Vortex wind turbine towers: synthesis

[bernardd]

Otherwise use airships to recover part of the energy from jet streams, but again there are many engineering problems to be solved (ultra light and resistant anchor cables etc ...)

But that would be the advantage of self-supporting cables, ie lighter than air: as their mass is canceled locally, all their resistance becomes available to resist the wind.

A vortex tower does not have all of its drawbacks and has the advantage of being achievable in a very short time.

Especially if you use self-supporting cables: their construction is then very simple.

[sen-no-sen]

bernardd wrote:

Especially if you use self-supporting cables: their construction is then very simple

You have more info on its self-supporting cables (test in real sizes for example?).
The applications would be numerous without a doubt.

In the case of a convection tower there would remain the problem of wind shear, which could severely test such a "self-floating" structure.

[bernardd]

I had this idea 3 or 4 years ago, when I had access to cables based on glass fibers and kevlar, very light and solid, of the order of 150kg / km for a resistance of more of 20000N / 2t and a diameter of 13mm: a bit like the idea of ​​an underwater cable with distributed buoys, but in the air.

It would be enough for a 1,5m3 helium balloon every 10m, or to build a tube with the equivalent linear volume, i.e. an internal radius of 22cm unless I am mistaken, to which we should add the volume corresponding to the additional material to increase the surface.

The important thing to understand is that the distribution of buoyancy over the length avoids using its resistance to carry its own mass.

It was last year that I saw the same idea come out, shown on a link given earlier:
http://nextbigfuture.com/2009/06/propos ... tower.html

With a double spiral assembly (see DNA :-)) we should be able to do a lot of interesting things.

[sen-no-sen]

Apparently the aerogenerator tower project is on track, with the construction of a 25-meter prototype planned for the year ... abroad.

A little more time and a real renewable alternative will be available.

[dedeleco]

25m is barely better than a chimney and it seems to me that in Spain there is already higher, from memory.

Helium, like rare earths, will run out much faster than petroleum !!!

[sen-no-sen]

25m is barely better than a chimney and it seems to me that in Spain there is already higher, from memory.

Helium, like rare earths, will run out much faster than petroleum !!!

Apparently you misunderstood dedelco!

This is to build a prototype of 25m, in order to make measurements, it is a reduced model of course.
The idea is not to produce energy, but to validate the calculations.

The project concerns the Coustou / Alary wind turbine tower not the Enviro mission solar chimney.

In addition, it is not at all a question of a structure inflated with helium, but of a metal or concrete tower.
The final project is I recall a tower of 300 m high for a power of more than 400 Mega Watts.

[dedeleco]

I was certainly mistaken, but without the references of the links on the project in question, it is impossible to guess the implication which is not written, and therefore we are mistaken with certainty.

I did not find the link or reference to read.

Anyway I ask myself the question that there are lots of cliffs and mountains where we can measure and test the validity of the calculations with very few installations, since the support naturally exists in hard ?????
Gliders and flying wings routinely test these ancestors.

I find this claim without proof, but turn to graft on nuclear power plants ..... sic !! to give them a good conscience, until the next Fukushima-Chernobyl in France ??? :
http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/aero ... ice/?tab=s
http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/aero ... message/62
http://www.europatentbox.com/patent/EP1 ... 31783.html

It is a much more sophisticated and efficient concept than anything that has been conceived until now in the field of electricity production using renewable resources. In particular, it is much more efficient and economical than devices using wind turbines, photovoltaic cells or solar towers.
- according to our low assumptions, a vortex tower could recover 50% of the
heat lost from a nuclear power plant..
In the patent:
Installation according to claim 6) characterized by feeding the calorie storage tanks with lukewarm or hot water from nuclear power plants or any other industrial installation capable of supplying additional calories to the wind turbine tower, by recovering its cooling effluents, otherwise generators of thermal pollution, and therefore the installation of wind turbine towers in the environment close to these plants., it being understood that the wind turbines can also operate completely autonomously with a sufficient area of ​​greenhouses.

Installation according to claim 7) characterized by the use of devices for transmitting the calories of the water, from a nuclear power plant or any other industrial installation, to the air drawn in by the tower, thanks to the use of networks of pipes, radiators, waterfalls, water jets and / or hot water spraying.

also ; http://www.paranormal-fr.net/forum/tour ... 15801.html
I would be happy to read a little more detail proving this claim.

Otherwise in this patent for a cyclone or tornado, it is a matter of controlling an artificial cyclone or tornado, and for this the optimum is to have a very hot surface of water at the base (lake under greenhouse) with condensation at the top of the tower (rain) which allows a much better yield, but which in my opinion simplistic, (basic thermodynamics, hot and cold source) remains very below 1, even in a cyclone rising to 12000m altitude.

Finally, given the omnipotence of the nuclear lobby in France, I understand better that this project finds credits, just to give a good ecological appearance, to nuclear power which swarms full of lukewarm steam in its towers much more than 25 m high !!
Besides, why don't they modify one of these towers over 100m high during the maintenance of a power plant ?????

For heating homes, the efficiency will never be as good as, by avoiding going through electricity, that of simple solar thermal collectors storing excess summer heat in the earth for the winter, which should replace all electric and other heaters for cheap, by reducing the price of small diameter boreholes, if you want, instead of making huge, centralized large installations perched on nuclear power plants !!!
.

[sen-no-sen]

I was certainly mistaken, but without the references of the links on the project in question, it is impossible to guess the implication which is not written, and therefore we are mistaken with certainty.

I did not find the link or reference to read.

Anyway I ask myself the question that there are lots of cliffs and mountains where we can measure and test the validity of the calculations with very few installations, since the support naturally exists in hard ?????
Gliders and flying wings routinely test these ancestors.

You speak of the concept of "solar mountain", it is about a simple solar tower with convection placed on the side of a mountain, the phenomena in play are not exactly the same.

Finally, given the omnipotence of the nuclear lobby in France, I understand better that this project finds credits, just to give a good ecological appearance, to nuclear power which swarms full of lukewarm steam in its towers much more than 25 m high !!
Besides, why don't they modify one of these towers over 100m high during the maintenance of a power plant ?????

You are wrong, I mentioned that the project was going to see the light of day abroad, because the French "nuclear lobby" has a lot to lose with the advent of this device.
The basic idea was to couple a nuclear power plant with several vortex towers in order to multiply the efficiency of the whole and thus allow the closure of the oldest nuclear power plants .... which meant bye bye EPR.

This would have allowed a smooth exit from nuclear power (under 10-15 years).

[dedeleco]

I note the corrections that I was wrong, but a link with details on the project abroad would have been useful.

Second, what is the temperature of the water Ts leaving the nuclear power plants allowing them to recover their energy with vortex towers, to know the maximum Carnot yield possible, but at first glance the gain in thermal energy will be of the same order as between a good boiler base and condensing boiler around 10% ???? and this gain will have to be multiplied by the efficiency of the electric mechanical vortex generator, ie (Ts-Tambient = 20 ° C) / Ts in absolute Kelvin values ​​(° C + 276 °) (much lower in reality than this value around 1/3) and therefore we recover around a third of 10% or around 3% at best, ????
A link seriously carrying out this calculation in a credible way would be useful, instead of a simplistic evaluation as I try, but I very much doubt that we recover a lot, at best the energy of a power station by going up full of these towers to vortex on all nuclear power plants in France.

Given the small temperature differences, the vortex tower seems to me to have a low enough output to extract the work from this thermal energy.
It is better to use this solar heat with few losses to heat the houses locally directly with summer storage for winter, without conversion into mechanical and electrical energy which have lots of losses.
The high concentration solar collectors allow high temperatures, and therefore much better mechanical yields in solar power plants.
We can also store their heat for the night as soon as the size is important.

So given these basic principles, I am quite skeptical and I ask for coherent convincing explanations.
The vortex tower patent does not give a consistent explanation.

[sen-no-sen]

I note the corrections that I was wrong, but a link with details on the project abroad would have been useful.

For the moment there are no links available about this project abroad, it should be understood that it is very difficult not to be "stung" an idea (because the cost of patents at the level world amounts to several tens of thousands of euros!), so the designer is not very talkative for the moment.

For everything related to technical questions you can ask them directly to the designer at the email address that you put yourself online (just register).
There is quite a lot of doc available on econology concerning the studies carried out on vortex lathes (reread the discussions), in particular on models of the Nazarre Sumatel and Michaud type, which lead to orders of powers from 180 to 310 Megawatts for a tower 300 meters high, based on a temperature delta of 30 to 50C °.

Louis Michaud website:

http://vortexengine.ca/sommaire.shtml

The big difference between the Coustou / Alary vortex tower and that of Louis Michaud resides above all in the fact that the vortex phenomenon is only generated inside the frame in the first case while in the second there is generation of a vortex with connection to the lower parts of the atmosphere (6000-10000m).

In addition, the Coustou / Alary tower works as an inverted turbo-reactor, which gives it better efficiency than a "crown" energy recovery system as chosen on the German Enviro-mission project, or the Michaud project. .