Windmill or Wind Turbine- powered boats: how many are out there, and are they viable? [Archive]

Windmaster

12-14-2006, 05:45 AM

Its not impossible.
I started with models - they could all sail directly upwind.
One was exhibited at the London Boat show in 1999.
I then built two different boats I could ride on.
Many people saw them working,
including members of AYRS (The Amateur Yacht Research Society) - Patron: HRH Prince Philip (Husband of the Queen of England).
They could both sail directly upwind.
Most experts will agree that it is easily possible.
More recently the argument is whether a boat or land vehicle can sail downwind faster than the wind.
A researcher in Florida has recently achieved this with model which demonstrates clearly that this is possible. A video exists on the net to confirm it. This model uses an air propeller to drive itself along.
"Weird" is only something you have not seen before and are not used to.
Check out the Amateur Yacht Research Society on the net (AYRS), consider joining, you will receive regular magazines and you can keep abreast of recent developments.

globaldude

12-15-2006, 10:45 PM

Shades of over unity perhaps?

Impossible to sail directly into the wind with a wind turbine only driving a prop.
A wind turbine will allow you to tack up wind like a sailboat though.
Whatever you come up with will look weird.
Definitely post some pictures.

Rayk san, it's not "impossible".
Here in New Zealand around 10 years ago a man had a 40' catamaran with a 30' windmill type vairiable pitch "prop", driving a 1.5m vairiable pitch underwater prop. According to his son [ the old man now has dementia & cannot remember anything ] the best they got was 10 knots directly into the wind !!.
The old guy built the vairiable controlls all himself and was well known for being very clever. Unfortunately when I heard of him and tryed to find him to talk to him, he was too unwell , so it seems his secrets to sucksess have been lost .
on another note, where are you living in Nihon ?.
I am comming to Japan to travel throughout the whole country. We [ me - Peter, Kayo [ okusan Nihonjin desu ] & daughter Ai chan ] have purchaced an Isuzu camping car in Shizuoka but will drive south to start our tour from the bottom up as it's so cold now in JP. We will be going to JP around Febuary.

rayk

12-16-2006, 03:55 AM

PMed you.

ruud

12-17-2006, 09:56 AM

Hi Globaldude
This story might be true. It is exactly what I have in mind.
Is'nt any tacking sailboat just a small part of a hugh windturbine with an underwater prop?
I mean that any sailboot can be seen as a one wing turbine (main sail of the boat) with a one prop blade (keel of the boat) and with the center of the earth as a virtual midpoint of the shaft.
So the surface area of the wind turbine underwater prop should be somewhere in the sail-keel surface ratio of a std sailing ship.
This explains the large 1.5 m underwater prop of the 40' cat in the New Zealand story.
Ruud

SamSam

12-19-2006, 05:25 PM

More recently the argument is whether a boat or land vehicle can sail downwind faster than the wind.
A researcher in Florida has recently achieved this with model which demonstrates clearly that this is possible. A video exists on the net to confirm it. This model uses an air propeller to drive itself along.
.

Where would the site be for this? This seems to me to be in the perpetual motion category.:confused: Sam

rayk

12-19-2006, 05:54 PM

Firstly Sam you have to understsand New Science. :rolleyes:

Normal people like you and I are mired in the illusion that
output is 'equal' to or less than input. ;)

ruud

12-19-2006, 08:11 PM

Hi Windmaster
A boat or land vehicle can certainly sail up or downwind faster then the wind. The fast 18 footers and skate sailing wings have already been sailing faster then the wind at a 40 - 140 degrees angle to wind direction.
The wind turbine propelled vihicle or boat can do that theoretically also directly up and down wind , but not at a 50 - 130 degrees angle to the wind direction.
Then the wind turbine also has to change tack to convert wind energy coming from the opposite side when sailing faster then the wind.

rayk

12-19-2006, 09:03 PM

I am curious...

If the wind direction is from north and wind speed is 10 knots.
Can I travel faster than 15 knots on a course of 50 degrees from north?

What is the limit for making ground faster than the wind speed?

It would seem unusual to claim that physics allows infinite extraction of energy from a finite source.

What is the natural limit that cant be broken?

please explain to me wind master, ruud, or globaldude.
(piss off trouty:P )

ruud

12-19-2006, 10:29 PM

The ground or surface speed depends on the efficiency of the conversion of the initional wind energy (which is also course depending) and the frictional loss or drag of the device. The limit of the speed is set by the technology.
For example a fast solar powered car runs much faster with the same energy then a large SUV.

rayk

12-19-2006, 11:17 PM

The limit of the speed is set by the technology.
The limit of technology is physics perhaps.:idea:

What is the maximum conversion ratio that can be achieved?

wind speed : speed in/toward true wind direction

Windmaster

12-20-2006, 05:35 AM

To backtrack a little, I have found where you can see the video of a model moving on land downwind faster than the wind - powered by the wind. It is at:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aJpdWHFqHm0
It's not magic!
Here is my attempt at an explanation.
Power is obtained from the moving interface between two mediums, the water and the air or the ground and the air.
As far as the model is concerned, it does not "know" if the ground is stationary and the air is moving, or the air is stationary and the ground is moving.
It can obtain power from the moving air to move over the ground (this is what happens in normal sailing) or, it can obtain power from the moving ground to drive itself through the stationary air. This second case is what happens that allows it to travel downwind faster than the wind. As far as the model "knows", it is existing in a stationary medium (the air) and getting power to drive itself through this medium from the moving ground underneath.

rayk

12-20-2006, 10:39 AM

Good video. What do you think about inertia? Can you use that as well to maintain forward motion? They could harness inertia in the next test and go even faster.
If the wind slackens that big prop could probably use a bit of inertia...

I am curious about why the model cant extract more power from the ground rushing under its wheels? How much more energy can be tapped?

The bushes were waving around in the background a bit, quite a windy day.
Good for a test run. On a gusty day, what keeps the model moving when the wind drops away for 3-5 seconds?
Is any part of the model under the influence of inertia yet?

Anyway, why did it stop?

What is the natural limit for wind driven speed dead down wind?
Is it twice, thrice or four times the wind speed?

rayk

12-20-2006, 11:07 AM

Watch the propellor carefully. Stroboscopic effect of the camera is helpful.

When the wind accelerates the prop it spins faster, anti clockwise from the rear.

When the wind slackens, the blade decelerates, and spins clockwise, as viewed from the rear. (If we could only figure out how to harness inertia...)

My wife pointed that out to me.....

jehardiman

12-20-2006, 11:26 AM

rayk;

The strobe effect of the video frame freeze has nothing to do with the direction of rotation, but rather the relative interference between rotational speed and frame speed. Go look at an old western movie with a wagon rolling quickly, while the wagon always moves forward, the spokes will appear "rotate" either forward, backward, or stand still depending on the frequency interaction.

Also, most of your objections as to the possibility of wind driven vessels have been brought up and adjuciated before. As I have pointed out, energy and forces are vector quantities and it is by manipulation of the vector directions that we produce forces useful to what we want to accomplish, i.e. there is no such thing as "lift"; there are only drag forces in the direction we want. See this thread which points to other proofs of concepts including a videos of several working vessels. http://boatdesign.net/forums/showthread.php?t=1289

rayk

12-20-2006, 11:50 AM

I stated that the prop accelerated and decelerated.
It does not spin at a constant rpm.
It may 'appear to rotate backwards and forwards' in your words, not mine.

As for my objections, the easiest way to uncover the science of this phenomona would be to get the dead upwind guys to reconcile their physics and mechanics with the dead down wind guys.
Are they both right, only one, which one?
The outcome is predictably an oil baron conspiracy.

By what factor can these machines travel against the wind?
Is it unlimited speed from the wind?
What is the limit?

jehardiman

12-20-2006, 01:13 PM

As for my objections, the easiest way to uncover the science of this phenomona would be to get the dead upwind guys to reconcile their physics and mechanics with the dead down wind guys.
Are they both right, only one, which one?
.....<snip usless inflamatory comment>
By what factor can these machines travel against the wind?
Is it unlimited speed from the wind?
What is the limit?

You don't know a thing about the aero/hydrodynamics of rotating lifting surfaces and the dynamics of free-free systems, do you? Otherwise you wouldn't ask a question about a system that is limit seeking, and that the limit is structurally and situationaly dependent. Get a good texts on turbines, propellers, and aero/hydro drag first, read them, understand them, and draw up the FBD's and do the energy balances, and then come back to your questions and I'll try to help you. But I cannot teach you aero/hydrodynamics over the net if you can't get past your limited understanding of first principles.

BTW, the reason the whole concept works is that water is 826 times denser than air which means that the energy advantage for propulsion is 5.3 to 1. That means that you only need to extract 18% of the energy from the air plus losses...say 20% of the required... so 22% overall. This means that speed to windward is limited to ~13% of windspeed *Cdi/Cdt.

SamSam

12-20-2006, 09:12 PM

It can obtain power from the moving air to move over the ground (this is what happens in normal sailing) or, it can obtain power from the moving ground to drive itself through the stationary air. This second case is what happens that allows it to travel downwind faster than the wind.

Nope, sorry. I can't buy into that. It could do it in gusty winds by storing energy in the form of inertia generated by gusts that it would use up in calms but thats not what I think of as going faster than the wind. If the wind was a steady X mph (in relation to the ground), the thing shown on the video, or any other arrangement (sails, etc) getting it's power from the wind, could never go any faster than X mph (in relation to the ground) minus whatever drag was created by the mechanical parts with friction etc. The fact that it stopped by itself at the beginning and end of the video with the wind blowing from 'behind' seems to me proof that it can't go faster than the wind. If it could go faster than the wind, it seems to me it would go until it broke and was unable to keep going. Not only that, it seems it would keep going faster and faster until it disapeared, and not just into the distance.
I'm referring to straight downwind.
I also don't think anything powered by the wind could propel itself faster than the wind (in relation to the ground) straight upwind. If the wind was 10 mph, and some contraption was geared to travel 5 mph against the wind, it might be in an apparent wind of 15 mph which might seem to be 'faster than the wind', but in relation to the ground, it's only half the speed of the wind.
Of course, I've been wrong numerous times before. Someone once posted that if you encircled the earth with a piece of string, and then encircled the earth with a piece of string that was held 1/2" off the surface, the second string would only be 3.14" longer. I mentioned BS. I was wrong. :( Sam

rayk

12-20-2006, 10:35 PM

You don't know a thing about the aero/hydrodynamics of rotating lifting surfaces and the dynamics of free-free systems, do you? Your principles dont describe anything else except your fruity devices. Your principles are not universally applicable. Conservation of energy is universally applicable, except to your stuff.
Otherwise you wouldn't ask a question about a system that is limit seeking, and that the limit is structurally and situationaly dependent. Get a good texts on turbines, propellers, and aero/hydro drag first, read them, understand them, and draw up the FBD's and do the energy balances, and then come back to your questions and I'll try to help you. That implies that I should learn what every one else accepts and then ask you for to impart the final secrets of over unity, free energy, and the location of King Solomons mine.
But I cannot teach you aero/hydrodynamics over the net if you can't get past your limited understanding of first principles. You can teach any one aero/hydrodynamics, so long as you dont veer off into jibberish. That seems to be the natural limit of New Science.

BTW, the reason the whole concept works is that water is 826 times denser than air (Something missing here.) which means that the energy advantage for propulsion is 5.3 to 1. (Something missing here.) That means that you only need to extract 18% of the energy from the air plus losses...say 20% of the required... so 22% overall. (Something missing here.) This means that speed to windward is limited to ~13% of windspeed *Cdi/Cdt.
Please continue....

jehardiman

12-21-2006, 10:45 AM

rayk;

I must admit I'm missing some of the subtler points of your argument about why such a system defies the law of conservation of energy (I get the “you’re a fruit” part).

Could you please explain WHY you think this system defies the law of conservation of energy? Please use standard the thermo equations (U, Q, W, m, V, g, etc) starting from the total energy equation and diagrammatically show where you draw your energy boundaries so there can be no misunderstandings due to language. Don’t worry, I’m pretty sure I can follow the math.

rayk

12-21-2006, 11:27 AM

rayk;

I must admit I'm missing some of the subtler points of your argument about why such a system defies the law of conservation of energy
:!: That is repeating my own words back to me.....? Are you taking my position in this discussion!:D

(I get the “you’re a fruit” part).Not you personally, although I could change my mind about that....

Could you please explain WHY you think this system defies the law of conservation of energy?
:!: That is repeating my own words back to me.....? Are you taking my position in this discussion!:D

Please use standard the thermo equations (U, Q, W, m, V, g, etc) starting from the total energy equation and diagrammatically show where you draw your energy boundaries so there can be no misunderstandings due to language. Please express the equation for inertia, that is what keeps the thing going.

Don’t worry, I’m pretty sure I can follow the math. No one can follow what you have posted so far.:P

Explain what is happenning in this video (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aJpdWHFqHm0)

....the easiest way to uncover the science of this phenomona would be to get the dead upwind guys to reconcile their physics and mechanics with the dead down wind guys.
Are they both right, only one, which one?

TaxationIsTheft

02-18-2007, 12:16 PM

Old thread. Hope someone's still reading.
I can't tell for sure, but it seems like the people who claim forward motion against the wind is impossible are inventing a law of conservation of force. Of course there is no such law. Force is not energy. You can create large forces from small forces all day long. Force can be created and destroyed. It's not energy. Some examples are in levers and hydraulics, inclined planes, gears... The idea is that a small, high speed force, the wind, is converted to a large, slow speed force, prop thrust.
It is only the product of force acting through distance(energy) that must be conserved. Say you have a wind turbine on top that draws 1000 joules/sec from a 10 meter/sec wind? It would have to have a drag of 100 newtons. 100 newtons * 10 meters/sec = 1000 newton*meters/sec = 1000 joules/sec.
You would then need a prop under water that can push at least 100 newtons of force. The only limit imposed by conservation of energy is that the underwater prop can't propel the boat faster than 10 meters/sec because the power required would be greater than the 1000 joules/sec being generated by the air turbine. Of course friction hasn't been considered at all in this. But to argue that it is not possible seems to be making an argument about how precise mechanisms can be built. It's not something to be dismissed with sweeping generalities, it seems to me. There's no talk of over unity here whatsoever. Let's say the wind turbine took 100 newtons of drag to produce 1000 joules/sec AKA 1000 watts of power. But the turbine was 75 percent efficient. So 250 watts were wasted on turbulence about the blade. Then the drive train took another 200 watts. So 550 watts to the prop. But the prop is 50% efficient. So 275 watts goes into against the wind motion. 275 watts = 275 newton*meters/sec. Since there are 100 newtons of drag from the air turbine then the forward speed could at most be 2.75 meters/sec. 2.75 meters/sec * 100 newtons = 275 newton*meters/sec = 275 watts. But then there is drag from the wind pushing against the hull and water drag slowing it down. There is also mass based resistance to motion during acceleration. But then maybe the water prop is 75% efficient and not 50% like I used. Maybe the drive drain doesn't take 20% of the power like I used. It all seems like a very high school application of physics to prove that at least in theory this can work and that there are no over-unity claims being made.

RHough

02-18-2007, 01:22 PM

SamSam

02-19-2007, 09:25 AM

Since it is possible to have a downwind VMG greater than windspeed. It is also possible to create a boat that can travel dead downwind faster than windspeed. The rotating foils only need to have the same relative angle to the local flow as their fixed counterparts on the conventional boat.

It is quite simple in theory and difficult in practice.

What does VMG stand for? It would seem in a boat powered solely by the wind, traveling dead downwind, that once the speed of the wind is attained, in effect there is no more wind and thus no more power to be gained from it. Even if there is a current going the same way, I don't think you could possibly go faster than whichever is faster, the current or the wind. No matter how well something is built, there will always be friction or drag and so it would also seem that a boat going dead downwind couldn't even equal the speed of the wind or current, and would always be slower.
Going dead upwind, the same would seem to apply. It doesn't seem possible that no matter what you are using to capture the power of the wind, it could supply more power than what is captured. Upwind travel may be possible, but not at the speed of the wind or even close. That is, if the wind speed is 10 mph ground speed, you would never attain 10 mph ground speed, either dead upwind or down. Sam

Windmaster

02-19-2007, 02:25 PM

VMG stands for Velocity Made Good - it means the velocity made towards your destination in spite of not being able to go there directly (for example tacking upwind in a sailing boat).
Now, the flaw in your thinking is revealed in your statement "a boat powered solely by the wind" - strange as it may seem, the boat is not powered solely by the wind - it is powered by the difference in velocity between two mediums, the wind and the water. Normally, sailing downwind, the boat gains its power from the wind over the water. But as it goes faster, this wind, as you quite rightly say, becomes less and when the speed of the wind is reached nothing at all. When this stage is reached, the difference in the velocity between the two mediums still exists, and the boat or land model gains its power from the flow or water (or land beneath). So therefore it must have an air propeller to power itself, using the movement of the water relative to the boat. It depends how you look at it:
Air moving - water stationary.
Water moving - air stationary.
Its obviously difficult to achieve downwind faster than the wind on water because the resistance of the water makes it difficult to get even near windspeed.
However, on land it is easier because the resistance of wheels is much less, and downwind faster than the wind or DWFTTW has been achieved.

scot

02-21-2007, 11:43 AM

...on wind turbine and "autogiro" boats can be found here: http://uk.geocities.com/fnsnclr@btinternet.com/yachts/auto/index.htm

--scot

AleX`G

02-22-2007, 01:24 PM

When this stage is reached, the difference in the velocity between the two mediums still exists, and the boat or land model gains its power from the flow or water (or land beneath). So therefore it must have an air propeller to power itself, using the movement of the water relative to the boat.

But surely no more energy can be converted from the water moving relative to the boat/air than can be converted from the air moving relative to the water. This would certainly explain how a boat maintains its speed when traveling close to the speed of the wind relative to the water but does not explain how it could travel faster

Or is this just because the relative friction provided by air and the ground/air interface are different there is less friction in the air so the extra energy when it is converted to thrust by the prop can accelertate the vehicle.
If the density of water and air were the same then it would nor be possible to go faster than the speed of the wind relative to the water. But since this is not the case then it is possible. Of course you couldnt do this kind of thing with a sail could you as there would be no way of transfering power generated by the relative speed difference of water and boat to power the sail.
Surely this then means this is a very efficient way of powering a boat?

scot

02-22-2007, 04:42 PM

The source of power for a sailboat is not the movement of the wind or the water relative to the boat, but rather the difference in the movement of the wind and water. If the boat is stationary and dropped into a 10 knot S current and a 10 knot S wind, then it will quickly come to rest relative to those, and be stuck, with no differential to extract energy from. IF the wind and current are going different directions, then energy may be extracted by playing the differing forces against each other, by sticking foils up and down, and diverting the flow appropriately.

As a simple thought experiment, assume for a moment an electric boat, with a have a generator with the shaft hooked to a wind turbine and the body hooked to a propellor, and the whole assembly mounted on gimbals to let it spin and turn as needed on any axis. As long as there is a differential between wind and water, then it will produce electricity; the amount of electricity is FIXED to the quantity of differential, the motion of the hull has no impact--if it moves with the current, then the propellor is still and the wind turbine provides all the power, if it moves with the wind, the turbine is still and the propellor provides all the current. In reality there's some slippage there, but that slippage will be there irrespective of the velocities; consider a vehicle mounted between two plates, with wheels top and bottom to act as propellor and turbine, and you get the same thing with no slippage (just rolling friction).

Now, with this fixed amount of energy (assume we propel the hull with an electric motor and propellor), the only limit to the boat speed is friction. Given that our frame of reference is going to be most closely tied to the water (water velocity relative to the "fixed" land being generally slower than the wind) the greatest friction will be on the upwind tack, so it should be slowest, and the lowest frction is on teh downwind tack, so it should be fastest. The amount of energy we can extract is limited only by the size of the propellor and turbine; the more mass of water and air we can deflect, the greater the amount of energy we can extract from a given differential speed.

Traditional sailing rigs do basically the same thing, sucking energy from the differntial speed by deflecting wind and water, and they can certainly exceed windspeed under the right conditions. The only problem with all this is that once we reach windspeed going downwind, traditional rigs loose "traction" with the air, and thus can't exceed windspeed on a dead run, because the sail is fixed to the hull and can't deflect the wind when the speeds are equal. A wind turbine rig at least has the potential to overcome this limitation because the turbine sail (and propellor, which acts like a moving centerboard) are not fixed to the hull. Practically implementing this, however, is the tricky bit. The electric generator/motor case is going to result in lots of losses as we convert energy back and forth; you should be able to do the same thing with a variable pitch wind turbine, but the complexity of the interactions involved makes my head hurt...

--scot

kjell

02-22-2007, 05:17 PM

Here is a drawing of a Wind Drive system.
KJELL

cstretten

05-26-2007, 03:54 PM

Hey all... I'm not a boater... nor am I an engineer. Don't know much about the math involved in computing conservation of energy calculations either. I found this site when looking up sustainable wind energy... which led to an image of a windmill on a catamaran etc.
I have since read a bunch of threads about this and that and the ability to travel against the wind... with the wind etc.
Has anyone considered the idea of vertical windmills? They operate with wind from any direction, are quiet and work both as the wind enters and exits the turbine. These are usually used for power generation, but I don't see why you couldn't keep the power recharge capabilities for life on boat, and drive a prop for movement.

I found an image on google of a catamaran and of a vertical windmill called a "Turby". I quickly put the two images together in Photoshop.
Any boat designers/engineers here think that this could be a viable option?

Image attached.
Cheers,
Chris

alan white

05-26-2007, 04:55 PM

Viable, yes. Havilah Hawkins (from Camden, Maine) sailed his own boat directly into the wind as a demonstration of its viability back in the eighties I think it was.
His had three blades on a horizontal rotor.
The theoretical maximum for wind engines is about 59% I think. The issue is getting the rotors to the right angle of attack at various different wind speeds. While a normal sail need only adjust draft and reef, the mechanisms to achieve variable pitch of rotors are expensive and complicated.
Windmills are expensive enough, but imagine them made to withstand salt corrosion and to work well in any available breeze. Then too, speed limits will not be exceeded, so there is no more effective power to be had.
Sailing direct to windward is the one advantage in favor of rotors.
My feeling is that electricity generation and storage capacity will become cheaper in the future, so that a boat could use its propeller in reverse as long as it was at hull speed anyway. Then, that energy could propel the boat to windward later. Lithium ion rechargable batteries, like my camera uses, would already make this possible, though very expensive to purchase.
Both windmill boats and normal boats would do better as batteries became cheaper. That is another advantage of a windmill boat. One that may favor a smaller windmill as part of a hybrid system in the future. The windmill (as a mizzen, for example) would make electricity whenever there was wind, and the mainsail and an electric drive to the prop would actually power the boat

Alan

Windmaster

08-07-2007, 10:36 AM

I have just completed posting my radio controlled model videos on Youtube.
They show two of my models. A trimaran which can sail in ANY direction relative to the wind, (its driven by a wind-turbine with an underwater prop). Also shown is a very basic wind-turbine landsailer model on the beach.
Check out this url at: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GzNq3aEyP2w Many in this discussion seem to think that sailing directly into the wind is a bit marginal and rather difficult. I think this will show it's very easy and no big deal! I'm looking for comments and criticism so don't hold back. Honesty is always appreciated!

rwatson

10-25-2007, 10:34 AM

Windmill boats have been around at least since 1931-
If you think being hit on the head with a boom hurts - stick your hand in a propellor :-)

Windmaster

10-25-2007, 10:54 AM

I must apologise to all. I had to withdrew my videos from Youtube due to patent issues.
In reply to the last post.
I assume the term "propeller" refers to the wind turbine. "propeller" is a misnomer because it implies something that propels. Personally, I always stick to the strict rule that a "propeller" is usually used underwater to propel a boat, whilst a turbine is something that collects energy from an outside source.
Anyway, that aside, the assumption that the turbine blades rotate at enormous speeds is erroneous, in fact the blades on my design do not rotate (and never can), rotate faster than the windspeed. So a blow from one of these could easily be less that that of a swinging boom. On a fullsize design of mine, a person actually walked into the turning blades without injury! Yes, they have been around, maybe even before 1931 but I don't that means there can't be an improved version.

rwatson

10-25-2007, 06:04 PM

Interesting concept - but I dont believe that the blades won't do any injury.
For a start "do not rotate (and never can), rotate faster than the windspeed" is a bit hard to define - because the arms of the turbine all operate at different speeds depending on how far from the axis you do the calculations.
Assuming the Outer tip is the bit that "never goes faster than windspeed " - that still leaves a 20kmh piece of, say, foam and fibreglass to contend with. The fact that your crew got hit by one and survived can only mean the wind was slow that day. I have tried to stop a small surfboard doing say 4 kmh in a wave and got a nasty bing.

As regards "I had to withdrew my videos from Youtube due to patent issues.". Of Course !! - because they have been around since 1931 !!!! How many hours of development and millions of man hours and development have been expended since then - and still not become a common form of transportation ?

Not to discourage your enthusiasm and creativity, the amount of time others have tried without success rings warning bells to innovators everywhere.

Pericles

10-26-2007, 04:20 AM

http://www.fourwinds-ii.com/v2/?c=library&i=windGenComp

Pericles

Windmaster

10-26-2007, 04:56 AM

I don't want to explain further about the blades not being able to rotate faster than the wind since this comes too close to revealing the secret of my system, and believe me, there is a secret here. That is why I withdrew my videos.
Clearly, you don't understand the process of the patenting system. Any public exhibition of an invention before the patent is granted can jeopardise the grant of a patent. Check it out.
However, they were there for all to see before. Why would I want to post them and then withdraw them? I don't think it is very fair to say that "millions of man hours" has been expended upon this in the past. A few inventors have tried it, some crackpot, that's all. Most people have never heard of it.
Just consider that the Wright brothers first flight was only 12 seconds and that Frank Whittle's first turbojet plane couldn't even pull itself out of the mud! Nobody concluded from this that these projects were not worth pursuing.
You can see other fields of research I follow by looking at my website http://www.sailwings.net this is concerned with self-trimming wingsails.

Richard Miller

02-02-2008, 11:14 AM

I reckon the ultimate sailboat is one which can go directly into the wind.

Claims have been made that wind turbine powered vessels do just that, without other means of ( engine ) propulsion or fuel useage.

Various cargo vessels started out, one by Jacques Cousteau, if my memory serves?

I would love to hear of any boats and ships using this type of drive.

Surely the ultimate in Green travel?

I would love to hear from anybody who is working on a Wind Turbin boat currently. richardmiller592@hotmail.com

Lin Olen

02-02-2008, 06:09 PM

Hello People. My invention titled Ä Propulsion Unit"was filed in Canberra, Australia on 15th March, 1974. It was alloted application number PB 6924. Jim Bates of Whangarei, NZ built his "Te Whaka" almost exactly to my disclosure, sailing it some 1,500 miles. Te Whaka cruised at 4.5 knots. My first effort at a full sized boat was a Trailer-Tri called "thrippence" which acheived 7.5 Knots into a 3.5 knot breeze with a very marginal 6 foot tin windmill. Icould not afford to fit my variable pitch airscrew which would be far more efficient. You can go where you like without fear of fragile rigs or ferocious winds. Cheers.

rwatson

02-02-2008, 06:19 PM

Jaques Cousteaus boat ALCYONE couldnt sail into the wind, though it had very high pointing angles due to the efficient foils it employed.
WindTurbine powered sailboats have been one someones drawing board since the beginning of the century, but no one except Windmaster has ever been able to solve all the problems associated with huge propellor (oops turbine) swept areas, dynamic gyroscopic forces while at sea, turbulent airflow patterns from waves, and a host of other practical problems.
I have been holding my breath for Windmasters invention to hit the patent office without luck -he must be sorting out the last few details.
You might like to read a prvious thread on the topic
http://www.boatdesign.net/forums/showthread.php?t=1289&page=2

Richard Miller

02-02-2008, 06:23 PM

Of ourse, there's nothing to stop you using a wind-turbine some batteries and an electric motor. This might provide a better solution.

Tim B.

Hi Tim
I am a wind turbin freek too. I think too much effency would be lost using an electrical system. But on the other hand I haven´t tried it either, so it´s entirely possible you may be right. It´s food for thought
Sincerely: Richard Miller
richardmiller592@hotmail.com

Richard Miller

02-02-2008, 06:42 PM

In the late 1990's I built and tested two different versions. They went quite well directly against the wind, but more development work is required to get them optimised.

http://www.geocities.com/pete3223/minlit.jpg

Hi Pete:
It´s me again. I have a full size Wind Turbin that should be finished by summer this year. I would like to know about how fast your boat can go and the wind speed required to get it to that speed. The problem with WT boats is they are inherently slow from what I read.

Richard
richardmiller592@hotmail.com

Lin Olen

02-02-2008, 07:31 PM

Rotary Sails.
Sails,
Rotary.

A sail is an aerofoil that obeys the laws of aerodynamics.

A keel is a hydrofoil that obeys the laws of hydrodynamics.

It is essential minimise the disturbance of the flow around the boat, the sail and the keel. It takes a lot of energy to move a ton of water back and forth! Although not so obvious it also takes a lot of energy to move air to and fro. Ideally there should be very little accelleration or decelleration of the water flowing around a hull, or the air over a sail.

The apparent wind is the most important factor and this is severely limited by the hull speed. If it were possible to double the apparent wind one could reduce the sail area to one-quarter... The same reasoning applies to the propeller.

By axially mounting sails coupled to axially mounted keels the limitation of power generation imposed by the hull speed is completely by-passed. Double and redouble the sail speed.

The principle of a traction propeller is reversible. A modern variable pitch airscrew can double as an effective rotary sail. We are talking of from tens up to thousands of kilowatts here!

My Trailer-Tri used a nine horsepower outboard driving directly upwind into a three and a half knot breeze, achieving an apparent wind over the deck of six knots, This was the lowest speed at which the six foot diameter fixed pitch windmill rotor began to perform. The hydraulics were then engaged while heading directly into the wind and Thrippence immediately surged to seven point five knots, at which point the outboard was reduced to idle. The boat continued to power upwind and could be steered in any upwind direction.

The windmill rotor was turning at two hundred revolutions with a chain drive stepping up the revolutions to a hydraulic pump. The hydraulics drove a twelve by twelve inch propeller at eight hundred revolutions through a forward, neutral and reverse control. Lin Olen, Woolli, AU

18578

Lin Olen

02-02-2008, 09:49 PM

Thrippence18584

Windmaster

02-03-2008, 04:04 AM

I'm surprised by how many "rotary sailors" have appeared recently! When I started my project I thought I was unique. But I guess its an old idea that has frequently been revived.
I'm in the process of preparing short videos that will appear on youtube. They are of my model tests and my "fullsize" version. Most of my work on "Rotary Sailing was more than ten years ago. My system has been patented.
Richard asks what was the boatspeed in different windspeeds. I don't have exact figures for that. Bear in mind the natural windspeed is not constant as most people think - it varies by 50 percent all the time. "What speed will it do in what windspeed" is a question often asked about wind turbine boats. It puzzles me that no-one ever asks that question in relation to normal sailboats!
The boat "Thrippence" looks an interesting experiment with good results that I had not seen before. I would love to hear more details of Richard Miller's new boat.

rwatson

02-03-2008, 04:55 AM

there is a secret here. That is why I withdrew my videos.
Clearly, you don't understand the process of the patenting system. Any public exhibition of an invention before the patent is granted can jeopardise the grant of a patent.

Well done. It appears you have successfully established the patent then, since October last year

Could you quote the Patent number for us so we can check out the features.

I await more info with interest.

Windmaster

02-04-2008, 06:32 AM

I have just posted a video of one of my models on Youtube.
Its at http://www.youtube.com/v/OlqLHRE8ReQ - I was disappointed it lost some quality during the upload. But I think you can still see what it's all about.

Lin Olen

02-08-2008, 02:51 PM

On Rotary Sails... Jim Bates built Te Whaka as suggested by me in patent disclosure. The reason that the rotating sail and rotating keel are so big is because I thought losses due to inefficiency would be high. This is not so, Small variable pitch propellors and standard marine props work very well. I have a photo of my Trailer-Tri under Rotary Sails. I spoke to Jim Bates but he did not believe that I provided the information that he worked with. The powers that be sabotaged Jim's boat. He said he was going to build a catamaran version but I have not seen it. When I applied for a patent in 1974 a patent search failed to find any rotary sails or wind turbines as a form of propulsion, but they sure have proliferated sine 1974. None of the plagiarised copies have worked better than Jims first boat. I seem to be the only inventor that has developed my design to a much highe potential. Look up all my posts on the forum. National Geographic interviewed me over a cup of coffee and milked my brains, then publishe my drawing made up by Havillah Hawkins of Camden, saying that he would not patent his invention, but Havilla's principles were of a much higher standard than those of the NG correspondent. Cheers, Lin

rwatson

02-08-2008, 07:44 PM

On Rotary Sails... Jim Bates built Te Whaka as suggested by me in patent disclosure. ......... I spoke to Jim Bates but he did not believe that I provided the information that he worked with.

Is it me, or there is not a lot of logic in these two statements.

And could you explain
:The powers that be sabotaged Jims boat" please

rwatson

02-08-2008, 07:48 PM

the assumption that the turbine blades rotate at enormous speeds is erroneous, in fact the blades on my design do not rotate (and never can), rotate faster than the windspeed. So a blow from one of these could easily be less that that of a swinging boom. On a fullsize design of mine, a person actually walked into the turning blades without injury! .

The blades on this RC model on You Yube seem to be spinning quite fast - whats the story?

Lin Olen

02-08-2008, 09:44 PM

Hello rwatson.

1. Jim Bates was selected to accompany the late Sir Edmond Hillary on a polar expedition. Jim was to keep the mechanized sleds operational. That was when he concluded that there was a lot of energy just waiting to be tapped from the wind. As an engineer he would have accessed many trade publications.
Jim probably read about my Provisional Patent and took little notice, but like most engineers filed the information away in his capable mind until he decided to build his '"wind turbine". The point is that I disclosed a basic method of proving the patent.

My disclosure described a differential fitted with a single hollow shaft mounted on top of a length of bore casing that was rotatable, mounted on a boat like a mast, to carry a large three blade variable pitch propeller which was mechanically turning an oversize propeller.

Jim chose a "Diamond yacht hull that was available, but when launched it capsized. Jim's answer, typical of Aussies and Kiwis, was to fix the blighter the quickest and easiest way. To do this he cut the hull in half lengthwise and insert an additional two feet of beam. This was enough to make the ballasted hull seaworthy.

2. Te Whaka began to receive excellent publicity ( see Cruising World, August 1981. Page 107.) and Jim demonstrated his craft to two officials. The demonstration was televised and this was when Jim made the statement that guaranteed attacks. "If there is going to be an alternative for power for shipping, this has got to be a viable alternative."

The two "Authorities" managed to persuade Jim to part with his three blade rotor 'for research' but after they got control of it the rotor was stored in a room in the Aukland (?) University and forgotten. Now the fun began in earnest. Jims foundry, which employed highly skilled metal workers to produce bronze boat and brass household fittings, was normally taxed at a low rate. Sales tax was increased from, I believe, 11% to 33%. His product unsaleable.

Rather than lose valuable tradesmen Jim took his boat long-lining to earn extra cash, but his engine failed on a lee shore and the boat was wrecked. He almost drowned and had to survive three days of exposure before he was rescued. Only the engine and some fittings were salvaged. (From my own experience I strongly suspect that Jim's boat was sabotaged.)

Being financially embarrassed Jim put his home on the marked, but his faithful wife sold her business to save their home. Jim intended building a catamaran version, as he had given details to an owner (Atkinson?) in the UK who fitted his cat with standard propellers, with good results. I spoke to Jim on a few occasions trying to advise what I considered neccessary, but Jim brushed off my advice. He did not believe that I was the inventor. Cheers, Lin

rwatson

02-08-2008, 10:10 PM

Hello rwatson.

As an engineer he would have accessed many trade publications.
Jim probably read about my Provisional Patent and took little notice, but like most engineers filed the information away in his capable mind until he decided to build his '"wind turbine". The point is that I disclosed a basic method of proving the patent.

My disclosure described a differential fitted with a single hollow shaft mounted on top of a length of bore casing that was rotatable, mounted on a boat like a mast, to carry a large three blade variable pitch propeller which was mechanically turning an oversize propeller.

I am not surprised he didnt recognise your creativity from this description of your invention. I have a copy an an article from a french popular magazine describing and illustrating the same type of device from the 1930's.
These things have been around for a long time, and the only reason that new patents can be registered I am sure, is that older patents have expired, and the patent office is happy to take your money without spending too much time researching 100+ years of mechanical invention.
You are certainly going to have to have added some real extra features so as not to have the patent overturned by the first capable attorney paid by someone with a financial motive.

Lin Olen

02-08-2008, 10:54 PM

Yes, rwatson, this is why I no longer patent anything, like Havillah Hawkins, all of my ideas and inventions are public domain as quickly as soon as I can show them. The bigger the corporation, the bigger the crooks running them.

Some genius said: "Power corrupts, and absolute power corrupts absolutely"

Lin Olen

02-08-2008, 11:18 PM

I am a lone experimenter with little exposure, until now, to the academic world of boat and plane designers. I did learn, though, that the human brain when properly motivated can outperform the multiple brain of multi-national research organizations. My prototypes work better than most. Honestly Ive been amazed and delighted at the amount of experimenting with Rotary Sails that is going on around the world since I joine Boat Design.net

I used hydraulic coupling on Thrippence and it worked as calculated. I wanted to buy an eight foot rotor but the supplier made me buy the whole damn mill and it was beyond my meager finances, it could just as easily have been be electrical or mechanical coupling. The hydraulics could use water, readily available, with no cooling or pollution problems! Cheers...

Windmaster

02-09-2008, 04:07 AM

The blades on this RC model on You Yube seem to be spinning quite fast - whats the story?

That's just an optical illusion caused by the filming - they are not really going any faster than the windspeed. - the rotor diameter was 2ft. Are you a "doubter" maybe you believe that it is not possible for a boat to sail directly into the wind!

rwatson

02-09-2008, 05:09 AM

Windmaster

02-09-2008, 05:30 AM

What I was actually referring to is a quote from you

"So a blow from one of these could easily be less that that of a swinging boom. On a fullsize design of mine, a person actually walked into the turning blades without injury! ."

The reason you said that was because I expressed concern about safety factors of spinning blades on an open deck.

Seeing the model in action brought back to me the vision of a full scale boat with a persons head in the way. Say the blades are turning at only the windspeed (15mph) - that will create serious injury, and the person would not walk away with just a bump. They certainly would not avoid serious iinjury.

My point was that regular sailors take a risk with a swinging boom, you just have to keep your head down. Same as this - the blow would not be anything anything worse. All activity has risk - how about walking into a plane's propeller! (In my design the rotors do not pass near the driver anyway and he can remain seated at all times.) - I know, I've sailed this boat! I will not discuss this "risk" factor again.

rwatson

02-09-2008, 05:44 AM

How you can equate a once every ten minute low velocity swinging boom, (usually accompanied with a loud verbal warning) with nearly invisible, suddenly swinging, high velocity, sharp object amazes me.
And then the astounding comparison with a pilot inside an aircraft. He and the passengers dont walk around the wing at all while the plane is operational!
Yeah , I bet you wont discuss this risk again. I wouldnt if I were you either.

Windmaster

02-09-2008, 06:17 AM

So apart from argument - what is your opinion on this? Are you trying to say its too dangerous, or what? Are you a member of the Health and Safety Executive? ;) How would you do this project? - be great to hear your take on this.

rwatson

02-09-2008, 07:27 AM

Oh no! You asked me for my opinion - I should be able to resist the tempatation to say what I really think - unnngh, struggle - no its no use - the Inner professor has taken over the keyboard - oh no - I cant stop aaaaaahhhhhhhh.

"With unknown innovations, and no practical examples to test and assess, often it requires small tests to find out high reliable the assertions of the innovator are.

When very basic, but important issues are raised, and get the brush off or are argued vehemently by the innovator, it sets off alarm bells.

Consider the following statements together :-
1) "the rotors do not pass near the driver anyway and he can remain seated at all times"
2) " a person actually walked into the turning blades "
Contradictory to say the least.

I am no doctor, but I know how much damage a sharp edged object (perhaps all three blades within seconds) moving at "windspeed" say 10-15 mph will do. As it is, with traditional boats, something like 70% of deaths are caused by accidents with equipment, not sinkings or men overboard.

Then when you say
" I know, I've sailed this boat! I will not discuss this "risk" factor again."

I will try desperately not to get too preachy here, but I have followed the story of many engineering innovations, sailing etc over the last 40 years. I was reading about turbine propelled boats 20 years ago, along with a half dozen other designs that actually made it into production boats. The reasons that designs get dont get used, become popular and dont make any money dont always hinge on the efficiency or originality, but come down to "little" things. An inventor who dismisses "little" things (perhaps like safety aspects) is probably dismissing other "gotchas" that have prevented the commercial usage of wind turbine propulsion over the last nearly 100 years.

But you know what? It would be great to be proved wrong! I hope you make a million and all the new Farrs and Benetaus come out with bright shiny turbines and the upwind beat becomes a thing of the past. Go for it!

There - that will teach you to ask for my opinion!!!! :-)

CNCAddict

02-09-2008, 10:36 PM

OK, I hate to make my first post one that is critical, but I couldn't help myself. It is a fact that wind turbine blade speed is MUCH higher than the apparent wind speed. So yes, a wind turbine on a boat is not safe if it is within striking distance of it's passengers. So maybe the solution is to mount it out of the way?! So no more arguing this obvious and silly point...OK??

http://www.daviddarling.info/encyclopedia/T/AE_tip_speed_ratio.html

Lin Olen

02-09-2008, 10:43 PM

Of ourse, there's nothing to stop you using a wind-turbine some batteries and an electric motor. This might provide a better solution.

Tim B.
Right on, Rotary Sail don't seem to care what type of transmission is used. It is not critical and has power to spare! Cheers, Lin

Lin Olen

02-09-2008, 11:02 PM

I do not mind valid criticism, but if you have a look at the Rotary Sail Trailer-Tri "Thrippence" you will see two obvious design details:

1. The automatic steering vane hangs below the wind-shadow of the rotor and points true in any breeze. This fin has a symmetrical airfoil shape.

2. The handle on the bottom of the fin is used to aim the rotor in still air, ready for the first expected breeze. It is just within reach when I am standing in the cockpit. I am over 6 feet.

Another point: I rounded and smoothed all the tips of this windmill rotor to avoid serious consequences. An aircraft engineer has safety drilled into him.

Satisfied? No?

Cheers, anyway! Lin

yipster

02-10-2008, 01:22 PM

any thoughts on counter rotating props?

Windmaster

02-10-2008, 01:31 PM

By "props" do we mean the propeller in the water, or the wind-turbine in the air? is there a reason why would you need them?

yipster

02-10-2008, 03:41 PM

need them, need them, hmm, need some funds much harder :D
CR water props show some advantages in better propulsiom
i wondered why i havent seen CR props for a windmill, on airplanes yes
grip, rpm, torque, stability, diameter etc could be better i figger?

Richard Miller

02-10-2008, 06:18 PM

I never had any problems with gyroscopic effects becuase I was using a slow-speed rotor.

Gyroscopic effects only happen when the rotor is self powered as in a hellicopter, but not as a passive system as in a windmill generator.

Lin Olen

02-10-2008, 07:08 PM

Good morning folks.

1 The term "prop/s" is short for propeller/s.

2 Counter rotating props neutralize yaw from torque.

3 Surface piercing props are more efficient and much faster.

4 Rotating Sails should have broad, symmetric section, low aspect ratio blades with a reflexed trailing edge and should be free to rotate about the lift axis.

When I could not get financial or technical aid to install my variable pitch propeller on Thrippence I had remove all of my experimental gear with its hydraulics and sell my boat.

Converting my 6 foot windmill into a 3 bladed test bed I mounted it on the mill tower as a proof of concept. The rotor began to turn in a gentle breeze and it adjusted itself to handle strong winds with no problems. This experiment was left running for several months.

This experiment proved that wingtip feathers on birds are a lot better than the latest propeller technology. The concept was offered to propeller manufacturers but those I approached already knew all there was to know about propellers and brushed me off... The same thing happened with my Tuned Hull.

Being a heretic is a lonely life... Cheers, Lin

Lin Olen

02-10-2008, 07:16 PM

"Got no money, Got no friends... ??? "

Lin Olen

02-10-2008, 07:57 PM

Gyroscopic effects only happen when the rotor is self powered as in a hellicopter, but not as a passive system as in a windmill generator.
Not true. My low speed model sailing yacht was stabilized by its Rotating Sail-flexible-drive- marine screw combination. Broaching 3 inch waves while heading directly up-wind without pitching looked very impressive on the 18 inch model. Cheers, Lin

Rick Willoughby

02-10-2008, 08:10 PM

Good morning folks.

1 The term "prop/s" is short for propeller/s.

2 Counter rotating props neutralize yaw from torque.

3 Surface piercing props are more efficient and much faster.

4 Rotating Sails should have broad, symmetric section, low aspect ratio blades with a reflexed trailing edge and should be free to rotate about the lift axis.

.........
Lin

On point 1. When we have the combination of turbines (power collecters)and propellers (propulsion devices) it is safer to refer to them as twisted foils otherwise you will upset Windmaster. This then allows for the case where the air twisted foil becomes the propulser and the water twisted foil becomes the power collector when sailing downwind faster than the wind.

On point 3. Surface peircing propellers are less efficient than the best submerged prop. The best surface prop gets efficiency around 70%. The best submerged prop around 90%. The virtue of a surface prop comes into play at high speed where the reduced appendage drag has a huge bearing on overall performance but this has nothing to do with efficiency of the blades.

On point 4. Air twisted foils should be designed to maximise power extraction while minimising the force to hold them against the wind. This is quite different to a land based wind turbine where you generally aim to maximise the energy recovery for a given area. I get the best results from a two bladed turbine with maximum chord around 60% of the radius. The tip speed is almost 10 times apparent wind speed - absolutely flying.

Rick W.

Windmaster

02-11-2008, 04:06 AM

Good morning folks.

1 The term "prop/s" is short for propeller/s.

2 Counter rotating props neutralize yaw from torque.

3 Surface piercing props are more efficient and much faster.

4 Rotating Sails should have broad, symmetric section, low aspect ratio blades with a reflexed trailing edge and should be free to rotate about the lift axis.

Point 3:
Surface piercing props have an enormous yaw since they are pushing on the water underneath and the air above does not have the same density. I tried one once. To neutralise this yaw you would need two with opposite rotation.
Point 4:
This is quite a good idea, but practically, you have got to think what you would do when you wanted to stop them turning. A brake would be the only answer and this would put a huge strain on the system in a gale!

Rick:
The turbine and propeller roles would certainly be reversed if you were sailing downwind faster than the wind. Whether this is possible on water no one is sure, but of course it has been done on land as is shown in the famous video which appears on youtube "DDWFTW" (or something like that).

Rick Willoughby

02-11-2008, 04:31 AM

Point 3:
....
Point 4:
This is quite a good idea, but practically, you have got to think what you would do when you wanted to stop them turning. A brake would be the only answer and this would put a huge strain on the system in a gale!

.........

It is not that hard to stop them simply by having control of the angle to the wind rather than allowing weather vaning. Some commercial wind turbines are using this principle to depower. The design I am working on uses a Perm PMG-132 motor with a 4-quadrant drive giving it immense torque capability relative to the prop size and easy able to stall the prop. Once stalled the 2-bladed prop has less area than a mast.

Rick W.

Windmaster

02-11-2008, 05:47 AM

It is not that hard to stop them simply by having control of the angle to the wind rather than allowing weather vaning. Some commercial wind turbines are using this principle to depower. The design I am working on uses a Perm PMG-132 motor with a 4-quadrant drive giving it immense torque capability relative to the prop size and easy able to stall the prop. Once stalled the 2-bladed prop has less area than a mast.

Rick W.

This is true but Lin said it would be free to rotate on the lift axis, by which I think he meant weather vaning. Is the design you are working on for a boat or a fixed base land generator?

Pericles

02-11-2008, 06:39 AM

Lin,

Have these sites any useful data for you?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/%C3%89olienne_Boll%C3%A9e

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brushless_wound-rotor_doubly-fed_electric_machine

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vertical-axis_wind_turbine

http://www.fourwinds-ii.com/v2/?c=library&i=windGenComp

http://www.fourwinds-ii.com/v2/?c=library&i=windGenComp

http://www.skipperpoint.net/caorle/menu/it/attrezzatura/energia/ampair-catalogue2.pdf

Regards,

Pericles

Rick Willoughby

02-11-2008, 07:11 AM

This is true but Lin said it would be free to rotate on the lift axis, by which I think he meant weather vaning. Is the design you are working on for a boat or a fixed base land generator?

The design is for a Solar-Wind boat. I have attached the original concept showing the stern mounted turbine and a further development of the hull that is slightly shorter, beamier and with increased displacement.

The current design will cruise at 7.5kts with 1.5kW and top speed just under 12kts. Overall length is 12m. The long keel in the latest design carries 280kg of batteries rated at 10.8kWh at 10hr rate. Solar cells are rated at 1.2kW and turbine design for peak power of 1.4kW. Perm motor/generator will be current limited to 4.8kW. The same motor will be used on both water and air twisted foils.

I have shown a vane in the original concept but I will be able to override the wind vane to park the blades in turbine mode. Blades have a maximum chord of 120mm.

The canopy over the cockpit is to provide protection from the rotor. I intend to lengthen the cockpit based on improved protection from the rotor. My blades are quite heavy to limit flexing so they build significant energy. The design thrust load on the turbine is less than 200N so overturning moment from the turbine is very low compared with the righting moment.

Rick W.

Windmaster

02-11-2008, 09:13 AM

Very interesting. I agree with the concept. You need to gain energy from the environment whether it be wind or solar. Such a boat should be autonomous - that is depend as little as possible on outside power supplies.

Lin Olen

02-11-2008, 03:16 PM

Lin

On point 1. When we have the combination of turbines (power collecters)and propellers (propulsion devices) it is safer to refer to them as twisted foils otherwise you will upset Windmaster. This then allows for the case where the air twisted foil becomes the propulser and the water twisted foil becomes the power collector when sailing downwind faster than the wind.

On point 3. Surface peircing propellers are less efficient than the best submerged prop. The best surface prop gets efficiency around 70%. The best submerged prop around 90%. The virtue of a surface prop comes into play at high speed where the reduced appendage drag has a huge bearing on overall performance but this has nothing to do with efficiency of the blades.

On point 4. Air twisted foils should be designed to maximise power extraction while minimising the force to hold them against the wind. This is quite different to a land based wind turbine where you generally aim to maximise the energy recovery for a given area. I get the best results from a two bladed turbine with maximum chord around 60% of the radius. The tip speed is almost 10 times apparent wind speed - absolutely flying.

Rick W.
Hello Windmaster, Exactly my point. Cheers, Lin

Lin Olen

02-11-2008, 03:35 PM

Hello Windmaster, Exactly my point. Cheers, Lin
My early papers stressed the importance of Rotary Sail blade tip being designed for transonic conditions. I was delighted to discover years later, that the newre attack helicopter rotors have been designed this way... The rotors are easier to drive and noise levels are much less.

When I speak about efficiency I encompass the whole vehicle. Submerged props need draggy struts to support a draggy marine propellor that has a useless central area of swept disc within the 50% blade radius. You call that efficient? Cheers, Lin

Lin Olen

02-11-2008, 03:52 PM

Hello Rick, I wanted to give you some of the results of my early experiments with propellers. The prop shown on your site is not the best way to go. Windmaster understand my reasoning. Keep your propeller in proportion to your power output. I have used and discarded the work of experts like NASA. Use your gut instincts and ignore the "Specialists" I was thrilled to see that you use linear pedal machanism and amazed that you achieved over 10 miles per hour with the proeller you described. Small contra-rotating surface piercing props are the best, but a low aspect edge mounted twisted foil will give you much more thrust than a large diameter high aspect ratio one. Cheers, Lin

Rick Willoughby

02-11-2008, 04:19 PM

......
When I speak about efficiency I encompass the whole vehicle. Submerged props need draggy struts to support a draggy marine propellor that has a useless central area of swept disc within the 50% blade radius. You call that efficient? Cheers, Lin

No they don't. A pushing prop is self stabiling so needs no support other than a tiny shaft. It has large forces causing it to align with the flow. I have pushed a boat over 15kph with an unstrutted prop on an 8mm diameter aluminium shaft that is 4ft long from the point of support. See the attached.

Rick W.

Lin Olen

02-11-2008, 04:52 PM

(I use the word "man" as the short form of human. It has nothing to do with gender: male, female and etc.) Any sexists aboard?

General notes:

A self pitch adjusting Rotary Sail has much less drag in a gale force wind than can be expected from a bare mast and rigging.

The supporting mast should be mounted on a suitable axial mounting and balanced to the vehicle centre of pressure, i.e. over the centre of pressure of a keel or fin and midway on a land vehicle.

My Trailer-Tri, "Thrippence" had its rotor mounted on a car wheel hub with a drum brake to lock it in one position for maintenance.

The directional fin was mounted clear of the wind shadow of the rotor.

I left the rotor freewheeling in gales or when at anchor or ashore, it has little adverse drag and only turns at a moderate pace when idling.

The rotor must be easily disconnected from the drive.

Immediately a load is applied it begins to work and believe me, its a powerful beast if mis-handled.

A small high-speed rotor is powerful. Low cost blades need only be 9 inches or 0.3 meters in length for recreational craft, or nthey can be large enough for ship propulsion.

Blades made from carbon fiber or injection moulded plastic should have a flexible reflexed trailing edge.

Rotor blades can have an integral shaft with bearings mounted axially along the centre of pressure.

A small high-speed flywheel in a Hydrogen filled casing would be beneficial, but any form of flywheel regeneration will improve the utility of Rotary Sails.

Ripple-capping air lubricated boats have low drag and are easy to make.

Streamlining of the vehicle is important.

Study original Albert Hickman Sea Sled. (A fast row-boat.)

Happy experimenting. Cheers, Lin

yipster

02-11-2008, 06:03 PM

ok call me walt vernes de la pancha but on windmills how about CR props in a savonius rotor
with a split but 100% frontal inlet, size of a radar or cooky tin and just to trickle the battery's

Richard Miller

02-11-2008, 06:44 PM

Lin Olen

02-11-2008, 06:56 PM

Hello Duma Tau My sentiments exactly, that why I go for Rotary Sails! Cheers, Lin

Lin Olen

02-11-2008, 07:01 PM

Hell Rick, I thought you were after performance as shown in your video of a sreamlined yellow crocodile. The craft show is a slow boat. Good fishing. Cheers, Lin

Richard Miller

02-12-2008, 10:50 AM

Do not confuse a Flettner rotor with a wind turbine.

A rotor ship uses a auxlliary motor to spin the rotors about a vertical axis to generate lift that propells the ship. The Baden-Baden:
http://www.tecsoc.org/pubs/history/pics/flettnerrotorship.jpg

A wind turbine uses the drag of the blades rotating about a horizontal or vertical axis to develop power that turns a prop through a generator or gearbox.

Revelation II

http://foxxaero.homestead.com/files/x_Revelation_II.jpg

or

http://www.freepatentsonline.com/4274011.pdf for a vertical axis/generator.

Both methods are somewhat problamatic on smaller vessels due to size required and gyroscopic effects.

Hi Jehard:
You omly get gyroscopic effects with a self powered turbin such as a helicopterñç: but not with a passive system such as a windmill generator
or a gyroglider (which I built and flew).
Richard Miller

Richard Miller

02-12-2008, 10:52 AM

Do not confuse a Flettner rotor with a wind turbine.

A rotor ship uses a auxlliary motor to spin the rotors about a vertical axis to generate lift that propells the ship. The Baden-Baden:
http://www.tecsoc.org/pubs/history/pics/flettnerrotorship.jpg

A wind turbine uses the drag of the blades rotating about a horizontal or vertical axis to develop power that turns a prop through a generator or gearbox.

Revelation II

http://foxxaero.homestead.com/files/x_Revelation_II.jpg

or

http://www.freepatentsonline.com/4274011.pdf for a vertical axis/generator.

Both methods are somewhat problamatic on smaller vessels due to size required and gyroscopic effects.

Hi Jehardiman:
You omly get gyroscopic effects with a self powered turbin such as a helicopter: but not with a passive system such as a windmill generator
or a gyroglider (which I built and flew).
Richard Miller

Richard Miller

02-12-2008, 11:14 AM

Shades of over unity perhaps?

Impossible to sail directly into the wind with a wind turbine only driving a prop.
A wind turbine will allow you to tack up wind like a sailboat though.
Whatever you come up with will look weird.
Definitely post some pictures.

Hi Rayk:
I would like to echo Windmaster´s sentiments: I too have built 2 (1 meter) models and they both sailed directly into the wind (with less speed of course) but still made foreward progress at a practical pace.
Richard Miller

jehardiman

02-14-2008, 03:39 PM

Hi Jehardiman:
You omly get gyroscopic effects with a self powered turbin such as a helicopter: but not with a passive system such as a windmill generator
or a gyroglider (which I built and flew).
Richard Miller

You missed the point. You will always have processional effects in 2 of the three axies depending on the axis of the rotor (maybe all 3 if you have a strange arrangement). Indeed, the effect was used in the Baden-Baden to reduce roll and pitch, and is still used in motion damping systems. The larger the mass inertia of the rotor, the larger the effect. Some small demo models have shown very pronounced effects.

Rick Willoughby

02-14-2008, 03:57 PM

John
I can vouch for the gyroscopic forces. I was supporting the thrust load on a 2.2m 2-bladed turbine in wind around 35kph (tip speed around 8X wind) and the reaction to positional change was substantial.

Rick W.

SamSam

02-14-2008, 05:08 PM

ok call me walt vernes de la pancha but on windmills how about CR props in a savonius rotor
with a split but 100% frontal inlet, size of a radar or cooky tin and just to trickle the battery's

need them, need them, hmm, need some funds much harder :D
CR water props show some advantages in better propulsiom
i wondered why i havent seen CR props for a windmill, on airplanes yes
grip, rpm, torque, stability, diameter etc could be better i figger?

Are you talking about contra or counter rotating props?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Contra-rotating_propellers

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Counter-rotating_propellers

Richard Miller

02-16-2008, 12:57 PM

Where would the site be for this? This seems to me to be in the perpetual motion category.:confused: Sam

The site is on You-Tube. It takes a few mins. to surpass the speed of the wind but it does eventually get there.

Rick Willoughby

02-16-2008, 05:45 PM

I would love to hear from anybody who is working on a Wind Turbin boat currently. richardmiller592@hotmail.com

Richard
I have played around with the idea a long time ago before I knew how to design blades with any precision. I did get a small model to progress into the wind. I now have quite good performance prediction methods based on proven propeller/turbine models and have made many high efficiency water blades and one set of high efficiency air blades. You will see in a earlier post that I am now working on electrically coupled air and water twisted foils.

The things that you need to understand.
1. Gearing. The system works because of gear ratio between the turbine and propeller. The turbine must be higher geared than the propeller. By gearing I am refering to the overall ratio that includes mechanical, electric or hydraulic connection and the pitch of the twisted foils. So if you have mechanical connected twisted foils with a ratio of 1:1 and you are going upwind then the air turbine will need a pitch of say 1m and the water propeller will need a pitch around 0.5m for a practical system. You might need to give the turbine a kick if the wind is light.

2. Efficiency. The required gear ratio is a function of the overall efficiency. The best result I can achieve is that the effective pitch of the turbine is 1.6X the propeller. However you need reasonably strong wind for this to work as the efficiency of the air turbine, of the size we are considering, is low at low Reynolds number. Also high aspect blades are more efficient than low aspect blades. Generally two or three bladed high aspects foils, as you see on modern wind turbines, will give the best result. You can get efficiences close to 90% for each twisted foil. My water twisted foils are similar in shape to air twisted foils as seen in the attached photos.

3. Upwind/Downwind. Upwind the air foil is the power collecter and the water foil is the propulsor. Downwind the air foil is the propulsor and the water foil is the power collector. For beam wind, the air foil is the collector and the water foil the propulsor.

4. Power Transfer. Nothing is free and the system losses result in greater power transfer within the system than the power required simply to propel the boat through the water. It means the propeller (air or water) is larger than required if you were not tapping power form the other medium.

5. Twisted Foil Interconnection. To get the best result from the system you need to be able to change the effective gearing between the foils. Going upwind the air turbine needs around twice the effective pitch of the water propeller. Downwind the situation is reversed. So you need to have mechanical adjustment of gearing through a selectable gearbox or pitch change. Modern electrics enable very wide change in gear ratio between the two foils through electronic controllers and this is the path I am going down. There are more components and associated losses but the system has advantages beyond the gearing aspect. It also allows simple power storage so when the wind is very strong you can store energy rather than depowering or waste energy trying to go faster. You can supplement power collection with solar cells and you can collect energy when moored.

If you want to have a go at building a system I can provide high efficiency blade design to suit your conditions. I would need to know some detail on the size and shape of the intended hull and the method of interconnecting.

Even a small (say 2m diameter) air turbine is a serious piece of machinery once windspeed builds. The tip velocity on a high efficiency blade will be around 8X windspeed so it has large kinetic energy even if built from lightweight materials. There are also substantial gyroscopic forces once it gets going.

Rick W.

Windmaster

02-17-2008, 02:56 AM

Richard
The things that you need to understand.
1. Gearing. The system works because of gear ratio between the turbine and propeller. The turbine must be higher geared than the propeller. By gearing I am refering to the overall ratio that includes mechanical, electric or hydraulic connection and the pitch of the twisted foils. So if you have mechanical connected twisted foils with a ratio of 1:1 and you are going upwind then the air turbine will need a pitch of say 1m and the water propeller will need a pitch around 0.5m for a practical system. You might need to give the turbine a kick if the wind is light.
Rick W.
If I may say so, you have'nt made this very clear. Talking about pitch you have got to say what diameter you are using. With a "twisted foil" pitch is obviously the best description, since the blade angle changes from root to tip. But I have found the turbine blades don't need to be twisted anyway so a simple angle is enough of a description.
Sorry - the term "twisted foil" is not a very good one since the air blades I use are not twisted - sorry to be pedantic! :)

Richard Atkin

02-17-2008, 03:05 AM

Wow....windmill powered boats. For industrial purposes maybe. But I bet they would be noisey and not very relaxing to look at. How's that for a very scientific point of view.

Rick...there you are again! You build props aswell!!?? I think you work for the US navy or something.

Rick Willoughby

02-17-2008, 03:32 AM

If I may say so, you have'nt made this very clear. Talking about pitch you have got to say what diameter you are using. With a "twisted foil" pitch is obviously the best description, since the blade angle changes from root to tip. But I have found the turbine blades don't need to be twisted anyway so a simple angle is enough of a description.
Sorry - the term "twisted foil" is not a very good one since the air blades I use are not twisted - sorry to be pedantic! :)

Windmaster
If a blade is designed to have the same angle of attack across its radius it will indeed be twisted. Meaning the angle of the blade with respect to the shaft it is mounted on will vary with radius.

A "perfectly pitched" blade will have the same pitch irrespective of the radial location. Meaning you could measure the angle of the blade relative to the shaft at any radial position and get the same answer for pitch in every location. Pitch being the distance the fluid would advance in one rotation of the prop without any slip.

I have found that the most efficient blade does not necessarily operate at the same angle of attack over its entire radius but they never have a constant pitch angle - they always have some twist. It is less noticeable with larger diameter blades but still evident. If you are using flat blades then they will be sub-optimal. I use asymmetric foils with optimised angle of attack across the radius, usually resulting in something between -1 to 2 degrees. So they need to be made with some precision to get the best result.

For other than perfectly pitched blades, I specify the pitch at 75% radius.

You did not like me referring to these things as props so I proposed twisted foil. Now you are saying this is misguide yet you suggest no satisfactory alternative. There is no pleasing some people.

Rick W.

TeddyDiver

02-17-2008, 03:40 AM

5. Twisted Foil Interconnection. To get the best result from the system you need to be able to change the effective gearing between the foils. Going upwind the air turbine needs around twice the effective pitch of the water propeller. Downwind the situation is reversed. So you need to have mechanical adjustment of gearing through a selectable gearbox or pitch change. Modern electrics enable very wide change in gear ratio between the two foils through electronic controllers and this is the path I am going down. There are more components and associated losses but the system has advantages beyond the gearing aspect. It also allows simple power storage so when the wind is very strong you can store energy rather than depowering or waste energy trying to go faster. You can supplement power collection with solar cells and you can collect energy when moored.

If you want to have a go at building a system I can provide high efficiency blade design to suit your conditions. I would need to know some detail on the size and shape of the intended hull and the method of interconnecting.

Even a small (say 2m diameter) air turbine is a serious piece of machinery once windspeed builds. The tip velocity on a high efficiency blade will be around 8X windspeed so it has large kinetic energy even if built from lightweight materials. There are also substantial gyroscopic forces once it gets going.

Rick W.
How about hydraulic transmission with Variable Displacement pump and motor. Anyway if the turbine is a bit bigger, lets say 10kW and up, it would give even better flexibility with gearing ratios. Maybe loosing a bit of coeffincy, but with a lighter weight.
What I've been considering is chancing the main engine also work to hydraulic pump too so there's a hydraulic hybrid. Ofcourse it's not so flexible with batteries like electric system, but with engine it wouldn't need to be..

Rick Willoughby

02-17-2008, 04:16 AM

Teddy
You get into an age old argument over what drive system is the best. Generally electric with modern electronics will be more efficient than hydraulics but then the hydraulic system is not as fragile. Particularly where salt water is concerned.

Efficiency is a bigger factor than size. If the turbine size goes up to cater for additional losses then the propeller size has to go up and there is more power transfer in the system for the same output. Remember, in the upwind case, you have to push the turbine through the air. In the downwind case you have to push the turbine through the water. The bigger the turbine the more thrust required.

The main reason I am going for electrics is the flexibility afforded with batteries for storage and ease of collecting additional energy from solar. There are already electronics available that optimise energy recovery from both turbines and solar systems so these are off-the-shelf.

I also have a redundant propulsion system as I can thrust from either air or water. I intend to use the same motors/generators and controllers for both twised foils so I have parts duplication as well.

These are the factors that are leading me toward electrics.

Rick W.

Windmaster

02-17-2008, 10:11 AM

Windmaster
If a blade is designed to have the same angle of attack across its radius it will indeed be twisted. Meaning the angle of the blade with respect to the shaft it is mounted on will vary with radius.

A "perfectly pitched" blade will have the same pitch irrespective of the radial location. Meaning you could measure the angle of the blade relative to the shaft at any radial position and get the same answer for pitch in every location. Pitch being the distance the fluid would advance in one rotation of the prop without any slip.

You did not like me referring to these things as props so I proposed twisted foil. Now you are saying this is misguide yet you suggest no satisfactory alternative. There is no pleasing some people.

Rick W.

I did actually know that!!!

Regarding the naming of the parts, its not a question of what I like or what I don't like. The fact is that if you want people to understand what you are talking about you need to use the correct terminology - making up your own names is not an answer when there is established convention stretching back many years which is perfectly sufficient to describe what you mean.

You should be using "turbine" for the element that takes power from the moving fluid and "propeller" that puts energy back in another fluid.
Check these links:
http://dictionary.die.net/propeller
http://dictionary.die.net/turbine

I have also checked these in the Shorter Oxford Dictionary.

Sorry to be a "pain" about this ;)

yipster

02-17-2008, 10:12 AM

probably mentioned here before i just hear power squares up by doubling size so a size 2 gives 4 power but 4 size 16 power
not exactly putting it right but you get ( allready have ) the idea the mills best be big

Windmaster

02-17-2008, 10:21 AM

Terry

Efficiency is a bigger factor than size. If the turbine size goes up to cater for additional losses then the propeller size has to go up and there is more power transfer in the system for the same output. Remember, in the upwind case, you have to push the turbine through the air. In the downwind case you have to push the turbine through the water. The bigger the turbine the more thrust required.

I also have a redundant propulsion system as I can thrust from either air or water. I intend to use the same motors/generators and controllers for both twised foils so I have parts duplication as well.

Rick W.
Hi

From this it looks as it your craft will be able to sail directly into the wind and also downwind faster than the wind - is that what you are hoping to achieve?

Also, a turbine has to be "pushed" through the air? Surely, it is pushing itself. The air acts on the turbine and pushes it round - isn't that right? If it had to be "pushed" - what would do the pushing?

Rick Willoughby

02-17-2008, 03:54 PM

Hi

From this it looks as it your craft will be able to sail directly into the wind and also downwind faster than the wind - is that what you are hoping to achieve?

Also, a turbine has to be "pushed" through the air? Surely, it is pushing itself. The air acts on the turbine and pushes it round - isn't that right? If it had to be "pushed" - what would do the pushing?

With my proposed Solar-Wind boat I aim to hold a steady 7 to 7.5kts day or night. I might end up down to about 5 kts in the wee hours on a windless night if I cruise all night. My air propeller is too small to work efficiently in light air downwind to provide sufficient thrust to collect power from the water turbine at the same time.

The blades on both sets of twisted foils are asymmetric. I am designing the foils such that the water blades are most efficient as propeller and the air blades are most efficient as the turbine.

Upwind the air turbine has to be pushed or forced through the air. The force is generated by the water propeller in addition to the force required to move the boat through the water. That is the cost of sailing directly into the wind.

Downwind the air propeller generates thrust in excess of that required to propell the boat through the water and the excess force is used to force the water turbine through the water so it collects power.

Rick W.

Richard Atkin

02-17-2008, 09:32 PM

Rick, I had no idea you were going this far with the windmill. I thought it was for your microwave or something. This is very iinteresting.

Rick Willoughby

02-17-2008, 10:25 PM

Rick, I had no idea you were going this far with the windmill. I thought it was for your microwave or something. This is very iinteresting.

Richard
I always intended to build or buy a sailing boat for my retirement. To this end I started playing with 3-4ft models after I sold my last yacht 16 years ago now. The models were fun but it did not get me on the water so I started with pedal boats in a nearby lake that prohibits power boats. I have learnt some things about efficiency trying to go as far and as fast as I can with my 120W engine.

The design progression goes:
I learnt that slender hulls are efficient.
I do not like the idea of a moderate size cat being mast down going nowhere in the ocean.
A slender monohull does not have much ability to carry sail unless it has a canting keel. I did not give the idea a lot of consideration though.
I would like a boat that is seaworthy yet trailerable.
I would like a boat that can sustain 7kts under most conditions.
I am an electrical engineer and am impressed with value for money of current technology like motors, controllers and solar cells. (I built my first battery/electronic/electric vehicle in 1976)
I have learnt a lot about efficient foils and propeller/turbine design from my pedal boats.
I saw the DDFTTW videos and this made me think a bit harder about the potential for props/turbines.
There was a post somewhere on these archives that covered the merits of electrics and battery storage in combination with turbines.
batteries can serve the dual purpose of energy storage and ballast. The VRLA gel type have fair life and do not leak - price is going up though.

These were the lines of reasoning that has got me developing a Solar-Wind coastal cruiser for effective point-to-point coastal passages. Time will tell if it is a good idea or better, a good example based on a good idea.

One thing I have learnt throughout my working life is that not many people have a good grasp of physical concepts. It does not surprise me how readily people dismiss ideas that are later seen as obvious. It takes about 30 years of development to get a good technology concept to every day use. There are many examples like telephone, TV, computer, solar cells, motor vehicle and so on.

Rick W.

Richard Atkin

02-18-2008, 08:05 PM

Rick, are you at the stage now, where you can actually build a solar/wind boat that will perform to about 70% of your goal? In other words, is it looking promising, or is it still a huge challenge with the goal looking some way off in the distance?

just curious, that's all

Rick Willoughby

02-18-2008, 09:14 PM

Richard
All the numbers are adding up OK. I am confident about hull shape, motor, controller, batteries and water prop. These are things I have tested thouroughly and have reliable data on.

I have tested the air turbine to the point of blades and primitive performance testing. Even a 2.2m blade needs to be mounted well for serious testing so I have not got around to scientific results. However I have looked at a wide variety of wind turbines and my blade performance is similar - I have slightly less energy recovery from the air stream but lower thrust force in given wind conditions.

I have not played around with modern large solar panels. Just tried little ones a few years ago. (My watch and calculator are light powered though - so my tiny contribution to sustainable development - actually I got fed up with changine batteries)

NA believes the hull sections can be built under my target weight. Stability is very good - as you would expect with a keel full of lead batteries.

I am expect to get inside 10% of my target performance. I can do better than that now with pedal boats and the small electric catamaran so there should not be a lot of difficulty scaling it up.

Rick W.

Richard Atkin

02-19-2008, 03:54 AM

Cool. So mostly it's just the wind turbine that needs to be optimised...the solar panels are just a case of choosing the right ones. Sounds like your design is nearly complete. All you have to do then is retire and have fun! :)

I must admit I like the robustness of the solar/wind turbine concept. There are no huge forces that will cause something to break. You are not likely to be in need of a rescue squad.

Rick Willoughby

02-19-2008, 04:25 AM

Richard
I have attached the latest iteration of the design. It still has the wind prop/turbine missing but it has some of the internals outlined.

Aim will be to have the entire hull developable so it can be cut out in flat panels from foam sandwich composite.

The only real concentration of forces is in the long keel to carry the batteries. These weigh 268kg. There is also a concentration of forces around the attachement points for the three hull components. My aim is to get any connecting holes above the waterline so I can float the sections separately if I choose to assemble it this way.

I have not yet sorted out the assembly process but I do know the front section will be easily carried by one person and the stern section, without the prop/turbine, will be manageable by one person. Both the water prop/turbine leg and wind prop/turbine will be removed for transport.

With a desalinator and fishing line I should be close to autonomous and able to move about at a respectable pace.

Rick W.

Windmaster

02-20-2008, 06:26 AM

The solar/wind boat is an interesting concept, but this thread was really about "wind turbine boats" by which I think it relates to boats powered directly by a wind turbine, as opposed to storing up energy using a wind turbine.

18976

Here is something for Rick:
A picture of a "seriously" big two-bladed wind turbine on a boat - used to power the boat directly - but I would think it would charge up the batteries fast also ! :)

yipster

02-20-2008, 10:44 AM

like to mention the 1899 lord brabizon's giro sail i saw in the program wind driven on discovery channel
point was made that apart from hi/lo side the tipspeed of the 2 blades having apearant wind advantage

Richard Atkin

02-20-2008, 04:47 PM

Windmaster, I think Rick's solar/wind boat is highly relevant to this thread. This thread is about using a wind turbine to provide a means of forward propulsion. It is important to consider all the ways that a windturbine can do this. This means considering the hull(s) that the turbine is pushing, and the way the energy is utilised, and in what kind of water you wish to do this. Focusing on the turbine alone could lead to premature conclusions.

Rick's highly efficient, 'go anywhere' design shows a solution to a wind turbine with no wind.

Windmaster

02-21-2008, 02:41 AM

Not Really - Please read the original question carefully. Maybe the original poster can tell us what he meant.

I reckon the ultimate sailboat is one which can go directly into the wind.

Claims have been made that wind turbine powered vessels do just that, without other means of ( engine ) propulsion or fuel useage.

Various cargo vessels started out, one by Jacques Cousteau, if my memory serves?

I would love to hear of any boats and ships using this type of drive.

Surely the ultimate in Green travel?

It does say "directly into the wind without other means of (engine) propulsion" doesn't it?
Why not start another thread if you want to talk about something different?

Pericles

02-21-2008, 05:11 AM

Windmaster,

Much earlier, I contributed some thoughts to this thread, and my perception of the meaning of his question is that Duma Tau knew in phrasing it, that the ultimate sailboat, by definition, cannot sail directly into the wind. A sailboat or sailing boat is a boat propelled partly or entirely by sails. A sail is any type of surface intended to generate thrust by being placed in a wind, in essence, a vertically-oriented wing.

When the boat traveling is across or into the wind, the sails propel the boat by redirecting the wind coming in from the side towards the rear. In accordance with the law of conservation of momentum, air is redirected backwards, making the boat go forward. This driving force is called lift although it acts largely horizontally.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sail

A wind powered vessel is another matter and the solution should be capable of being scaled up to the size of a commercial freighter. As is known, the heat of the sun contributes to the winds, so utilising some of the other forms of power from the sun, by more direct methods in order, to assist the wind powered vessel's capabilities makes commercial sense. This is, to my mind, a legitimate and acceptable example of lateral thinking. Let us not be "limited by the terms of the enquiry" in the weasel words of national governments, but expand oor minds to include all types of designs that avoid the direct use of fossil fuels as motive power.

We are seeking to convert the sun's energy for immediate or later use as a fuel to propel a vessel. Fuel is stored energy, whose origin is from the sun, be it coal, crude oil, or even hydro power. Electricity is a fuel although the ignorant call it energy and it is available by conversion processes with which we are all familiar, when it is required. So, pencils at the ready, let us attack the proposition once more with gusto.:P :P :P :P

Pericles

TeddyDiver

02-21-2008, 02:25 PM

Electricity is a fuel although the ignorant call it energy and it is available by conversion processes with which we are all familiar, when it is required.
Electricity is fuel only when stored in a capasitor or smth similar. In the batteries fuel is a chemical reaction. Most commonly electricity is only one form transmission:P

Pericles

02-21-2008, 03:53 PM

Teddy,

That's very true. The reports you hear in the MSM talk about an energy crisis when they should say fuel crisis. Energy can be neither created, nor destroyed. You and I and most of those who post here know that. Reporters should be stood up in a line and--------------!!!!

The Norwegians have hydro power that works, but Tajikistan cannot make their new Russian funded hydro power system work.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/programmes/from_our_own_correspondent/7243704.stm

Regards,

Pericles

Richard Atkin

02-21-2008, 09:46 PM

I don't want to argue with anyone. I think we can all relax when it comes to "off topic" contributions. If it is relevant in some way....then welcome it. Everybody wins. If you are bored you can just skip past the article. I don't like to see interesting people disappear when they are 'brushed off'. (Not speaking about Rick so much....just people in general).
Some people lerk in BoatDesign.net and offer a lot of their time...because they are interested in a subject....only to be accused of being not helpful enough, or off topic, or this or that....and they just go away (probably can't be bothered with the arguments). And then I think....man...I was interested in that, but now I will have to go elsewhere too.

Everybody just stay cool :D