Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: {Disarmed} Re: [s-w-h] Last days for local turbines? Southwest Windpower shutting down

Expand Messages
  • Nando
    Well I started all this mess again, when I reported the death of swwp. The power curves of the four turbines you have reported have a very common problem
    Message 1 of 40 , Mar 24, 2013
    • 0 Attachment
      Well I started all this mess again, when I reported the "death" of swwp.

      The power curves of the four turbines you have reported have a very common problem each one of them want to produce more power that they are capable to harvest because the four do not have the harvesting limiting control to stop rising the power level even though all four may have the means to do so "limited" power control means.

      This is what I have for long time point it out -- that the wind mill needs to have a means to flatten its power production even under gale winds -- these in simple words means -- the wind mill has to have the blades feathered to the point where the power is always limited to the designed parameters.

      Furling is lousy and it can be seen in one of the curves , the power goes high then starts to come down up to certain level then steadily raising again like without no furling control available -- this says that the furling tail has short range limited control.

      I will not spend the time to try to see what type of power limitation control the other three may have, though it seems that three of them have some Furling control , the fourth I do not do analysis because from the beginning it is clear that the power limiter is basically not designed to control high wind velocities.

      For a wind mill to survive long term the basic design needs and requires the means to control the RPM even under gale winds, this control implies and demands that the blades MUST BE FEATHERED like when in an airplane with multiple engines and one failed, the pilot automatically feathers the propeller to reduce to a minimum the power drag that such propeller must be loading the other alive propellers.

      This is the basic step NECESSARY to start designing a wind mill to have long life and to be able to bear the Mother Nature "tantrums" of gale winds long term.

      Since I proposed the TPCH I have been attacked from all flanks -- but this is the type of principle that keeps the wind mill from producing higher power when feathered ( This done mechanically or electrically) -- and the closest available principle is the centrifugal RPM control that unhappily MOST of the time is designed to work just under a range of wind velocity and may not include gale winds.

      The profile of the blades can, as well, assist in the "flattening" of the power curve including gale winds.

      The ideal design is, as well, the one that when the wind mill generator is unloaded, the wind mill automatically reduces its RPM because the unloading causes the feathering of the blades.

      This step by itself assures the designer that the wind mill will have longer life because its RPM is highly reduced to such low level that the life of the bearing elements have a much longer life.

      The large wind mills have electrical feathering and some of the designs can bear the gale winds if the profile of the blades is proper to produce along the blade a Zero torque when fully feathered.

      The tower should and must be designed to bear the loading generated by the blades producing the top designed power plus the loading due to the nacelle and the power components by a factor of at least 2.5 time for Gale winds of around 130 mph or even more.

      All four designs, shown with the power curves, indicate that the power production may damage the equipment harvesting the power generated because there is NO control in the power level generation due to the poor RPM control that all four wind mill clearly show that the power harvested is not flatten above certain designed wind velocity.

      The designs seem to assume that the wind regime is going to be in wind gusts of high velocity for very short periods of time which basically it is a horrendous basic error in the design of the wind mill.

      Lastly, the immense majority of wind mills have the shaft of the generator firmly attached to the blades of the wind mill ( in principle) -- this old, very old idea must be dropped and the new idea in principle is to use a ROPE "to push the generator" up to the design limit then the "rope" become soft above the design power limits to stop "pushing" the generator.

      I stop here before this becomes and encyclopedia .

      Nando


      ----- Original Message -----
      From: Michael Klemen
      To: small-wind-home@yahoogroups.com
      Sent: Sunday, March 24, 2013 09:23
      Subject: Re: {Disarmed} Re: [s-w-h] Last days for local turbines? Southwest Windpower shutting down



      Yes, I do have several turbines still flying. I have the AWP 3.6,
      Proven WT2500, and Bergey XL.1. The Bergey is presently down.

      I havea slip ring problem with it that needs to get fixed. Aside
      from that, all my other turbines have died, and I have no intention
      of resurrecting.

      These turbines all have one thing in common. Here's a picture I've
      shared here before, but I put it in the groups section this time:

      http://groups.yahoo.com/group/small-wind-home/photos/album/1767280081/pic/101261917/view?picmode=&mode=tn&order=ordinal&start=1&count=20&dir=asc

      Also included as one of the 4 unidentified turbines is the Whisper H40.

      Does anybody dare start a discussion about the contents of
      this image? What does the data mean in terms of turbine longevity?
      It's very clearly in black and white for all to see. I've

      discussed it before.

      I'll chime in again later.

      Mike

      ________________________________
      From: Carl Emerson <carl@...>
      To: small-wind-home@yahoogroups.com
      Sent: Tuesday, March 19, 2013 5:58 PM
      Subject: RE: {Disarmed} Re: [s-w-h] Last days for local turbines? Southwest Windpower shutting down

      Hi there,

      Can I remind everyone that Michael Klemen has had a couple of turbines on
      his punishing test site surviving very well for several years.

      From memory these are the Bergey XL1 and the AWP3.6

      The latter is a machine designed with substantial input Hugh Piggott.

      It is a slow and heavy machine that does the business.

      It may not look 'sexy' but it delivers.

      The industry should support the development of similar machines that last
      and don't just look good.

      Investors may not see a quick buck but they will have the satisfaction of
      doing the right thing (are there any left)

      SWWP was not such a company, there was a 21% warranty return on the AIR 403
      down in these parts.

      They looked great but performed abysmally.

      My two cents.

      Carl Emerson

      Free Power Co.

      Web www.freepower.co.nz

      _____

      From: small-wind-home@yahoogroups.com
      [mailto:small-wind-home@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Nando
      Sent: 20 March 2013 10:39 a.m.
      To: jerry freedomev; SWH
      Subject: {Disarmed} Re: [s-w-h] Last days for local turbines? Southwest
      Windpower shutting down



      It is very SAD to know that SWWP has "died" .

      There is a very common problem, in the Wind Mill industry, in the basic
      design that has shown for a long time , this for decades; the design of the
      wind mills are NOT surviving mother nature tantrums because the "mechanical
      topology" of the small wind mills have not the "strength" to supports such
      "tantrums" -- and the "strength" does mean designs that give the wind mill "
      a Teflon coat" for the "tantrums " to slide to the side without damaging the
      windmills.

      Furling was developed to reduce , "somewhat" the "tantrums" but often the
      wind mills totally furled still produce power in excess and above of its
      designed limits .

      Braking electrical a poor implemented design that has shown poor chances of
      protecting the wind mill !!!.

      Braking , Mechanical , a bit better implementation but still too "dangerous"
      when very high winds of a furious Mother Nature explodes for too long
      causing blade breakage or tower destruction.

      Passive systems that give a better improvement but still the % of wind mills
      damaged are high and expensive because quite often the buyer is forced in
      buying new blades or even a new generator

      Other problems are the system balancing that unhappily the tower most of the
      time do not have implementation of re-balancing due to the changes in the
      land caused again by "mother nature" .

      Most important : installation of wind mills in poor regime wind areas or
      installing the wrong type wind mill for such local wind regime.

      So now what solutions are available to solve all these problems and to allow
      the wind mill industry to flourish ?

      I shall continue when I get the time which I do not have now !! But there
      are solutions !!

      Nando

      ----- Original Message -----
      From: jerry freedomev
      To: SWH
      Sent: Monday, March 18, 2013 21:48
      Subject: Re: [s-w-h] Last days for local turbines? Southwest Windpower
      shutting down

      Hi Nando and All,

      The sad thing is they could have easily fixed the units. The 3.7 only needed
      to have the casing changed to balance the unit on the center of the pole
      instead of 2' behind which if off straight up even a degree kept it from
      making power in lower wind speeds.

      Their and all WG manufacturers need to do is lower their prices as at least
      2x's higher than needed for decent profit.

      Why can't someone make a good $3k 2kw WT? I've done the material/labor study
      on it and it came to under $700 for that. Yet similar WT's are going for
      $5k-10k! Isn't 200-400%+ enough profit?

      I'll be doing my Streamliner EV body over the next couple months and will do
      the WT blades at the same time as the same materials, process. I'm doing a
      4.5kw axialflux alt as a warm up for the WT one now as a range extender for
      the Steamliner.

      My test cell, a 34' trimaran, sailboat, is about 25% done so I'm firmly on
      the road now to get the prototype built and tested.

      Jerry Dycus

      ________________________________
      From: Nando <nando37@... <mailto:nando37%40tx.rr.com> >
      To: SWH <small-wind-home@yahoogroups.com
      <mailto:small-wind-home%40yahoogroups.com> >
      Sent: Monday, March 18, 2013 2:09 PM
      Subject: [s-w-h] Last days for local turbines? Southwest Windpower shutting
      down

      Southwest Windpower closing the doors
      Last days for local turbines?

      http://azdailysun.com/news/local/last-days-for-local-turbines/article_316629
      58-c28d-5af4-99ee-8f0e6f19f595.html
      Company officials are staying mum, but it looks as though a pioneering
      Flagstaff manufacturer of backyard wind turbines is closing its doors for
      good.

      Carol Curtis, the director of the Coconino County Career Center, said
      employees were told by Southwest Windpower officials Wednesday that the
      facility in Flagstaff was going to be closed and they should "leave
      quickly."

      Attempts by the Arizona Daily Sun to reach company officials for comment
      Wednesday were unsuccessful.

      The doors of the facility in west Flagstaff were unlocked Wednesday
      afternoon, but no staffers were available to talk to a reporter.

      Multiple phone calls to the Flagstaff manufacturing plant as well as its
      administrative offices in Broomfield, Colo., outside Denver went unanswered.

      The company also has offices in Germany and a joint venture in China.

      Mike Sobolik, the chief financial officer for Southwest Windpower, did not
      return calls from the Daily Sun seeking comment.

      Recent developments point to a scaling back of Southwest Windpower's
      operations, if not a shutdown.

      The wind turbine manufacturer laid off 14 employees in December, one of a
      series of layoffs the company has had over the last three years.

      The company has sold its AIR line of turbines to a company out of Lakewood,
      Colo., called Primus Wind Power, and it has also has stopped selling its
      Whisper line.

      It is not clear who would manufacture the company's top-selling model, the
      Skystream 3.7, if Southwest Windpower were to close.

      The wind turbine manufacturer also refused to take a $700,000 federal
      stimulus grant to help build the next generation of its Skystream wind
      turbines in 2011.

      Southwest Windpower had previously considered opening new offices on the
      East Coast earlier this year, when the state of Delaware offered the company

      a $1.2 million grant to move into a 6,500-square-foot facility.

      The company would have spent $4.5 million of its own cash on the deal, but
      those plans were eventually scrapped for undisclosed reasons.

      It also scrapped plans to produce the Skystream 600, a more energy-efficient

      version of the company's popular Skystream 3.7 model, because officials said

      the newer model was "not reliable."

      Curtis said any laid-off employees will be eligible for re-employment
      services through the county career center.

      Joe Ferguson can be reached at 556-2253 or jferguson@...
      <mailto:jferguson%40azdailysun.com> .

      ------------------------------------

      ==========================================================
      THANK YOU FOR PARTICIPATING IN THE HOME ENERGY LIST.
      ----------------------------------------------------------
      . Please feel free to send your input to:
      small-wind-home@yahoogroups.com <mailto:small-wind-home%40yahoogroups.com>
      . Join the list by sending a blank e-mail to:
      small-wind-home-subscribe@yahoogroups.com
      <mailto:small-wind-home-subscribe%40yahoogroups.com>
      . To view previous messages from the list,
      subscribe to a daily digest of the list,
      or stop receiving the list by e-mail
      (and read it on the Web), go to
      http://www.yahoogroups.com/list/small-wind-home .
      . An FAQ on small wind systems is located at
      http://www.ndsu.nodak.edu/ndsu/klemen .

      ----------------------------------------------------------
      Yahoo! Groups Links

      [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

      [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

      [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

      ------------------------------------

      ==========================================================
      THANK YOU FOR PARTICIPATING IN THE HOME ENERGY LIST.
      ----------------------------------------------------------
      . Please feel free to send your input to:
      small-wind-home@yahoogroups.com
      . Join the list by sending a blank e-mail to:
      small-wind-home-subscribe@yahoogroups.com
      . To view previous messages from the list,
      subscribe to a daily digest of the list,
      or stop receiving the list by e-mail
      (and read it on the Web), go to
      http://www.yahoogroups.com/list/small-wind-home .
      . An FAQ on small wind systems is located at
      http://www.ndsu.nodak.edu/ndsu/klemen .

      ----------------------------------------------------------
      Yahoo! Groups Links

      [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]





      [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
    • glen c
      Hello, Having been on the list for a few years i just wanted to chirp in here from someone that has been waiting and watching for a known good windturbine to
      Message 40 of 40 , Mar 28, 2013
      • 0 Attachment
        Hello,

        Having been on the list for a few years i just wanted to chirp in here from someone that has been waiting and watching for a known "good" windturbine to show up. I would like to buy something small in the 500 to 1kw range that actually works as stated and does have some longevity to it. I have tried Air X's and Hornet 1000w, and to tell the truth, they suck.

        My first question would be why are not ALL turbines held to some universal standard in regard to the actual output at a certain windspeed. Why not have a level way to judge each model? At xx windspeed it puts out xxx in watts, amps or whatever was decided on as the benchmark.

        As nothing more than a customer, that is my first concern...Does it work as advertised? As a customer, WE are DUMB, we need a way to be able to look at a simple figure and be able to say "Yeah, that'll work". None that i have heard of do that. Performance is overblown so much that it is impossible to make a purchase based on what is 'claimed', it's pay your money and take your chances.

        For most of us that isnt to much of an option, if you buy and it doesnt work, not likely you will keep buying more until you happen to hit on one that does work....most customers wont have the money to do that, including me.

        Besides the bad taste left from buying a product that is so far away from it's advertised actual output, that it would be laughable if not for the hard earned cash laid out including the other associated costs in tower and balance of system just to find out, can make a customer down right irate...and bad mouth wind turbines to anyone that will listen.

        That cant be good for business...

        Second....

        If those old Jacobs, and others, had great longevity, why are there not more made along that same pattern. It seems all the concern is over efficiency...as a customer i would be more concerned, as i write the check, over how long will this thing last, not if i will get 3% or even 30% more out of this model or that one. All the efficiency in the world does no good if it isnt working...

        Hope you guys get it figured out because i really believe in small wind for some of us...as of now tho, because of my limited experiences, i wont be buying any.

        Thanks,
        Glen

        --- In small-wind-home@yahoogroups.com, "Windmission Co." <mail@...> wrote:
        >
        > Robert, amazingly the EU seems to haves softened some lately, which was
        > also needed.
        >
        > According to a Danish law draft (Nov/2011) I hold, micro turbines below
        > 1 m2 (square meter) go totally free. After that certification is
        > graduated. Mini turbines 1-5 m2 (max 1-2 kW) need no certification, but
        > can obtain official registration when having a CE. Then for the next
        > 5-40 m2 span actual certification is in play. Higher level certification
        > above 200 m2 and so on.
        >
        > I have not checked if this is law now, but as far as I know, mini
        > turbines (1-5m2/1-2 kW) in reality are legally handled as described above.
        >
        > best
        > Claus
        >
        > WINDMISSION Co.
        > Claus Nybroe (arch. maa)
        > Stenbankevej 6, 5771 Stenstrup, Denmark
        > Tel. (+45) 61601216 36981778
        > VAT, MwSt, MOMS reg.: DK11271448
        > http://www.windmission.dk
        >
        > On 28-03-2013 17:55, Robert Preus, PE wrote:
        > > Claus,
        > >
        > > I am not playing any cards. I am speaking from my experience and that of
        > > others. I understand that the standards issue is a little excessive in the
        > > EU. I helped Xzeres get through CE and MCS for the UK with their 10 kW
        > > machine. That is not so much the case here although it can feel like it
        > > especially when you have a legacy turbine and new standards to meet.
        > >
        > > Robert W. Preus, PE
        > >
        > > President
        > >
        > > Advanced Renewable Technology, LLC
        > >
        > > 22700 NE Mountain Top Rd.
        > >
        > > Newberg, OR 97132
        > >
        > > Phone: 503-538-8782
        > >
        > > Mobile: 503-476-4172
        > >
        > > Fax: 971-285-9038
        > >
        > > robert@... <mailto:robert%40ARTre.us>
        > >
        > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
        > >
        > >
        >
      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.