|
|
|
#1
|
||||
|
||||
Wind farm technology question.
In Wales (UK) they are about to build the largest wind farm in the world...so far.
I watched the BBC video of the Romney Mash wind farm and because of it have a question. Why is the main...and very heavy gearbox and generator.... at the TOP of the tower? It seems to me it would be safer and more easily serviced if the generator was at the base. Is there some valid technical reason the tower is built this way ? A generator at the base could be driven by a belt or shaft and would be eminently more practical to carry out maintenance in this position. A friend of mine was recently employed by the company who operate the wind farm along I-40 east of OKC and he commented on the difficulty of working at those heights and the fear inducing sway of the tower in the wind. http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/wales/north_west/7762242.stm
__________________
[http://languageandgrammar.com/2008/01/14/youve-got-problems-not-issues/ ] "A liberal is someone who feels they owe a great debt to their fellow man, which debt he proposes to pay off with your money." |
#2
|
||||
|
||||
I would surmise that the losses due to the transfer of energies via a belt or gearbox would make wind-generated power too inefficient to be financially feasible.
Consider that hydro-electric generators are coupled to the water and transfer energy in the same manner but don't have the physical challenges. If you've ever looked at a dyno sheet demonstrating the HP output of an engine at the crank versus output at the drivetrain, there is a pronounced reduction of power due to the losses of energy transfer (friction, additional weight of the drivetrain, heat, etc.)
__________________
2009 ML350 (106K) - Family vehicle 2001 CLK430 Cabriolet (80K) - Wife's car 2005 BMW 645CI (138K) - My daily driver 2016 Mustang (32K) - Daughter's car |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
that would be one loooong belt or shaft,
|
#4
|
||||
|
||||
Well you both make good points....however, I grew up in eastern UK and we had a lot...well, a few windmills there for grinding wheat to make flour.
The grinding stone was at the ground level. On the water wheel type of power provider, the belt in the mill was very l-o-n-g running all the machines....mostly used in the cotton industry. So, if it worked a hundred years ago.....?
__________________
[http://languageandgrammar.com/2008/01/14/youve-got-problems-not-issues/ ] "A liberal is someone who feels they owe a great debt to their fellow man, which debt he proposes to pay off with your money." |
#5
|
||||
|
||||
The losses due to friction and torsional deformation/vibration would be unthinkable.
Just imagine a child's skipping rope twirled faster and faster.
__________________
|
#6
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
The technology of that era required such energy transfer because it was impossible to construct them otherwise. The obvious energy transfer losses did exist then, but that's was all there was.
__________________
2009 ML350 (106K) - Family vehicle 2001 CLK430 Cabriolet (80K) - Wife's car 2005 BMW 645CI (138K) - My daily driver 2016 Mustang (32K) - Daughter's car |
#7
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
Well yes...but BIG ships use l-o-n-g propeller shafts and deliver ENORMOUS power.
__________________
[http://languageandgrammar.com/2008/01/14/youve-got-problems-not-issues/ ] "A liberal is someone who feels they owe a great debt to their fellow man, which debt he proposes to pay off with your money." |
#8
|
||||
|
||||
Ships can afford to lose horsepower, the idea behind a windmill is to make energy not lose it.
|
#9
|
|||
|
|||
I would think it is cheaper also to build them that way, less parts, less parts to wear out, and less maintenance. As far as the access, I think they only get maintenance once per year. As far as the ship example, there is no right angle gearing, just a straight shaft, same as the wind generators.
__________________
1998 C230 330,000 miles (currently dead of second failed EIS, yours will fail too, turning you into the dealer's personal human cash machine) 1988 F150 144,000 miles (leaks all the colors of the rainbow) Previous stars: 1981 Brava 210,000 miles, 1978 128 150,000 miles, 1977 B200 Van 175,000 miles, 1972 Vega (great, if rusty, car), 1972 Celica, 1986.5 Supra |
#10
|
||||
|
||||
I have not done a structural analysis of a windmill but I know something about wind loading of buildings. I believe with some certainty that the extra weight of the mechanism up at the hub is pretty incidental comapred to the wind loads imposed on the structure. In fact I bet the wind load is so great that the extra weight can be ignored in the calculations.
__________________
[SIGPIC] Diesel loving autocrossing grandpa Architect. 08 Dodge 3/4 ton with Cummins & six speed; I have had about 35 benzes. I have a 39 Studebaker Coupe Express pickup in which I have had installed a 617 turbo and a five speed manual.[SIGPIC] ..I also have a 427 Cobra replica with an aluminum chassis. |
#11
|
||||
|
||||
Up in Tehachipi, there are a number of a different sort of windmills. They have a ribbon in the shape sort of like a standing egg, that has it its axis vertical, so all the mechanicals are at the borrom. There's only a few of them amongst all the rest of the regular windmills. I suspect they take up more room.
__________________
Thank You! Fred 2009 ML350 2004 SL600 2004 SL500 1996 SL600 2002 SLK32 2005 CLK320 cabrio 2003 ML350 1997 C280 Sport |
#12
|
||||
|
||||
Let me shift gears a little. My town does not have any ordinance regarding windmills. Nothing about where they are permitted, how high they may be built, collapse radius, etc . Some of the surrunding towns have adopoted their own, but so far mine has not.
Next month my zoning board is going to have to deal with our first application for a privately owned windmill. I understand he's going to ask for a height variance of 135 feet. (35 feet is the max. allowed in any district in my town.) My initial reaction is to vote against it, under the theory that its encroaching on the township committee's legislative powers. Any comments? What does your town permit, if they have an ordinance in place? |
#13
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
Then think about the same energy source without having to overcome all that inertial. The energy that would have been wasted on starting (and maintaining a spinning mass) would be net output instead of net loss. The type of technology they had was dictated by the material available and the engineering knowledge. Belts were made of animal skin. Wheels of plant material. They have a lot of mass for the amount of strength they provide. That put an upper limit on how much energy they could transfer, too. |
#14
|
||||
|
||||
Personally, I like the vertical axis turbines better
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wind_turbine
__________________
"I have no convictions ... I blow with the wind, and the prevailing wind happens to be from Vichy" Current Monika '74 450 SL BrownHilda '79 280SL FoxyCleopatra '99 Chevy Suburban Scarlett 2014 Jeep Cherokee Krystal 2004 Volvo S60 Gone '74 Jeep CJ5 '97 Jeep ZJ Laredo Rudolf ‘86 300SDL Bruno '81 300SD Fritzi '84 BMW '92 Subaru '96 Impala SS '71 Buick GS conv '67 GTO conv '63 Corvair conv '57 Nomad |
#15
|
|||
|
|||
Quote:
If that is the case, it must be on a large piece of property. You would probably not hear it. Why would you oppose it? I don't really understand your explanation. |
Bookmarks |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|