After seeing the single Darrieus rotor design that would span between two peaks, or buildings, I was giving it some more thought. It would appear that many contra-rotating Darrieus rotors, across the same cable tension line, would be a more reliable system. In other words, one rotor spins one way, the next one spins the other way, etc.
In-between each rotor is a generator system. The housing(s) of a generator system is attached to the end of one Darrieus rotor, the armature is attached to the next. How this would be accomplished? The main thing is to design the blades, and the generators, so that they can be easily removed, and replaced from around the tension cable.
This could mean having three generators, that are equilaterally-balanced around the end of a spinning Darrieus rotor. Three friction gears, one from each generator, roll over a"tube" surface, that is centered on the cable with bearings. That tube spins the other direction; since it is connected to the next-in-line "contra"-spinning rotor. So then, it'sdouble-time, for the spinning of each generator!
With the presently-designed system mentioned in the forum, eventually the maintenance of the two HUGE blades will have to be dealt with. As well, there will be much torsion applied upon them in high winds. Having large generators at each end, with their resistance torque factors, will greatly contribute to the stressing along the long span of these two blades.
This design that I am presenting, uses much smaller, more manageable Darrieus rotor units, that are placed side-by-side, like on a string of beads, and all are contra-spinning on this tension cable. Being stretched across a vast span of area, it will make the entire system much more durable, easier to work on, and easier to replace any defective part.
The generators can also be switched over to be motors, to kick-start the Darrieus rotors into spinning at their optimal rotation.
How to accomplish any repairs? Well, I would prefer using an airship over a helicopter, for the job of lowering a person(s) down to replace a defective unit. Perhaps a blimp could actually be set aside, and ready in a hangar, just for this purpose?
I have recently found information on how to safely make the use of hydrogen as the lifting gas in a blimp. US 20040155149 Basically, it is a balloon-in-a-balloon. The inner envelope is filled with hydrogen. The outer, slightly-larger envelope is filled with a "blanket" ofnitrogen.
Why go to all this trouble? Why not just use non-flammable helium as the lifting gas? Because helium is a non-renewable government-controlled gas. It takes about $1000 of it to lift 300 pounds, with a 20 ft. diameter balloon.
The very energy substance that this string of Darrieus rotors could produce, could be hydrogen gas. It would then be not only the gas to run the fuel cells, which run a compressor to make the nitrogen, etc., but also the lifting gas for doing any repairs by utilizing a blimp!
Here is a short rhyming story that I've written around this balloon-in-a-balloon
airship concept. And, this one spins like a football being thrown through the air!
This will make the overall size of the envelope needed to be much smaller, to lift the same amount of weight: http://darinselby.1hwy.com/spinningairshipglider03.html
Hotmail: Powerful Free email with security by Microsoft.