This action might not be possible to undo. Are you sure you want to continue?
Wichita State University
A performance and structural analysis was done on parts of the Breezy 5.5 Homebuilt Wind Turbine Generator available from www.prairieturbines.com. Twisted tapered blades were analyzed and compared to the existing non-twisted-non-tapered design. The results indicate that a rotor with 3 twisted tapered blades with higher rotational speed can produce 17,000 KWh/year depending on the probability distribution of the wind. The structural analysis shows generally low stresses and a few details that uneven stress distributions.
the blades and shows analysis results of some of the structural details undergoing some of the operating forces that the structure is subjected to. The Breezy 5.5 is grid tied and uses a 3 phase induction gear motor as a generator with a 14.5:1 gear ratio which provides a constant rotational speed of 119 rpm. The rotor consists of 4 wooden blades carved with an untapered un-twisted airfoil shape. Each blade is 10ft long. Primary control is achieved through stall regulation. Overspeed is sensed and auxiliary protection is achieved with a small circuit that receives a generator rpm input and shuts the turbine down upon overspeed. Shutdown is achieved with an electromagnetic failsafe brake. The turbine nacelle yaws with the wind on its yaw bearing due to the response of the tail in the wind.
With the emphasis on renewable energy in society today, the homeowner is drawn to do his part not just for the environmental benefits, but for financial reasons also. A brief review of available wind turbines of the size needed to offset the power use of the average home shows that the cost is substantial and the pay back period long. One alternative for the homeowner is to build a wind turbine himself with a variety of plans available. One such plan is available from www.prairieturbines.com and is called the Breezy 5.5, named for its rated max output of 5.5 KW. With a few purchased components, the remaining structure is simple to build with straight cuts, drilled holes, carved wood blades, welding of mild steel, and only 1 machined part. The cost is reduced to about a tenth the price of purchasing a commercially available turbine, which reduces the payback period to years instead of decades. Other designs attempt to use clever ways of circumventing the head on force of nature, but the Breezy 5.5 design withstands nature by brute force. This paper begins an analysis of the effect of changing
1. Use published wind data to determine the size of wind turbine needed to produce at least 17,000 KWh/year at 11000 E 39th St S, Derby KS, which is the energy use for the residence there. The Kansas Corporation Commission has Mean Wind Speed and Mean Wind Power Density maps available for various heights on their web site at www.kcc.state.ks.us/maps/. The wind power density is the power available per unit rotor area in w/m2. This takes the probability density of all the various wind speeds into account and greatly simplifies wind turbine power output estimation. The average wind speed is commonly used but is less useful in that it doesn’t take into account that the amount of power available is a function of V3. The alternative is to set up a tower with wind measurement equipment on it and record the wind speeds at that particular site to get the probability distribution of the wind. And that is
AE 878 Directed Project, Wichita State University, Department of Aerospace Engineering.
Wind turbine fuel is free. Therefore this is rarely done for the residential size wind turbine installation and instead an estimate is used and you take what you can get. Instead it indicates the average power available per unit swept area of the wind turbine rotor. A study of momentum theory and how it applies to wind turbines shows that if you capture all that power.30. The only relevant argument for having a more efficient turbine is Figure 2: Wind velocity in the stream tube and the axial induction factor a.7 ft).  To verify the breezy design with a 20 ft rotor diameter we use the power density and multiply by various factors to get the diameter of turbine required. However. 2 which gives a mean average wind power of 350W/m . that would increase the Cp estimate to 0. 2 If the lower power density of 233 W/m is used. Notice that a doubling of wind speed correlates to an 8 times increase in the power contained in that wind. The power equation below shows how much power is available in the wind per rotor area. and V is the velocity of the wind. it’s not a density in the traditional sense. Figure 2 shows the velocity slowdown at the rotor and even more slowdown downstream.15 and not to predict its performance. It’s nice to have a super efficient turbine. Where u is the power density and z is the height above ground level of the point in question. This corresponds to an axial induction factor of a=0.org/faq/usresource.5 has a coefficient of performance (Cp) of 0. Because the wind speed decreases near the ground. However. The corrected power density is 233 w/m2. Figure 1: Mean Annual Power Density at 30 meters The map in figure 1 reads 250 W/M 2 at 30 meters above ground level at the residence address.indeed necessary to establish a business case for a commercial turbine. Power in the wind = ½ ρ A V3 Where ρ is the density of air at the hub.html. But this is not the same problem that automobiles have to try and conserve an expensive fuel. Their measurement of output is that it produces 12000 KWh/year as measured by the KWh meter connecting it to the grid. the costs of such a test setup is easily more than the entire costs of a homebuilt turbine. That limit is the Betz limit and is 59%. A is the area swept by the wind turbine blades.5 use a lower resolution wind data map from www. . The designers of the Breezy 5. While the map indicates “power density”. mass per unit volume.awea. Not all that power can be captured. Therefore there is a limit to how much energy you can remove and still maintain flow. This is high compared to the higher resolution data available today. The Breezy 5.5 is on a 60 ft tall tower. the 1/7th power law from  is used to correct the power density down to the tower height of 60 ft. The lowest wind map available is for a hub height of 30 meters (98.20. the designers use this data only to determine that Breezy 5. you have reduced the wind velocity to zero and made the exit stream of air have infinite area. This is only at one wind speed though. the cost of the machinery used to capture the power you desire from the wind.
The Breezy blades are designed to be easy to produce and that is a big benefit to the home-builder.5 measured the energy generation at the grid connected power meter to be 12. These will converge to the right value upon iteration. An example of such blades are below and are available from www. Composite blades have the disadvantage of being contrary to the spirit of home building.9 ft. The BEM method is as follows from .com. Or. the next equation shows that we could instead increase the diameter to 23. If the OEM composite blade manufacturer cannot be found after 5 years. Despite these problems.000 KWh/year. wooden twisted tapered blade is more difficult to carve compared to un-twisted un-tapered blade and requires more material thickness to accommodate the twist. Blade manufacturers don’t share their design and manufacturing processes because they are of a competitive nature. Figure 3 shows that a max value of .5 homebuilt wood 4 blade design and determine the viability of changing the blades to commercially produced composite 3 blade design. and easy to maintain.The same equation is used to determine what size rotor area or efficiency of turbine will be needed to produce 17. each blade must operate at various wind speeds which make the blade operate at different angles of attack. and easy to find the twist and taper calculations. Each blade is carved out of a single 2x12.28. 2. Therefore this assumption is the only practical choice. Estimate the coefficient of performance of the Breezy 5.20 and so the hope is that a twisted and tapered blade would have the performance increase that we desire for a Cp of 0. In this paper the Blade Element Momentum (BEM) method is used to evaluate the 4 bladed Breezy rotor and the 3 bladed composite rotor and compare their output at a variety of wind speeds. If a blade breaks. another one can be made the same way the originals were made to begin with. Begin by 1.28 is needed if the rotor diameter were to remain constant. Since the goal of this paper is to compare 2 different blades. And a Several important differences between the Breezy blades and a possible replacement affect the performance of the 2 different blades. While it may be easy to conceptualize that a twisted and tapered blade would be superior.000 KWh/year of generation  and so this provides a point of reference. the project statement suggests the possibility of sourcing blades from a manufacturer for comparison purposes. The wood blades simplicity comes from having no twist or taper which makes it easy to use a hand held portable planer to form the initial airfoil shape.5 was determined in the last section to be 0. • • • • 4 blades vs 3 blades Twisted vs un-twisted blade Tapered chord vs un-tapered chord Tip speed ratio of 6 gives 200 rpm vs the Breezy 119 rpm rotational speed In addition to these differences.magnets4less. The Cp of Breezy 5. it’s quite another to make a twisted tapered blade to any degree of accuracy either in wood or especially in composite due to the tooling costs and labor intensive nature. The BEM method is an iterative method from  and this paper includes Prandtl’s Tip Loss Factor in step 3 and the Glauert Correction for High Values of the axial induction factor a in step 7. The interactions of all the different variables at each radial location combine to produce the rotor performance vs wind speed. Wood is inexpensive. dividing the blade into sections. The designers of Breezy 5. fatigue resistant. The first equation below shows that a Cp of . The Breezy design uses a rotor with 4 blades made of wood. Initialize the axial induction factor a and the radial induction factor a’. the attempt is made to reach a higher efficiency. then the homebuilder has some redesigning to do. This airfoil will be used to analyze both the breezy blades and is assumed to be the airfoil of the prospective new blades for comparison purposes. 10 ft long and have an un-twisted and un-tapered airfoil shape which is constant along the length of the blade similar to a NACA 4412 airfoil.
This results in the conclusion that more accurate lift and drag is needed for more accurate results. Additionally. the Cl & Cd change with Reynolds number as shown in the figure below. it shows a trend.3. To clarify some issues with lift and drag graphs some discussion about Reynolds number (Re) is needed. and α is the angle of attack of the airfoil to Vrel. The Prandtl tip loss factor is a method of including the effects of those tip losses. These are the coefficients of lift and drag. and e is the mathematical constant.performance is achieved at a=0. While conceptually the trend is assumed to apply to the NACA 4412 airfoil. Figure 3: Coefficient of thrust (Ct) & Coefficient of power (Cp) vs a  2. A graph of those effects can be seen in figure 5. Figure 5:Prandtl tip loss factor F vs radial position for various number of blades (NB) and wind speeds. Compute the flow angle Φ 5. . Compute the local angle of attack of the airfoil. Figure 4: Angles in the rotor plane showing the relative velocity of the air Vrel when rotor speed is included . r is the radial position of calculation. 4. to include that in the analysis would probably be arbitrary and especially so because both blades would use the same data making the assumption of questionable usefulness. Where Φ is the angle of Vrel to the rotor plane. perpendicular and parallel to the airfoil respectively. It mainly affects the response of the airfoil in the stall region. R is the radius of the rotor. a’ tends to be closer to zero. θ is the angle of the airfoil to the rotor plane. While this graph is for a different airfoil. Compute Prandtl Tip Loss Factor F The high-pressure air on one side of a blade spills over the end of the blade seeking the low pressure on the other side making tip vortices which waste energy and create drag on the blade. For the Breezy and the composite blades Re is calculated and it’s found to be quite low compared to much of the published data for airfoils. Re is a dimensionless quantity that allows comparisons to be made from one size of airfoil to another in different kinds of fluid. Read Cl(α) & Cd(α) from experimental data for the airfoil. Where B is the number of blades. 3.
The Momentum theory breaks down at higher values of a. else quit. A stall regulated wind turbine sometimes operates exclusively in this region during a time when this estimation is important. 9. ac ~ . the blade comparison using this data is assumed to be useful even if not fully accurate. ac ~ . Where L is the lift on the airfoil perpendicular to the chord. If a & a’ have changed significantly from the initial a & a’.For a<ac.2 Where D is the drag on the airfoil parallel with the chord.2 and a’ Figure 6: variation of Cl and Cd with angle of attack for various Re  8. Where Pn and Pt are the force per unit blade length normal and tangential to the rotor plane respectively at that radial distance on the blade. Figure 7: Cl and Cd curves from  for NACA 4412 at Re 1. 7. max power output. therefore some factor is needed to correct the prediction. Note that these also use the Prandtl tip loss factor F.5 x 106 The data used is from  and shows lift and drag at a higher angle than other data found for this report. and c is the chord length. . Compute the forces on each blade element. however most of them were tested with aircraft in mind and tend to stop at the beginning of the stall region. and ρ is the density of the air. Compute Cn & Ct which are the coefficients of force normal to and tangential to the rotor plane. 6. For a>ac. Unfortunately figure 7 represents the best data the author could find and while it’s at a Reynolds number that is too high. Calculate a & a’ with Glauert Correction for High Values of a. then go to step 2. The lift and drag curves are available in a variety of resources.
The 60 rpm turbine doesn’t match the performance of the 45 rpm turbine until 9 m/s wind speed. To maximize the power output at one rotational speed the turbine gives up performance at another rotational speed. This peak happens at a higher wind speed though and so to compare blades at one low wind speed gives a deceptively low number. tapered blade gives a projected increase from 12000KWH/ year x 1. This Cp is for the blades only and doesn’t include the other losses such as gearbox losses. the new blades could capture a significant amount of power at higher wind speeds. the 45 rpm turbine is making nearly 10 KW in a 6. But after that the 60 rpm turbine greatly surpasses the slower turbine. Sum up all the sections to get the total thrust force on the blade. but it is an advanced feature for an induction turbine and certainly out of the realm of possibilities for the vast majority of homebuilders. But the faster an airfoil goes. That turbine’s peak capability would rarely be used and the significant cost increase in generator capacity would be underutilized. taper. then a high peak power output in high winds will not be productive since it’s rarely seen. A further discussion of the effects on output of wind turbine configuration changes is warranted to further understand the effects of the changes between the 2 different blades.Then compute the force for each section from I=1 to N.22 & 0. That extra generator capacity can capture a significant portion of the output for the year in these peak scenarios. and some turbines do that. however it doesn’t necessarily do that. the greater the drag. For instance. in the example turbine in figure 8 above. The Cp at 30 mph is 0.37 respectively. electrical resistance losses. and for the twisted.  Figure 8 shows an increase in power output as the RPM and wind speed increases. case where the probability distribution of the different wind speeds is needed to see if the shifting of the blades peak power wind speed is useful or not. If the wind blows constantly at low speed. 10.38 which is a 18% increase in power output by changing the blades twist. so the designer will need to justify the output of his design at a variety of rotational speeds for the expected wind distribution at the particular site.5 m/s wind while the 60 rpm turbine is making none. So there is a tradeoff that only a complete analysis of all the options would show. The calculations at 23mph result in a Cp of the Breezy blades of 0. This report did not pursue that analysis. & RPM. Repeat for the Pn to get the bending force on the blade. tapered blades of 0.19 = 14280 KWh/year. This appears to validate the benefit of using a twisted tapered blade. Calculate blade in-plane and out-of-plane moments where the moment is M. Changing from the Breezy blades to the twisted.32. and other inefficiencies. RESULTS OF BEM method The calculations are in an accompanying excel spreadsheet due to the large number of calculations for each blade section. An increase in RPM will give an increase in power output as shown in figure 8. These losses are assumed to be similar for either type of blade. This is a . electricity used to operate the wind turbine. which is a 68% increase at that wind speed. But since the Cp’s are so different at the higher wind speed. The opposite is true if the site has plenty of very windy days. Figure 8: the effect of rpm on output for an example turbine. Ideally the turbine rpm would increase or decrease depending on the wind speed. The formula below is the point slope equation for a linear assumption between sections where A is the slope and B is the y intercept.
This shows that a fast rotation speed in a slow wind (high tip speed ratio) gives a lower Cp due to drag. wind speed for Breezy and for the new blades.1 & 9. There is an optimal tip speed ratio for each rotor configuration and rotational speed. Solidity also changes the characteristics of the efficiency curves as shown in Figure 12. which gives low Cp due to stall. Additionally. less torque. Higher solidity gives you slower speeds. Using more blades isn’t necessarily better.2: Cp vs. In Figure 10 each curve rises to a peak and then falls as the tip speed ratio increases. The solidity of a rotor.Figure 9. and more power. This analysis shows an unexpected peak at 30 mph and so it doesn’t correlate very well to the observations and measurements in . The new blades show a peak and a drop off as the wind speed increases. While lower solidity gives you higher speeds. which is the ratio of the blades plan area to the total swept area of the rotor. The more the blades. And also a low Cp occurs for a low rpm rotor in high wind speeds (low tip speed ratio). Figure 11: Front view of a wind turbine rotor showing the area a of a single blade in the total swept area of the blades. Just that the analysis here can’t include all the factors in a simple analysis of a real wind turbine. the better low tip speed performance Figure 9. This is the whole point of stall regulation because this is exactly what is needed to limit the power input from the blades due to the tremendous power in the wind at high wind speeds.2 show the power output and Cp curves for the 2 different blades. But the analysis of both show the power rising to a peak and falling as the airflow stalls over the airfoil and stall regulation takes over. Figure 10: A classic Cp vs tip speed ratio graph for different types of turbine.5 turbine power output was described in  to rise fairly linearly and level off to 5. higher torque. This doesn’t mean the authors of  are wrong. It must be an average Cp over the expected normal range of power output.1: Power output vs wind speed for Breezy and for the new blades. To calculate the power output using the mean annual power density. Figure 9. . shown in Figure 11. high rotational speeds produce more noise and stress on the blades and hub due to high centrifugal forces and gyroscopic forces. the Cp of a turbine is used. The Cp also rises to a peak and drops off dramatically. and less power. has an effect on the operating characteristics of the turbine.5 KW at 23 mph. The Breezy 5.
The optimal chord value is nearly 1/3 of the length of the blade. This reduces the power input by reducing the effective area. .  Note that solidity is a factor in determining a and a’ in step 7 of the BEM method. The chord length c is calculated with the following formula Figure 13: Tail Furling Another method of controlling the max power input is stall regulation. is the most commonly adopted control method. This is impractical to build and the chord is usually trimmed linearly from a practical value and blended into the rest of the blade instead of following the optimal formula.”  Stall regulation is mechanically simple due to having no moving parts to limit the power input. Solidity σ: The ratio of blade area to the total swept area. For every conceivable variable there is an associated graph of the effect on the power output or the efficiency. the effect is a rotor that turns at an angle to the wind. and by changing the angle of attack to a lower angle on the blades at the top of the rotor and to a steeper angle at the bottom. this can be accomplished with tail furling. each variable must be changed and the effect plotted to identify the optimal design. The blades are at a fixed angle to the hub. Determine the benefits and viability of including the tail furling design found in . Figure 12: the effects of changing solidity on a Cp vs tip speed ratio plot. While it’s called tail furling. and the tangential velocity remains the same. Stall regulation is normally used on a constant rotational speed generator like an induction generator. Tail furling is typically used on a turbine with a permanent magnet generator because that generator does not limit the rpm and the airfoil can’t stall. The optimal angle of attack α is chosen based on the lift and drag curves and Φ is computed and used in the BEM method. at the time of writing. The twisted and tapered blades in this paper were given the optimum twist angle from  using the following equations. The BEM method can be used to do that in a simple spreadsheet. The following quote sheds some light on this method: “Stall regulation provides the simplest means of controlling the maximum power generated by a turbine to suit the sizes of the installed generator and gearbox and until recently. The rpm would increase until something came apart. As the tail turns the tail still points parallel to the wind and the rotor turns at an angle to the wind.The twist angle in the root area is commonly adjusted also. The angle of Where x is the local tip speed ratio at r instead of R for the usual tip speed ratio. To do a complete job in wind turbine design. however it is time consuming and tedious and is the reason why computer programs are written to speed the process and that task is not undertaken in this paper. With small turbines using a tail for directional control. One method of limiting power during high winds is turning the rotor at an angle to the wind as seen in figure 13. If the twist angle is increased it helps in low wind speeds when the turbine is staring up. With stall regulation the wind speed increases. 3. Furling is when the dynamics of the system respond to the excess wind by turning the tail to the side in proportion to the excess wind speed.
3) = 138 ft lbs (formula below) Figure 14: increasing wind speed decreases tip speed ratio λ.  Root moment on each blade from 50 year extreme wind loads. Cd of 1. wind speed curve will provide the correct balance between optimal extraction of power while limiting peak output.4 times the annual extreme wind. The 50 year extreme wind is 1.kcc.attack increases and the airfoil gradually stalls and decreases the Cp as shown in figures 14 & 15. Figure 16 shows this map from www. 4.3 for a flat plate is used in the standard drag formula below. The blade design and generator must be analyzed as a system at all wind speeds to make sure that the power output vs. stall regulation is a better option on an induction generator wind turbine and an analysis of the need for tail furling is therefore concluded in this report.state. M = 999 ft lbs. The IEC standard defines the Mean Annual Wind Speed as an input to determine the 50 year extreme wind.us/maps/ and 6. While tail furling is effective and useful on some wind turbines. Λ is the yaw rate.6 lbs (formula below) Gyroscopic forces (assume 60 degrees/10 seconds from the International Electrotechnical Commission (IEC) 61400-1 load case 1. and cos Ψ is 1 and –1 to give max bending at the top and bottom position of the blades.ks. This is 102 mph for this site. which is 5 times the mean annual wind speed. Centrifugal force of blade on rotor = 2. The formula below is the standard formula for determining the moment from a cantilevered beam with distributed load w.6) = 656 lbs per blade and 2622 lbs total. Figure 15: Cp vs tip speed ratio λ showing the significant impact to Cp of decreasing λ during stall regulation. Gust Loads thrust on rotor (50 year extreme wind from IEC 61400-1 load case 1. Determine the forces acting on wind turbine system and analyze the stresses on selected components. From the BEM method calculation spreadsheet the loads on the Breezy blades at the rated output of 5.5 m/s is found at the target site.5 Kw at 23 mph are: Blades force on tower = 264 lbs Torque of rotor = 409 ft lbs Blade root bending moment (per blade) = 449 ft lbs . Where Ω is the.
Due to the complexity of some of the structure. The higher stress shown in the color scale correspond to stresses in the cables. . Figure 19: Tower close-up under gust loads. Tower stress ~5 ksi Figure 17: FEA of tower under operational and gyroscopic loads. a. the FEA workbench in CATIA was used to analyze the structure. Under normal operating loads with gyroscopic forces. which isn’t analyzed here. Under gust loads the stress increases to 10 ksi. Tower and yaw bearing assembly. stress ~ 10ksi. b. the stress level in the tower is quite low at only about 5 ksi as shown in figures 17 & 18.Figure 16: Mean Annual Wind Speed at 30 Meters These loads will be combined and used to analyze the operating conditions of selected components. Rotor hub Tower The rotor hub is a complex weldment and benefits greatly from FEA. Figure 18: Tower close-up under operational and gyroscopic loads.
In figure 21 the rotor has gyroscopic forces applied. this author initially assumed a higher yaw rate of 90 degrees/second was a suitable number for a tail pointed turbine. and a fatigue limit of 1/3 Ftu. The yaw rate of 60 degree/10 seconds in the IEC standard is noted at being the minimum. Figure 23: hub with substantial gyroscopic forces causing high stresses. which bend the top blade one way and the bottom blade the other way. The wind itself is cyclical with gust here and there driving various cyclical loads in all components. The forces can be significant for a fast yaw rate. . Stress ~ 31 ksi. Figure 24: Blades with 50 year extreme wind. Max stress ~12. In addition. Assuming mild steel with Ftu = 30ksi. They result from yawing of the turbine while the rotor is spinning. Max stress 32 ksi. Figure 22: Close-up of hub with operating loads and gyroscopic forces.6 ksi. there could be fatigue cracking at certain highly loaded locations. Figure 20: rotor under operating loads. The high gyroscopic forces were high enough to yield the driveshaft and hub and prompted further investigation into a suitable yaw rate. each blade undergoes a load reversal from gravity at each revolution. The cyclic gyroscopic forces exemplify that fatigue is a driving factor in the design of wind turbines.The stress in the hub reaches >10ksi at certain locations during normal steady state operation. Prior to finding the IEC standard. Further investigation or testing is needed to see if that is a suitable number. Figure 21: rotor under operating loads with gyroscopic forces.
Also included is a downward force of 50 lbs to account for the mass of the tail structure. Stress ~ 31 ksi c. . Stress ~ 1. Figure 27: Driveshaft with normal operating forces and gyroscopic forces. Tail boom The tail force is assumed to come from a 10m/s side gust on a flat plate. d. The high stresses resulting from an assumed load case indicates the need to determine the actual yaw rate seen in service on a small wind turbine. Stresses ~ 46 ksi. It also underscores the importance of appropriate radii on the driveshaft where the diameter changes so as to reduce stress concentrations. Figure 26: drive shaft with normal operating forces. While this isn’t much. it showed the weak spot in the structure. Stress ~ 1 ksi.Figure 25: Hub with 50 year extreme wind.5 ksi Figure 29: Tail under side load. stress ~ 6 ksi. Drive shaft Figure 28: Driveshaft with gyroscopic forces from 90 deg per sec yaw rate. This only produced a force of 26 lbs and stresses of 6ksi.
It is fastened along the sides of the bedplate to the upstanding leg of angle iron.Figure 32: yaw structure under operating and gyroscopic loads. gyroscopic loads during yaw. The deflection is about . This is short of the goal at face value. A quick fix for this is to use a square channel section. The inclusion of such a substantial stiffening member can only be assumed to make the stresses and deflections irrelevant.5 output was found to be . The bedplate provides a mounting base for the generator and the driveshaft bearings so that they remain properly aligned to each other. What isn’t shown is the nacelle cover that’s made of 16 gage sheet metal (. Stress ~ < 3ksi. This is another complicated structure that benefits from FEA. The size of blades was determined to be 23. The tail furling concept was abandoned in light of the investigation into stall regulation.28 in order to achieve the 17.5 were analyzed and compared to a twisted tapered design of the same diameter but at an increased rpm. Some structural details of the Breezy 5.20 at 23 mph. It’s also fastened along the entire front and back creating a tension and shear member.5 ksi.060 thick). or the same size but with a Cp of .020”. Loads on the blades were determined for the operating loads. While this reduced the stress to 4. This isn’t necessary depending on the confidence that this analysis represents the maximum load on the part. Stress ~ 4. Figure 30: Tail structure close-up showing 6 ksi under light load. The blades of Breezy 5. Structure connecting low speed driveshaft bearings to yaw bearing. The high stresses in figure 30 occur on the aft standing leg of an angle iron support in bending. The efficiency increase coupled with an rpm increase caused their output to be predicted at the target 14280 kwh/year. CONCLUSION The coefficient of performance of Breezy 5. e. Figure 31: Tail without side support.5 were analyzed and the peak stresses identified. Stall regulation is well suited to induction generators and is therefore the preferred choice over tail furling which is more suited to permanent magnet generator equipped wind turbines. A further investigation of the complete power curve combined with the probability distribution at various wind speeds will determine if their performance is suitable for this stall regulated design. Some peak loads were found to be excessive and this may lead the builder to modify certain details to avoid high stresses. The stresses in this structure under operating and gyroscopic loads is quite low at 3 ksi. and for the 50 year extreme wind. .000 kwh/year goal.9 ft. This will add stiffness as well as reducing the peak loads in that piece. the deflection doubled and further treatment is needed to investigate weather vibrations are a problem due to the structure being less stiff.5 ksi The high stress above caused me to investigate whether this angle was even needed and figure 31 shows the stresses without it.
Aerodynamics of Wind Turbines. CO. Breezy 5. ACRONYMS. VA. 2009. 2001. 2005 2. Nick Jenkins. 2001. Buckville Publications LLC. He lives at 11000 E 39th St. Hansen. 3. Timothy McCall and Alan Plunkett. 2008. 4. or 316-686-1611. Johnson. Electronic Edition. L. Prairie Turbines. ABBREVIATIONS a: axial induction factor (AKA. Masonville. slowdown factor) a’: radial induction factor A: area of rotor ρ: density of air z: height above the ground u: power density V: wind speed V0: far upstream wind speed Vrel: apparent wind speed in rotating airfoil frame of reference Φ: angle between apparent wind and the rotor plane α: angle of attack of airfoil relative to Vrel θ: angle of airfoil to rotor plane ω: angular velocity of rotor λ: tip speed ratio x: local tip speed ratio D: diameter of rotor Cp: coefficient of performance σ: rotor solidity Re: Reynolds number μ: kinematic viscosity BEM: Blade Element Momentum F: Prandtl tip loss factor B: number of blades on rotor β: angle of airfoil at the tip of the blade Cl: Coefficient of lift of airfoil Cd: coefficient of drag of airfoil Cn: coefficient of lift normal to rotor Ct: coefficient of drag tangential to rotor Pt: tangential force on individual blade segment CONTACT Steven Kreibach is a design engineer at Spirit Aerosystems. Derby KS 67037 (where he intends to build a wind turbine) and can be reached at skreibach@yahoo. Tony Burton. LLC. DEFINITIONS. Sterling. Martin O. David Sharpe. He has a BS in mechanical engineering from the University of Kansas (1995) and is working on a master’s degree in aerospace structures at Wichita State University. Derby KS. Gary L. Wind Energy Handbook. John Wiley & Sons. .REFERENCES 1. Dan Bartman & Dan Fink. 2nd Edition. 5. England. & Ervin Bossanyi. Homebrew Wind Power. S.5.com. Wind Energy Systems.
unit of rate of energy use KWh: Kilowatt hour.XLS .Ai: slope of linear Pt equation Bi: point intersect of linear Pt equation M: moment R: blade radius r: radial distance of calculation Kw: Kilowatt. unit of energy FEA: Finite Element Analysis OEM: original equipment manufacturer NACA: National Advisory Committee for Aeronautics APPENDIX BLADE CALCULATIONS.
This action might not be possible to undo. Are you sure you want to continue?
We've moved you to where you read on your other device.
Get the full title to continue reading from where you left off, or restart the preview.