Author Topic: Dan Blade vs 222 for garbogen  (Read 13373 times)

0 Members and 5 Guests are viewing this topic.

HenryVG

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 24
Dan Blade vs 222 for garbogen
« on: June 21, 2011, 11:15:37 AM »
I'm looking at a set of blades for a garbogen I'm building and was wondering if the 222 design (especially with the latest table saw discussion) or the Dan design would be the best choice for these, my first set of blades. They will probably be 60" dia.
Performance is my main consideration, but ease of fabrication is also a factor.

Thanks for any opinions.

Henry

Southbuck

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 39
Re: Dan Blade vs 222 for garbogen
« Reply #1 on: June 21, 2011, 12:32:44 PM »
Ive built 2 garbogens and have used danb style blades.
Alot depends how you have the stator wired and for what voltage you want to charge batteries at.
Mine is hooked to a 24v bank.
I don't understand all the hype of the 222 profile. Any blade running a 10 degree pitch will deliver torque but not high end speed.
Ive built 15+ sets of blades, a flat plank set at 10 degrees will start early and deliver incredible torque. A blade made to match an alternator
will depend on cut in speed and max operating range of rpm needed.

Im sure others can help more.

Southbuck

taylorp035

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1209
  • Country: us
  • Stressed spelled backwards is Desserts
Re: Dan Blade vs 222 for garbogen
« Reply #2 on: June 21, 2011, 09:55:26 PM »
Quote
I don't understand all the hype of the 222 profile. Any blade running a 10 degree pitch will deliver torque but not high end speed.

I agree.  The 222 profile is much higher tech, so I imagine it would provide better performance once the real aerodynamics kick in at higher wind speeds.  But the 222 profile is hard to carve by hand ( I haven't tried though ). 

ChrisOlson

  • SuperHero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 3644
  • Country: us
Re: Dan Blade vs 222 for garbogen
« Reply #3 on: June 22, 2011, 12:23:38 PM »
I don't understand all the hype of the 222 profile. Any blade running a 10 degree pitch will deliver torque but not high end speed.

The high end speed is not all it's cracked up to be.  Using a torquey profile like the Gottingen 222 allows you to design a generator with good low speed cut in without running into issues with the rotor running at tip speed ratios that are too low for a high speed profile when the wind picks up.  It maximizes output in the 12 mph wind range where it matters the most for the majority of installations, without compromising high end output due to a generator that's too "stiff" for a high speed blade profile.

If you're interested only in high end "bragging numbers" then a high speed blade is the way to go.  If you're interested in maximizing kWh output day in and day out, then the "hype" of the GOE222 is well deserved.
--
Chris

Southbuck

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 39
Re: Dan Blade vs 222 for garbogen
« Reply #4 on: June 22, 2011, 01:21:53 PM »
I think a flat faced blade with a profile on back set at 10 degrees would be near equal performance.
The 222 has been out for years, I just think its the pitch of 10 degrees that puts it in a good range for a transmission built mill.
That is the lower rpm scale.
Not peak bragging rights by running a DanB blade profile, its peak performance obtained in high winds.
Duh.
I built blades with 3,5,7, and 10 degree pitch, if I want more torque and less speed I increase the pitch.
It does work.

Southbuck

HenryVG

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 24
Re: Dan Blade vs 222 for garbogen
« Reply #5 on: June 22, 2011, 03:35:22 PM »
Thanks for the input, guys.

I see that I really need to first understand a lot more about what my cut in speed will be and get a realistic estimate of the average wind at the site where my friend will be mounting this.

I'm off to search for cutin speed calculations.

Thanks again.

Henry

Janne

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 244
  • Country: fi
  • Turbiini
    • My image gallery
Re: Dan Blade vs 222 for garbogen
« Reply #6 on: June 22, 2011, 04:09:29 PM »
The biggest advantage for the GOE222 designs floating around here is that they all utilize a straight / no taper blade. When thinking of the ideal situation, this blade of course is not very good, as parts of the blade will always be running stalled, or at too high speed. The thing that makes these blades work is the crooked way most of the turbines here are loaded, by direct connecting them to the batteries with a rectifier. If we have a blade that is designed to work optimally at a given tip speed ratio (blade with twist and taper calculated accordingly with spreadsheets) installed into a machine that is loaded this way, what will happen is that the whole blade will hit stall at once, and that of course plays havoc on the efficiency figures beyond that point. But with the no twist no taper blade there will be always some sections of the blade providing lift, so the effects of bad load matching are less significant.

If you want to have a proper load matching, say for example with an MPPT controller, then the blades should be definitely designed for a chosen Tip Speed Ratio to get the most out of it. But if the intent is the charge batteries directly with rectifiers, or feed heating resistors without any controller, then the straight no twist no taper design could very well be a winner. The effect of the chosen aerofoil is not so drastic, and I suspect the results would be quite similar with any reasonable profile no twist no taper blade, for example NACA4415 instead of the GOE222

Anyways, these are mostly opinions based on my own intuitions, not so much on any hard technical evidence. I'd be interested what others think about this.
Nothing's as easy as drilling a hole in the wrong place

ChrisOlson

  • SuperHero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 3644
  • Country: us
Re: Dan Blade vs 222 for garbogen
« Reply #7 on: June 22, 2011, 04:11:11 PM »
I think a flat faced blade with a profile on back set at 10 degrees would be near equal performance.

Possibly, however, the GOE222 has a very high lift/drag ratio as compared to the Clark-Y.  The Clark-Y was developed for aircraft wings.  The GOE222 was developed by the Gottingen Aeronautics Research Center in Germany for windmills and has a proven track record, used by Wincharger for years.  Many of the more successful commercial turbine companies such as Bergey have continued to use the constant chord/zero taper concept with variations of the GOE222 profile.  I think the Clark-Y/NACA series airfoils are chosen by homebuilders because of ease of carving, not ultimate performance.

Quote
That is the lower rpm scale.

RPM is a function of rotor diameter, not airfoil selection.  Tip Speed Ratio is more important.

Quote
Not peak bragging rights by running a DanB blade profile, its peak performance obtained in high winds.
Duh.

That's many times a misconception.  Peak performance is achieved at the point where the rotor runs at the design TSR of the blades.  Without MPPT, variable air gap, extremely high cut-in speed, or some other schema to prevent the rotor from running below optimum TSR, high wind performance is usually dismal when looking at it from the standpoint of Cp.
--
Chris

opo

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 130
  • Country: mx
    • homepage
Re: Dan Blade vs 222 for garbogen
« Reply #8 on: June 23, 2011, 11:34:16 AM »

One of the advantages I see from the "table saw method" can offer , for the home builders, is to have a blade with a good approximation of an airfoil profile. It is also repeatable. It gives the home builder the posibility of producing consistent blades.

To decide which blade (Dan's, Hugg's, Alton's, wincharger, etc.) to go with for a given alternator is another story. It does not make much sense to say "blade design X is better than blade design Y" without mentioning the alternator, load scheme, wind speed range, etc.

I think a no twist no tapper blade will be a good starting point for your garbogen, make them a little bit longer than your planned diameter so that you can easily adjust the diameter if needed, and also make them so that you can play a little bit with pitch angle, say from 5 to 20 degees. The aifoil is your choice :), but if you have access to a table saw, then why not going with a GOE222 profile?

Cheers,

Octavio 
http://play.google.com/store/apps/developer?id=opo Check my apps aFoil and aFoilSim on android market.

ChrisOlson

  • SuperHero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 3644
  • Country: us
Re: Dan Blade vs 222 for garbogen
« Reply #9 on: June 23, 2011, 11:51:00 AM »
To decide which blade (Dan's, Hugg's, Alton's, wincharger, etc.) to go with for a given alternator is another story. It does not make much sense to say "blade design X is better than blade design Y" without mentioning the alternator, load scheme, wind speed range, etc.

This is good advice.  Virtually any blade profile can be matched to the generator for peak performance at a certain wind speed.  The GOE222 has a fat torque curve and does not lose TSR rapidly as load is applied.  So it works good with "stiff" generators that are too efficient for blades that need higher TSR to operate at their peak.  If you have a high resistance wire run and a generator that lets the turbine spin freely as the wind picks up, or are using MPPT/buck converter, then the GOE222 is not the best choice.
--
Chris

Southbuck

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 39
Re: Dan Blade vs 222 for garbogen
« Reply #10 on: June 24, 2011, 10:14:22 AM »
http://s298.photobucket.com/albums/mm249/Southbuck7/?action=view&current=Hobartfastblade.mp4
no twist, no taper, 7 degree pitch, 5'4" dia blades on garbogen.

http://s298.photobucket.com/albums/mm249/Southbuck7/?action=view&current=MVI_0107.mp4
5 foot cedar, DanB copy.

http://s298.photobucket.com/albums/mm249/Southbuck7/?action=view&current=hobart.mp4
Heres a 4 foot 4 blade made from poplar planks. no profile on back, flat face

more hands on than book smart.

Southbuck

ghurd

  • Super Hero Member Plus
  • *******
  • Posts: 8059
Re: Dan Blade vs 222 for garbogen
« Reply #11 on: June 24, 2011, 05:11:55 PM »
Dan Blades.
Garbogen needs more speed than torque.
222 would be a bad choice.

Get the cut in RPM, calculate the blade TSR to match that RPM at about 6.5 or 7 MPH.

Depending on the original HP rating, wiring, magnets in it, etc, will probably have to make a 2nd set of blades to get the diameter just right.
Most work well with 4~5' diameter.
G-
www.ghurd.info<<<-----Information on my Controller

ChrisOlson

  • SuperHero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 3644
  • Country: us
Re: Dan Blade vs 222 for garbogen
« Reply #12 on: June 24, 2011, 05:34:26 PM »
Garbogen needs more speed than torque.
222 would be a bad choice.

I should probably digress with my lack of hands-on experience and only several thousand hours on GOE222's.  Using a garbage disposal motor would be sort of like taking the field exciter off my Jake 23-10 and trying to use it for a wind turbine.  So my experience is rather limited to the next size up machines.

But I will say this - many folks seem to have some misconceptions about the GOE222 profile.  I ran a 12 foot GOE222 rotor once, unloaded, at 670 rpm in a 30 mph wind, strictly as an experiment to see if the blades self-limit their rotational speed due to tip stall.  They don't.  I burned up a lot of stuff, including blowing up two 165 lb 4D batteries, trying to stop that rotor after it got spooled up.

If you've ever seen a 5 foot Wincharger run, then you know what I mean.  So your advice is probably good - stick with the Dan blades.  Unless the garbogen is robust as hell, GOE222's will probably burn it up.
--
Chris

DanB

  • Global Moderator
  • SuperHero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2153
  • Country: us
    • otherpower.com
Re: Dan Blade vs 222 for garbogen
« Reply #13 on: June 24, 2011, 07:55:48 PM »
those 222 blades do work well and they are very different from what I'm used to.  I've posted this stuff before but again..;. my only experience is with one of our 10' turbines.  The weight of the blades is a LOT more - which by itself changed behavior a lot.  They do have tons of torque - I could shut them down I think any time by shorting the alternator all 3 phases, but not with a single phase.  So on that machine...  a wire broke, it went single phase, they tried to shut down and it burned up.

I know that wincharger used that airfoil on some machines, but I've never actually seen one in person.  Most wincharger blades I've seen look a lot more like what we me - I took a lot from those to come up with our current blades.  Wincharger was around for a long time and tried lots of different stuff.  I grew up with a 6' diameter wincharger (still have bits of it) - but the blade on that was nothing like the 222.
If I ever figure out what's in the box then maybe I can think outside of it.

ChrisOlson

  • SuperHero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 3644
  • Country: us
Re: Dan Blade vs 222 for garbogen
« Reply #14 on: June 24, 2011, 08:27:31 PM »
I believe Wincharger used several vendors for blades in the early days.  My dad still has the Model 611 that my Grandpa bought in the early 30's - it's an Airline Model 611 Deluxe, and he's got the Zenith radio that came with it.  It ran on it's 12 foot tower until I was about 10 or 11 years old and one of the two blades finally broke.  I have the remnants around here someplace and it's most definitely a 222 blade.

In the 1950's Winco Wincharger switched to using extruded aluminum blades on their 12 and 14 foot 32 volt machines, and there's still quite a few of those running around the country.  I spotted one in southern Minnesota a couple years ago - a 12 footer with four blades - and tried to buy it but the guy wouldn't sell it.  From what I could see from the ground those blades were not GOE222 but it was hard to tell.  Two of them were power blades and the other two were governor blades.  So I don't know for sure what they were, other than the fact that they were aluminum.

Edit to throw in a comment:
I tried a set of PowerMax 131's (13.1 foot diameter) on one of my geared turbines that otherwise use GOE222's at a diameter of 3.75 meters or 12.3 feet.  The 222's start at about 3-4 mph wind speed, the first trickle of power comes in at 6 mph and 7.5 TSR (100 rpm) and at 12 mph it's making 330 watts.  The PowerMax blades (S809 airfoil) never really did get the machine turning very good.  They don't start up until about 7 mph and at 12 mph were only putting out 195 watts.  At 12 mph my geared machines run at 5.7 TSR with the 222's, or 155 rpm.  They quite easily reach 300 rpm @ 25 mph, which is 5.3 TSR.

The S809's were slightly larger diameter but not enough to make a significant difference.  I flew them for about a week and only ever got a peak of 488 watts even with gusts in the 25 mph range while I ran them.  They just could not seem to get turning.

However, using those same S809's on a direct drive machine with a little less "stiff" generator, and cutting them in at 8.5 TSR at 8 mph wind speed (140 rpm), they perform quite nicely.  But still are short of the geared 222's at 12 mph by about 30 watts.
--
Chris
« Last Edit: June 24, 2011, 08:58:50 PM by ChrisOlson »

Boss

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 551
  • http://outfitnm.com
    • Outfit Renewable energy site
Re: Dan Blade vs 222 for garbogen
« Reply #15 on: June 25, 2011, 07:58:33 AM »
I'm having difficulties visualising the differences and simultaneities of the blades y'all are talking about
I really can't find anything on the garbogen: Except perhaps it is the PVC pipe cutout type

I found this here http://www.fieldlines.com/board/index.php/topic,138433.html
This looks like the blade from Dans' book and the one we've build four or five sets of
The other type looks like a helicopter blade, both both bottom and top are convex curved?

Is there another blade style?
Trying to get a handle on blade basics obviously
Brian Rodgers
My sustainable lifestyle site http://outfitnm.com no ads, not selling anything either

Southbuck

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 39
Re: Dan Blade vs 222 for garbogen
« Reply #16 on: June 25, 2011, 08:47:13 AM »
Years ago on the old board there was a member called Jerry. He built wind generators out of garbage disposal stator. Motor conversion.
Ive built 2, my last is capable of 100 watts in fairly low wind and close to 500 watts max in a 24v system.

Ive scaled the 222 like you did and Ive seen the 222 at 5 degrees and 7 degrees but apparently royal fab is making them at 10 degree pitch.
Anybody who has built blades know that a 10 degree pitch will provide torque, but will be limited on top end speed.
The garbo gen Ive built requires high speed blades to get it in its power band and Ive seen over 1000 rpm on a 5 foot blade.

The back side of the 222 can be easily duplicated, and the pitch can be changed (when you build them yourself) But they just arnt a 222 blade profile fits all.

Sounds like chris thinks this board is only for 12 foot mills? Janne's mill made his look like a toy.
We dont all struggle to MAKE the power we use. Some of us do it for the fun, not the need.

Southbuck

.

Royalwdg

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 68
  • Country: us
Re: Dan Blade vs 222 for garbogen
« Reply #17 on: June 25, 2011, 11:11:53 AM »
The 6' and the 8' wincharger had profiles pitched at 10 degrees but did not have a concaved front surface. They resembled the clark-y profile. The also had a little taper but still a constant pitch.  These blades were on the 500 and 650 watt machines.  The people using this profile will all tell you that if there is high end limiting, then it's way beyond the rpm range where you should be running.  We've all had to check our shorts a time or two during  a storm .   Dave M

ChrisOlson

  • SuperHero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 3644
  • Country: us
Re: Dan Blade vs 222 for garbogen
« Reply #18 on: June 25, 2011, 11:43:00 AM »
Sounds like chris thinks this board is only for 12 foot mills?

10's and 12's are what I've done the most experimenting with as far as blades.  My Jake is 23 foot but I have to have a crane handy to try different blades on it so it's not too practical.  I have flown a lot of different blade profiles and used to lay up and build fiberglass/carbon fiber composite blades several years ago.  But with my lack of experience flying real equipment less than 6 feet in diameter I guess I should leave the blade threads to the real "experts".
--
Chris

ChrisOlson

  • SuperHero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 3644
  • Country: us
Re: Dan Blade vs 222 for garbogen
« Reply #19 on: June 25, 2011, 01:31:08 PM »
Is there another blade style?
Trying to get a handle on blade basics obviously

Boss, the S809 is a very good wind turbine airfoil, well suited for MPPT or generators with a controlled field.  Being symmetrical it creates no lift at zero angle of attack and thereby self-limits rotational speed due to the airfoil reaching stall at high speeds/low angle of attack.  It runs quite well from 2 degrees up to about 12 degrees AoA.

Non-symmetrical airfoils typically create lift at zero angle of attack and generally have a wider range of AoA that they will operate at quite efficiently - some of them up to 18 degrees AoA.

It's important to make the distinction between angle of attack and blade pitch angle - the two are not the same.
--
Chris

Southbuck

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 39
Re: Dan Blade vs 222 for garbogen
« Reply #20 on: June 25, 2011, 02:08:50 PM »
Thanks for the correction of terminology.
Would not want confusion on that.

I guess you could have stopped at garbogen chris, your knowledge can be spread else where.


Ive tried to help the man, and you want to turn it into all about you.

have a good day all.

Southbuck.

Boss

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 551
  • http://outfitnm.com
    • Outfit Renewable energy site
Re: Dan Blade vs 222 for garbogen
« Reply #21 on: June 25, 2011, 02:17:23 PM »
Thanks Chris
Quote
It's important to make the distinction between angle of attack and blade pitch angle - the two are not the same.
Googled Blade pitch angle images got this

Am I getting warm?
Brian Rodgers
My sustainable lifestyle site http://outfitnm.com no ads, not selling anything either

Southbuck

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 39
Re: Dan Blade vs 222 for garbogen
« Reply #22 on: June 25, 2011, 02:33:20 PM »
The pitch angle is what is used on helicopter rotor type. Its basically the adjustable angle of attack.

From my understanding.

I just found this, hope it helps.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blade_pitch

Southbuck
« Last Edit: June 25, 2011, 02:41:35 PM by Southbuck »

Watt

  • Guest
Re: Dan Blade vs 222 for garbogen
« Reply #23 on: June 25, 2011, 02:59:32 PM »
Thanks Chris for sharing your experience with ths 222 profile.  You've certainly used this profile to better your existing alternators in power production for your uses.  You are doing a fine job helping us and posting first had experience.  Thanks  Mike

 
Thanks for the correction of terminology.
Would not want confusion on that.

I guess you could have stopped at garbogen chris, your knowledge can be spread else where.


Ive tried to help the man, and you want to turn it into all about you.

have a good day all.

Southbuck.

Flux

  • Super Hero Member Plus
  • *******
  • Posts: 6275
Re: Dan Blade vs 222 for garbogen
« Reply #24 on: June 25, 2011, 04:06:53 PM »
Boss

That is right for the pitch angle as shown in your diagram.

The angle of attack is the angle the apparent wind makes to the chord line  of the blade. This apparent wind is not the true wind direction except at start up and that is why start up is difficult, the angle of attack is very large and the blade is in stall.

When running the apparent wind is shifted by the vector angle of ratio of tip speed to wind speed. The wind that the blade sees when running
at speed is much nearer the direction of blade rotation then the real wind direction along the prop axis.

If you go to Hugh's site at www.scoraigwind.com/  there are some drawings somewhere that explain the various angles, showing the real wind, the apparent wind, the angle of attack and the setting or pitch angle, you need the drawing to understand the differences. A prop doesn't fly in the same way as an aeroplane wing until you sort out this apparent wind direction.

Flux

Flux

  • Super Hero Member Plus
  • *******
  • Posts: 6275
Re: Dan Blade vs 222 for garbogen
« Reply #25 on: June 25, 2011, 04:13:39 PM »
I think you go here and click on blade design PDF
http://www.scoraigwind.com/wpNotes/index.htm

Flux

Boss

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 551
  • http://outfitnm.com
    • Outfit Renewable energy site
Re: Dan Blade vs 222 for garbogen
« Reply #26 on: June 25, 2011, 05:25:59 PM »
Quote
When running the apparent wind is shifted by the vector angle of ratio of tip speed to wind speed. The wind that the blade sees when running
at speed is much nearer the direction of blade rotation then the real wind direction along the prop axis.
  Uh Oh! I think it is beginning to sink into my thick scull.
At some point the blade rotational speed becomes more relevant than the wind speed
 
Brian Rodgers
My sustainable lifestyle site http://outfitnm.com no ads, not selling anything either

Boss

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 551
  • http://outfitnm.com
    • Outfit Renewable energy site
Re: Dan Blade vs 222 for garbogen
« Reply #27 on: June 25, 2011, 05:47:11 PM »
Thanks for that link Flux http://www.scoraigwind.com/wpNotes/bladeDesign.pdf  Great and in-depth description... still reading
 
Brian Rodgers
My sustainable lifestyle site http://outfitnm.com no ads, not selling anything either

Flux

  • Super Hero Member Plus
  • *******
  • Posts: 6275
Re: Dan Blade vs 222 for garbogen
« Reply #28 on: June 26, 2011, 03:16:45 AM »
Quote
When running the apparent wind is shifted by the vector angle of ratio of tip speed to wind speed. The wind that the blade sees when running
at speed is much nearer the direction of blade rotation then the real wind direction along the prop axis.
  Uh Oh! I think it is beginning to sink into my thick scull.
At some point the blade rotational speed becomes more relevant than the wind speed
 

Yes more or less.  The true wind speed is the factor that decides the maximum power you get, there is no denying that, but unless the rotational speed is high enough to keep the angle of attack below stall you can't hope to extract much of the available power. The ideal rotational speed will bring you on the blade design tsr and the more you slow the blades below ideal the closer you come to stall. There is a band either side of design tsr that still works well enough but once you hit hard stall the power drops right off.

Flux

Boss

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 551
  • http://outfitnm.com
    • Outfit Renewable energy site
Re: Dan Blade vs 222 for garbogen
« Reply #29 on: June 26, 2011, 08:27:08 AM »
Thanks Flux, Yes we did run a set of hand carved blades that stalled after I added twice as many batteries. I could see them getting faster, then slowing down in constant wind speed. Interesting how it all is related. Some relationships are strong, others, obfuscated. This really is a fun hobby, though. ;D
Brian Rodgers
My sustainable lifestyle site http://outfitnm.com no ads, not selling anything either

ChrisOlson

  • SuperHero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 3644
  • Country: us
Re: Dan Blade vs 222 for garbogen
« Reply #30 on: June 26, 2011, 12:38:27 PM »
Ive tried to help the man, and you want to turn it into all about you.

Not at all.  I have a lot of experience flying different blade profiles on larger machines where the airfoil and matching is critical to peak performance.  People who fly smaller machines generally have more experience experimenting with different blades because it's easier to do and not nearly as expensive.  But the results of blade experiments on small machines are many times harder to compile into useful information as to what works and what doesn't because few people spend the money on a decent tower for these small machines.  Most of them that I've seen are flying at less than ideal heights in turbulent air, which skews results of blade testing.

So I guess my observations on what I've found that works with various combinations on larger machines may not apply to these small "fun" machines.  Few people who are flying the "fun" machines even log kWh output - they'll typically hook up a watt meter or ammeter and see what sort of peak amps or watts they get.  But total energy production, which is what flying a wind turbine is really all about (for those of us who use them to power something like our house), is rarely addressed with small "fun" machines.

So I offer my experiences flying these different blades because maybe it will be useful for somebody flying a small "fun" machine.  I see some misconceptions here already that a 10 degree pitch GOE222 will not work on a garbogen because it's assumed to be a slow turning rotor.  But I'm betting it would work by using a two-blade rotor, aka a Wincharger, instead of a three.

But anyway, whatever.  I'm one of the only builders on this forum that I know of who has ever designed a machine from the ground up, and flown it, with GOE222's.  Many people have flown them on various machines that were adapted from Otherpower designs, or whatever.

I guess what I read in the subject line was whether or not the GOE222 would work on a garbogen.  I think it would, but it will take some adjustments to make it work and GOE222's have proven themselves, in my testing, to be a bit more than you want in higher wind speeds and could damage the generator if some forethought is not given to how you're going to control power.

"Dan Blades" are a bit "safer" in my experience, and much more easily controlled.  I guess if that information is not useful, then you obviously have way more experience with GOE222's than I got, so you can take it from here.
--
Chris

Boss

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 551
  • http://outfitnm.com
    • Outfit Renewable energy site
Re: Dan Blade vs 222 for garbogen
« Reply #31 on: June 26, 2011, 01:12:33 PM »
Quote
Few people who are flying the "fun" machines even log kWh output - they'll typically hook up a watt meter or ammeter and see what sort of peak amps or watts they get.
this is me in a nutshell, and I for one find your posts highly valuable Chris and thank you thank you
Brian Rodgers
My sustainable lifestyle site http://outfitnm.com no ads, not selling anything either

Southbuck

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 39
Re: Dan Blade vs 222 for garbogen
« Reply #32 on: June 26, 2011, 02:31:50 PM »
A axial flux, or axial flux with transmission is not a motor conversion.
The blade for a axial with a transmission will most likely not work well with a straight axial flux mill let alone a motor conversion.

Ive flown a garbogen for three years. I check wind speed at local airport and record watts made at whatever the wind speed is at.
Wh is just as easy to keep track of with a turnigy. Can be reset and recorded at whatever intervals you want. A no brainer.
Comparison of performance is just as easy with blade changes and checking watts out in the same mph wind.
Nothing is exact, but doing it for 3 years gives you a good idea whats going on.

I scaled down a DanB blade, gave it 5 degrees at tip and it out performs the 3 flat faced no taper no twist blades I made for it.
I tried the flat faced blades at different angles, measured open volts and determined rpm vs wind speed. Still, easy to make comparisons.

Just what I found by "actually" doing it.

Southbuck