Discover the best of the web!
Learn more about Digg by taking the tour.
The Sky Serpent: Twenty-Five Turbines in One
environmentalgraffiti.com — A California man has constructed a design that features twenty-five small turbines in lieu of the massive blades on a modern wind power plan. One day this may approach the production capacity of the behemoths.
nelsonjs- 751 diggs
- digg it
- rlray216, on 05/15/2008, -0/+21These pictures alone are awe-inspiring.
- ChileanGoD, on 05/15/2008, -0/+9Until the wind suddenly changes direction and chops someones head off.
- edwartica, on 05/15/2008, -0/+6Its all fun and games till someone looses an eye. Then its just a game, find the eye.
- gyrfalcon, on 05/15/2008, -2/+1Yeah this idea has to be great for the birds... it's not like the single propeller ones don't kill enough birds already.
- Prescottonian, on 05/15/2008, -0/+1Those are not pictures. They are Illustrations.
- ChileanGoD, on 05/15/2008, -0/+9Until the wind suddenly changes direction and chops someones head off.
- whatsrequired, on 05/15/2008, -8/+7Word.
- cowsgonemadd3, on 05/15/2008, -0/+3What?
- longbow486, on 05/15/2008, -0/+5Word, for writin' letters n' ***** yo
- cowsgonemadd3, on 05/15/2008, -0/+3What?
- sjbdallas, on 05/15/2008, -0/+24that's a solid bar of some kind that the rotors are attached to right? When I first looked at it, I thought it was a flexible wire and worried that those rotors would be spinning towards the ground at some point chopping the heads of polar bears or something.
- whatsrequired, on 05/15/2008, -0/+2I think it's flexible. The thing said it was held up by a balloon.
- uptwolait, on 05/15/2008, -1/+10A balloon? One rogue teen, one six pack of cheap beer, one pellet rifle = $2M into the ground.
- Terr01, on 05/15/2008, -0/+1It wouldn't be a lot less difficult to make a nice long pole just out of reach of the maximum extent of the "serpent" and then suspent the tail end from it with a lightweight wire--it'd float around, but even if all wind died immediately it'd just sag without touching the ground.
Or even to design a circuit so that once it starts bending too far towards the ground things halt and it pages somebody.
- Terr01, on 05/15/2008, -0/+1It wouldn't be a lot less difficult to make a nice long pole just out of reach of the maximum extent of the "serpent" and then suspent the tail end from it with a lightweight wire--it'd float around, but even if all wind died immediately it'd just sag without touching the ground.
- uptwolait, on 05/15/2008, -1/+10A balloon? One rogue teen, one six pack of cheap beer, one pellet rifle = $2M into the ground.
- aetherboy, on 05/15/2008, -1/+4Thats a good concern, how about some others...
-How much more space does this design take up compared to conventional turbines? Obviously it needs to allow for more spacing between them due to horizontal motion to make sure they don't hit each other in turbulent winds.
-How in the hell do you repair something like this? Doesn't look like the easiest thing in the world to stop for maintenance work...
-If there is indeed a risk of it hitting people on the ground (or hitting the ground in general), what sorts of precautions would need to be taken to make it safe? Foam-covered blades aint going to cut it...
-With larger turbines, I feel a bit safer about how firmly they are anchored. With this thing, i'd be concerned that in a strong enough storm it would uproot and go flying off and cause unknown damage.
-With larger standard designs, its easier (somewhat) for birds to avoid. How in the hell does a bird avoid this thing? Wouldn't the smaller rotors be harder to see?
This is interesting in all and its great he figured out one of the bigger engineering challenges but I wish there was more thought given to the practicality challenges and how to overcome those.- xptoast, on 05/15/2008, -0/+2Fix for the bird thing:
Don't fly near the wizzing noise that is created by insanely fast spinning blades that will surely cause your death. Nature always gets in trouble somehow. You can't save everything. Beavers build dams and flood things a bit. That kills off stuff. Why don't we kill the beavers? It's all a part of nature. Don't freak out so much.- uptwolait, on 05/15/2008, -0/+3Beavers are sometimes killed by the falling tree they cut down. You can't stop every natural tragedy.
- xptoast, on 05/15/2008, -0/+1Exactly correct
- uptwolait, on 05/15/2008, -0/+3Beavers are sometimes killed by the falling tree they cut down. You can't stop every natural tragedy.
- xptoast, on 05/15/2008, -0/+2Fix for the bird thing:
- whatsrequired, on 05/15/2008, -0/+2I think it's flexible. The thing said it was held up by a balloon.
- mesarah, on 05/15/2008, -1/+3hmmm
- rtknox00, on 05/15/2008, -2/+23What we need is more maverick physicists like this guy, people that break the mold and do something really awesome
- xptoast, on 05/15/2008, -0/+1They usually get shot down pretty quick if your idea isn't a textbook kind.
- greyexplosion, on 05/15/2008, -3/+5Wow.
- DeathWish808, on 05/15/2008, -1/+41Very cool, but I still think this is a better idea.......http://link.brightcove.com/services/player/bcpid12 ...
- serif69, on 05/15/2008, -0/+12That is one of the coolest things I have ever seen.
- discoloda, on 05/15/2008, -0/+4that is pretty cool, but i wonder how much energy you can get from it. so far it has the design goal of being cheap.
- vernsan, on 05/15/2008, -0/+2Would this work if you put this under or over a bridge?
- mightyslick, on 05/15/2008, -0/+2One a large scale the vibrations would be hard to handle. The wind would have to be very constant . Look to scale how much air is going over that little thing. The fan is putting out a lot of air to accomplish the level of vibration seen in the video.
- itzac, on 05/15/2008, -0/+2Actually, as the belt gets longer, it vibrates at slower wind speeds. You could put, say, 4ft bows under a brigde, stacked a few high. And they output DC, so scaling is a question of connecting them in series for higher voltage or parallel for more current. Much easier than scaling AC generation.
- Ramble, on 05/15/2008, -1/+1That's pretty crap, you need at leas 10mph or so of wind to get it moving in the first place, and it doesn't generate a whole lot.
- dthumphreys, on 05/15/2008, -1/+7Very Cool - Hopefully my grandkids will have some of this technology in their homes.
- whatsrequired, on 05/15/2008, -0/+4Hopefully I'll have this technology in MY home!
- stanleyford, on 05/15/2008, -0/+1I don't think it's going to work very well in your house.
- LLLSecretChimp, on 05/15/2008, -0/+2You must be expecting your grandkids to have really drafty houses.
- BCCStu, on 05/15/2008, -1/+4Really, really sweet concept.
- starfocus03, on 05/15/2008, -0/+2Beautiful!
- Modestexcuse, on 05/15/2008, -3/+7"Selsam, who attended college at UC-Irvine but didn’t graduate, has very little formal training in the ways of physics or wind power, which is probably what left him prepared to break the mold".
I've seen this time and time again. Refreshing... - compgeek, on 05/15/2008, -4/+2amazing concept good work makes clean power and costs less
dugg- wrathbone, on 05/15/2008, -0/+2. . .
- buffyangel108, on 05/15/2008, -8/+2Enough to power two light bulbs for a whole day!
- Rikkochet, on 05/15/2008, -0/+123kW? Those are a couple of big ***** light bulbs.
- halleyscomet, on 05/15/2008, -0/+53kW = 3,000 Watts. Most light bulbs used in the home are only 60 Watt.
This turbine could easily meet all the lighting needs of the average single family home. You'd only be able to run one or two major appliances at a time though, as some of them can draw 1,500 Watts easily. Still, this would significantly reduce the energy footprint of a home, allowing most of its energy needs to come from the turbine. You'd still need to be on grid, but if you're using energy star complaint appliances you won't be drawing much power. You'll draw none of you stagger your use of major appliances.
Not bad for an early version of the technology.
- Rikkochet, on 05/15/2008, -1/+15This is why inventors will always trump engineers. They can see past processes and create something totally out of the mold.
/engineer- spamagnet, on 05/15/2008, -0/+4Most "inventors" ARE engineers.
- xptoast, on 05/15/2008, -0/+1However not usually the other way around. Textbook engineers ruin it.
- shogun545, on 05/15/2008, -0/+0Yup. Pretty much the definition of an engineer is someone who applies knowledge, and therefore, all inventors are engineers.
- spamagnet, on 05/15/2008, -0/+4Most "inventors" ARE engineers.
- vulapine, on 05/15/2008, -1/+14Instead of thwacking birds from the sky it will be slicing them to ribbons.
- nezroy, on 05/15/2008, -0/+3I know you're probably just trying to be funny, but it's not like alternative energy isn't already facing an uphill battle as it is. Even unintentionally propagating this wind-power myth is unhelpful.
In the US, power lines, communications towers, tall buildings, collisions with vehicles, pesticides, and other various man-made sources conservatively kill about 400 million birds a year. Bird kill via collision with urban structures and windows is hard to measure but may well be in the billions.
Comparatively, if the entire US powergrid was supplied solely by wind power using existing wind turbines and their studied bird kill rates, you would be talking about maybe 30 million bird deaths/year from wind turbines. While not insignificant, it would be fourth or fifth down the list of man-made bird killers in the US. Power-lines alone contribute about 130 million to the 400 million mentioned above.
Nevermind that in 2001 the estimated bird kill for wind turbines in the US was a grand total of... 6400.- edwartica, on 05/15/2008, -0/+2But how many of those birds would just be killed off if we didn't keep our cats indoors? :P
- nezroy, on 05/15/2008, -0/+1Well if you live in Wisconsin, one of the few States to have bothered trying to find that out, the answer might be as high as 39 million in one State alone :)
- edwartica, on 05/15/2008, -0/+2But how many of those birds would just be killed off if we didn't keep our cats indoors? :P
- nezroy, on 05/15/2008, -0/+3I know you're probably just trying to be funny, but it's not like alternative energy isn't already facing an uphill battle as it is. Even unintentionally propagating this wind-power myth is unhelpful.
- sonaboy, on 05/15/2008, -0/+2let's go, wind power!!
- wendelgee2, on 05/15/2008, -1/+5wouldn't the big (slow) turbines be safer for birds and flying future babies?
this thing looks like an open air cuisinart. - mrbambastik, on 05/15/2008, -3/+21The article points out twice that he "has little training... did not graduate from college..." to have readers fall in love with the underdog feel of the story rather than consider cold hard facts.
Would you rather pull a wagon with 1 horse or 100 chicken? Which one do you think is easier to maintain?
With 25 rotors there are 25 more odds one breaks down. 25 times more downtime. Large rotors orient themselves to face the wind's direction. It is not possible with this design where the direction of the shaft is set. Also the pitch on big rotors changes according to wind force. The pitch and spacing on his design is set and cannot be optimal for all wind conditions.
Also I the statement that it uses less material is untrue. Large blades benefit from the momentum of wind force applied far from the center of rotation, just like a ceiling fan spins slowly and moves a lot of air vs. your computer fan which spins like a gerbil's wheel. It takes more material to make 25 small fans than 1 3kw blade. 3kw is tiny, you only need a 6 foot span for that. Most single-rotors make in the order of megawatts.
So look past emotions conveyed by "the underdog" story, diggers. He may have created something new but in no way better.- kinerry, on 05/15/2008, -4/+1except that you just have one horse with many legs in this case
- edwartica, on 05/15/2008, -1/+2And if one in 25 breaks down, you still have 24 left. If one of one breaks down, then you have 0 left.
- diggydougie, on 05/15/2008, -1/+3If your horse dies then you're stuck. If some chickens die you still continue. Get more chickens later, they're cheap.
- rushiku, on 05/15/2008, -0/+1If your power requirement is 'One Horse' and 100 chickens = One Horse, then you're not going anywhere with 99 chickens.
- diggydougie, on 05/16/2008, -0/+1Of course you will. That's only 1% power loss.
- ojuice, on 05/15/2008, -0/+2My god this analogy has gone horribly wrong.
- rushiku, on 05/15/2008, -0/+1If your power requirement is 'One Horse' and 100 chickens = One Horse, then you're not going anywhere with 99 chickens.
- mfc5200, on 05/15/2008, -1/+9Anyone here ever study airfoils? There is a reason they don't design turbines like this, they are inefficient. Go look at gliders, their wings are designed to be thin and long for a reason.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aspect_ratio_%28wing% ...
It is for the same reason, birds such as vultures, condors, and other "efficient" flyers have high aspect ratios, because they are meant to stay in the air all day just flying with the wind currents. On the other hand, small birds like hummingbirds sacrifice this efficiency for maneuverability, much is the same way fighter jets do.- sbgskl, on 05/15/2008, -0/+1Looking at the actual blades here: http://www.speakerfactory.net/TURBINES/ they're actually fairly high aspect, comparable to traditional wind turbines (horizontal axis of course). The PopSci article (http://www.popsci.com/scitech/article/2008-05/ten- ... ) sourced by the story also mentions the inventor came up with the idea in a fluid dynamics course, so the guy has some legitimate background.
- fdavis, on 05/15/2008, -0/+1looks very cool, but not practical
- knumbknuts, on 05/15/2008, -1/+2Where's the beef? This article is fluff. It doesn't even explain the reason behind the design, other than supply is short for the biguns.
Once air passes over an airfoil, it's dirty and inefficient for the purposes of harnessing energy. It creates rotor and drag. Look at race cars, look at the turbulence behind jets.
He'd have to have a perfect design just to match a normal turbine. I can't see where his would harness more power than a similar surface area on a single blade. - noahhoward, on 05/15/2008, -0/+1I don't see how this will work. Power generation by wind relies on having a lot of these things. The spacing I assume you would have to have between these things to make sure they don't collide and tangle with each other would seem to make it very expensive/difficult to build a wind farm. You can pack more traditional turbines per acre than these it would seem.
- cobbs, on 05/15/2008, -0/+2Stand underneath it and get showered with bird shrapnel.
- kinerry, on 05/15/2008, -0/+4imagine all the death from birds flying by....awesome
- xptoast, on 05/15/2008, -0/+1Dugg for saying that it was awesome and not complaining like a whiner.
- Prescottonian, on 05/15/2008, -0/+1No one seems to think bending a carbon fiber shaft at high RPM is a bad idea. A single line of props, shown in the water, will bend because of it's own weight. If a bent shaft is rotated it cycles from tension to compression directly proportional to the RPM. When carbon fiber breaks it produces some real shrapnel that can stick into a wall with STATIC testing. Composites have never really been know for their performance in full cyclic loading. That is the damned thing about engineering, you can never think about everything.
Gliders are driven by the need to reduce span wise flow and improve L/D. This is simply done by elongating the wing span (b). Another driver is the Oswald Efficentcy (e) but there is a reason why there are few airplane manufacturers.
I wonder if this Californian will claim overunity... - sindrit, on 05/15/2008, -0/+3I like how the article manages to avoid mentioning weather his new design actually produces more power than traditional designs.
- UoMDeacon, on 05/15/2008, -1/+2It mentions in passing that someday it might be as efficient...
Something most of the diggers here managed to overlook because they like to cheer for the "underdog" with "no formal education".
- UoMDeacon, on 05/15/2008, -1/+2It mentions in passing that someday it might be as efficient...
- DerangedPenguin, on 05/15/2008, -0/+1Just curious?
But does it "process" birds of prey as well as the big bladed windmills? Actually it might be a better solution because it offers a less appealing nesting site for the raptors.
Nice to see innovation is alive and well. The Youtube video of the monster wind turbine self destructing should be enough to cause concern about their use in populated areas. - ever0095, on 05/15/2008, -0/+1I am definitely working that phrase into regular vocab rotation.
"Oh that's nothing, have you seen my sky serpent?" - Mr.Gone, on 05/15/2008, -0/+1Shenron?
- shogun545, on 05/15/2008, -0/+0This article neglects just about every important piece of information needed to verify whether or not this design is practical from a long term maintenance versus initial cost standpoint. I also would've liked to see peak and average power output. I guess this article was just one of those "show and tell" plugs.
- 3pair, on 05/15/2008, -0/+0looks like he found a complicated way to generate less power then an equivalent diameter wind turbine would...
if that's the way you "buck convention" by not being educated, then I'd rather have a college trained engineer thanks. - bbendele, on 05/15/2008, -0/+2http://www.popsci.com/scitech/article/2008-05/ten- ...
- etx313, on 05/15/2008, -0/+3I cannot imagine these things could be installed too closely together. But still very cool none the less.
- bbendele, on 05/15/2008, -0/+1Broken windmill video:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c3FZtmlHwcA
imagine if this happened all these at once.
- bbendele, on 05/15/2008, -0/+1Broken windmill video:
- bbendele, on 05/15/2008, -0/+1.
- colab, on 05/15/2008, -0/+0I still like this one:
http://www.magenn.com - bstory, on 05/16/2008, -0/+1perfect
Digg is coming to a city (and computer) near you! Check out all the details on our 
© Digg Inc. 2008 —
Content posted by