No announcement yet.

Wind ignited gravity center of mass shift turbine

  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Wind ignited gravity center of mass shift turbine

    Hi there, just wanted to post a design Idea and ask if someone knows if the weights (black) will float on the wind and hence stop the turbine from rotating?

    Another problem could be that the wind has to be shielded from the backside of the turbine - so that the lift force does not compensate. And I think it's quite difficult to work against this wind flow - will it keep the turbine from rotation?

    Any input is much appreciate. Some day we will manage to reverse engineer or really invent one of the thousands of working energy devices that are posted on the internet massively - unfortuneately without proper schematics. But hope dies last.

    Keep up this endless effort! This must work. It's no magic perpetual motion, it's underestimated potential of nature.

  • #2
    Ah okay, another update that solves part of the problem. (#3, i.e. that the wind flow keeps the turbine balanced -- now there is another common sagitarrius turbine fixed to the center axle to help in increasing load capacity).


    • #3
      Hello Jonardon,

      Some excellant thinking, however your design unfortunately has the same ineficiency of the paddle wheel in that energy is lost returning the blade to where it commits effort. Having a second set of vanes to compensate the energy loss of the first set of vanes leaves the problem of how to compensate for energy losses caused by the second set of vanes.

      One form of turbine not commercialy seen is the screw turbine which in fact produces more output than a bladed turbine as the air current has greater surface area to act upon. This again is increased by funelling which causes the air flow speed to increase as it travels through the turbine. This is common in hydro turbines and also used in the smoke stack of steam locomotives.

      All this should not encourage you to give up on design work, as by nature its mostly failure and some sucess, but the sucess is truly worth it. Never give up!


      • #4
        haha true, failure is common because everything has to be exactly right. To break something is much easier because if only one aspect goes wrong usually the whole system fails.

        You teached me alot about the Archimedes' micro hydro screw I did not think about until now!! I now have to reconsider my screw design there too. Or do you think it makes no difference if the hydro screw becomes narrower at the end?

        What do you mean with where it [the paddle/blade] commits effort? Thought it would just flip around .. perhaps that's not working? (it's thought to be flexible mounted like a hinge, have to make a quick animation, because simulation did not work in blender for me atm)


        • #5
          Hello jonardaron,

          Sorry with late reply. Not locked into receive email of reply.

          To your question turbine design a look at the Kaplan turbine best sets out how the turbine be shaped. this is also coppied but different in the Francis turbine. The turbine casing is flared at the end to allow air/water expansion thus creating a vacuum draw behind it.

          As to paddle wheels only the blade in contact with water is being delivered any force, the remainder are energy user as they have to be rotated back round to come into force contact. Only a limited number of blades are in force contact at any time.

          A jet engine is a good example of turbine design. The blades may be proppeller shaped and arranged in circles first a set of blades folowed by a current straightener followed by more blade. Or may be solid screw.

          The objective being to keep as much force as possible in contact with as much blade area as possible at all time.

          One of our previous findings is it may rotate fine first revolution, second revolution but come the third no longer as things shifting eventuality put other out of place. So we decided all part must be stationary with the movement to succeed.

          Give up all hope of being asleep at 3am, for that is when you will awaken to try a new idea to solve problem.

          Good luck.

          Last edited by DaS Energy; 04-20-2013, 08:56 PM. Reason: missing words.


          • #6
            hello peter,

            that's no problem, the last thing I will do is force you to answer straight away all the time. It's honor enough if you answer, and if it is in 20 years.

            Thank you for the hints, it's very valuable. Neither heard of Francis turbine before. Have to have a look at it.
            --> omg. Look at the alternator bearing - they don't really install that a huge alternator, do they?

            The francis turbine looks like a snail housing, very interesting. Do you think the Lily impeller is comparable to it?

            Here the well-known Archimedes screw (Archimedes, this old titan!).

            Ah, before I go on with thinking about what you said about turbines. Here is the promised animation, wait it's a simulation, no animated parts (that's why the bolts fall from the top, gravity just pulls them). Still far from perfect.


            • #7
              Hello jonardaron,

              Thank you, though I do admit its nice for an old man to pass on his knowledge.

              Yes they are that size and bigger, Chinas three georges an example.

              They say your never too old to learn and I learnt new today with your posting the liley impellor, never heard of it before.

              As a general rule of thumb looks first to its efficiency. Then look to see what could be swapped into a different turbine to make it better. Even the three stage steam engine has a lot to offer with its thinking as the force dimmishes increase to surface contact area this retains the energy receipt despite a loss of forces travelling through the turbine.

              Arhamedies screw is not a turbine per say but a water pump that has to be rotated by and energy force. Its also differs as its not a bloded device but a an angled pipe wrapped round a shaft which itseslf cannot be elevated above a give degree.

              A perfect turbine either wind or water would incurr no turbulance at blade contact and thereby increase work output.

              Your drawings of a wind turbine would ulimately work with hinged paddles but the wind force would need to lift them flat at some point to provide wind passage through the back of the turbine and that results in a loss of energy output.

              If the flute of the kaplan turbine is attached to the back of an encased wind turbine, the wind not travelling through the encasing but passing doen the outside of flutin creates the vaccum causing draw at the from of the turbine. Other attach the flute to the fronm to funnel more air in.

              The blade wind turbine so often seen is both the cheapest and most inefficient of any turbine.

              History has taught us the best is only so till someone comes up with something better and that someone has never been a engineer for qualified person, just a person with and ability to think for themselves and give it ago.

              One of the great problems in developing new things is to forget that which as taught you and go out and see for yoursel.

              Two blokes peddling bicycles got the world airliners off the ground a Prespeterian Preist invented the internal combustion engine. I child gave them the formula for the atomic bomb.

              Never give up



              • #8
                Hello jonardaron,

                I took a look at liley an fully agree, I having made similiar observations. The shape allows fluid quickest passage through a restriction. A torndo twists as will any lose cord by being wide at the bottom and tight at the top when twisted at the top. Updrafts can be more violent than tornados and they have no twists. However back to the point of turbine use, all the research as good as it is, does not yet claim any efficiency rating, which in the finish is the be all of any turbine. It remains possible it may be greatest of all however without any flow charts as yet it is hard to reach any sort of conclusion.

                As for your own reseach, the Pelton wheel turbine came about by a boy noticing that a loose bladed impact turbine was in fact putting out more power. Which only reinforces its not what you know its how well you can observe.

                Never give up.

                Last edited by DaS Energy; 04-22-2013, 01:52 AM. Reason: Grammer


                • #9
                  Hello jonardaron,

                  My appologies I should have pointed out earlier, your turbine drawing is functional however it need be mounted on a vertical plane not horizontal, so that the lift need is dismissed and the blades mainatain constant drive.



                  • #10
                    Originally posted by DaS Energy View Post
                    Hello jonardaron,

                    My appologies I should have pointed out earlier, your turbine drawing is functional however it need be mounted on a vertical plane not horizontal, so that the lift need is dismissed and the blades mainatain constant drive.

                    Right, this could solve the lifting energy problem. Unfortunately I wished the weights (black square tubes) to do the main work. The wind just should serve as the trigger, i.e. if the wind comes from the left, flowing towards the right.
                    1) The wind shall lift the leftmost paddles a bit. (using energy as you said) => Result is an imbalance in weight as the distance to the center of the left weights is less than the right side ones'.
                    2) The wheel starts to rotate clockwise slowly.
                    3) The Savonius wheel in the center helps blocking the wind to affect the right side. It also boosts up rotation.

                    Unfortunately the efficiency is very bad ... (we can take that for sure here .. haha .. even though gravity assists the rotation),

                    What I just don't get is,that on wikipedia they say the common horizontal type turbines (HAWT) have superioir efficiency to low-speed vertical VAWTurbines (even though those have more torque, and save plenty of electronics and make the mechanics easier and more stable as not that many things have to be mounted in the top housing).

                    And here they compare Savonius and the common crossflow design, Savonius looses:

                    Another comparison claims Helix designs despite bigger surface has baddest efficiency of all.

                    What ever it the silverbullet solution to the turbine problem is, thank you for your efforts.

                    Ah, by the way Electrodus had created some design calculator for the savonius windmill. I have extended it - and also changed a lot under the hood -- possibly I just broke the correct concept although I hoped to get the last bugs out of it. Output is now a bit higher than in the original version. Would be happy if this helped someone (and be critical with the output, it differs from the original, either he or me made a mistake, feel free to report errors).

                    Here you find both files for download: HowTo - History, Nature & Engineering - Savonius Windturbine.
                    Last edited by jonardaron; 05-02-2013, 03:20 PM.