere and smart people have been working on this for a long time. When it comes time to build, I will stick with a proven design, described by honest people who aren't trying to sell me anything. Do not believe any ads or manufacturer claims.


To get electricity you have to spin magnets next to copper coils. Radial flux means you're spinning a soda can shape inside a slightly larger stationary soda can. Axial flux is like spinning a pancake next to another pancake.


For the one-time expense of adding a second set of spinning magnets on the other side of the stator of coils, the output will be noticeably improved in all conditions.


It is easier to add a second magnet rotor, and then adjust the air-gap to the optimum distance from the stator on an axial flux. On a radial, it is much harder.


Why 3 blades? even numbers of blades have a small problem at high RPM's, so 2 and 4-bladed designs will work, but 3 is better. 5-bladed props are more trouble and expense, but some people have used these in low-wind sites. High blade-count props have more torque, but the high solidity forces some of the wind around the prop instead of through it.


Why 3-phase? One-phase can make a filament bulb noticeably flicker. I think this is called "flutter". Two phase has less flutter, but 3-phase is very smooth for a small additional complexity. 4-phase would work OK, but it would need 4 rectifiers instead of just 3. If you build an odd-phase machine, few people will be able to answer any questions you have.


Voltage? Wind-gens, inverters, and chargers are usually 12, 24, or 48 volts. If you build a 36, 60, or other custom voltage wind-gen, you will also have to build a custom charger and inverter.


"I think" iron-core means steel or iron is put in the center of the copper coils to help focus the magnetic fields. I think air-core just means there is no iron/steel. The coils are usually set in a poured epoxy form that hardens, but they are not called epoxy-cored.


"Mag-Lev" Magnets have two poles, commonly called North and South. Opposite poles attract, and like poles repel each other. If you configured a bunch of magnets so an axle and a frame had like poles that were facing each other, the axle would float in a type of "air bearing". It would have unusually low friction. Strong magnets are expensive, so I don't think it would be worth all the extra trouble.


Above a certain size, there is a cost benefit per output by converting a common industrial electrical motor into a radial PMA by removing the rotor, and altering it to add magnets (if you find a used one at a good price). Here, its called a "Zubbly conversion".


I hope this helps, and I haven't butchered the info too badly.

« Last Edit: May 17, 2008, 10:07:06 PM by spinningmagnets »

Kevortex

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 27
Mag Lev
« Reply #7 on: May 20, 2008, 10:12:22 AM »
There is a Magnetically levitated VAWT on YouTube. Hunt around, you'll find it.
« Last Edit: May 20, 2008, 10:12:22 AM by Kevortex »