Hybrid Car – More Fun with Less Gas

Busting wind turbine myths - Page 2

register ::  Login Password  :: Lost Password?
Posted by Josepi on November 2, 2009, 12:12 am

George. Forget teasing the little troll. He has climbed a tower and now
thinks he is God. You ain't gonna' convince God of nuttin' except we ain't
gonna' bow down.

The plonk system really hurts these little online Gods and they usually go
away 'cause they have nuttin' to say anyway. If they did nobody would listen
'cause it is just out there.

Looks like you guys go way back, here.

On Nov 2, 1:17 am, wmbjkREM...@citlink.net wrote:

Was never asked for reviews

subject)http://peswiki.com/index.php/Review:Homebrew_Wind_Powerhttp://frugallygreen.org/2009/08/homebrew-wind-power-a-hands-on-guide ...

For ten years or more wayne has tried to shut me up.

Why? Because he put up a “Look at what I did” website. Well I had a
look at this site, then asked wayne what he had in fact done. You see,
there were some pretty fanciful claims as to the performance of the
system wayne had set up.

On this site wayne claimed up to 30kWhs production with the further
claim that he could use all of that in a day. Unfortunately there was
no data as to what the individual loads were. When questioned about
the lack of this information wayne started waffling on about how his
system was so advanced that no one but himself could understand the
design.  This is of course a load of nonsense as all PV systems are
made up of pretty much the same items, panels, regulator, batteries
and inverters.

These items are all tied together in a system. There is a formula
which is used to determine the relationship between these items and
the load the system is expected to service.

Now, because wayne has no understanding of how his system performs and
can't tell anyone what his loads are, what his system produces or what
it uses he has tried to discredit me by posting his little hate site
http://www.citlink.net/~wmbjk/tbfduwisdumb.htm .

I strongly recommend visiting this site, it really is a hoot. What
really makes it funny is that wayne thinks it hurts me in some way. I
suppose that one day he will wake up and realise that for all the
years he has been running this site I have directed people to it.
After all it's not often that one can see such rabid hatred displayed
in public.

Now he is set to try the same brand of blackmail on another person he
feels should kow tow to his wishes. You see, he just will not allow
anyone kick his favourite puppy, and of course that puppy's name is

Posted by Joseoi on November 1, 2009, 1:28 am

Cool! You may want to clarify what "blade length" means though. Does this
include my 1.78m dia hub?

There’s a lot of mis-information on the net surrounding the output of
a wind turbine. A great many scam artists are over rating their
turbines to make it sound like you can get a lot more power than you
really will. Even commercial manufacturers tend to over rate their
turbines, by using wind speeds that are not commonly seen at John Q.
Public’s homestead. We have put together an online calculator that
will help you sift the wheat from the chaff so to speak. Plug in your
numbers and see what you can expect from a given wind turbine at your


Posted by sspence on November 1, 2009, 3:49 pm

From the tip of the blade to the center of the hub.

Posted by ghio on November 1, 2009, 8:49 pm

Seems to me, that as wind acts on the surface area of the blade, the
swept area is determined by the length of the blade from tip to base
and does not include the hub. The hub does not, in fact, contribute
any energy. Hmm, it would seem that including an area that does not
add energy may render the calculation inaccurate.

While a hub that has a diameter of 150mm would cause only a small
error, a hub that has a diameter of 1.78m  would render the
calculation, as written, quite unreliable.

What do you say Steve? Is the swept area the area swept by the blades?
How much energy is added by the area swept by the hub? Is this just a
case of a shopping list posing as a design?

Posted by wmbjkREMOVE on November 1, 2009, 10:51 pm


So far, so good!

Dang, if only you'd included some of your infamous "maths" to support
your hypothesis. :-(

Let's see, 8" hub, 10' rotor, hub area accounts for .44% of the swept
area. Which would change the 15mph production from say 400W, to
398.2W. Thank goodness readers have a resident ghinius to protect us
from such egregious errors!

Ah, so we need to use Gymmy Bob's fictional turbine to suffer any
meaningful error! Then why not post a link to a typical home power
turbine with a 6' hub? How many of those do you own?

All we have here are you and Gymmy Bob the tag-team phonies, inventing
fault for your own brain-dead reasons. Same-old same-old, not a single
useful contribution from either of you.


This Thread
Bookmark this thread:
  • Subject
  • Author
  • Date
please rate this thread