Posted by George Ghio on October 4, 2005, 4:20 am
wmbjk wrote:
>
>
>
>
>>>And they are only good for water pumping, not electrical
>>>generation.
>
>
>>I don't know where you get your info, but in the twenties and
>>thirties it was even money as to whether one of those windmills was
>>pumping water or running a Wincharger generator. They were quite
>>popular, at least in the Plains states where it was a long time
>>before REA (Rural Electrification Authority) got lines out to all
>>those homes way out there.
>
>
> <sigh>
>
> We already have a resident flake who chose to imagine a past-tense
> reference in Steve's statement. It isn't there.
>
> The type of windmills you're talking about *don't* offer (note present
> tense) any worthwhile advantage for electric power generation. If you
> or the flake have a time machine, or even a current source for antique
> power windmills, then please post some links so that we can compare
> them to readily available offerings.
>
>
>>And BTW, even if they were slower, the prudent owner either cocked
>>the tail a ways to slow the fan down or turned it all the way off
>>if high winds were expected.
>
>
> Having to take manual action in anticipation of high winds is now
> considered a severe design defect. Which is just one of the reasons
> that many-bladed windmills aren't practical for home power.
>
> BTW, Edison cells also *don't* offer (note present tense) any
> worthwhile advantage for home power.
>
> Wayne
Wayne
Steve Spence in his infinite ignorance said;
"And they are only good for water pumping, not electrical generation."
While I, with greater knowledge said
Why do you come here? Just to flaunt your ignorance.
Some of those old wind mills were huge and ran factories. And why do
you think they were called mills?
They were not used to just pump water.
Please note that at no point did I say that this type of wind mill was a
great choice for electrical generation.
I did point out that it is an untrue statement to say that they are only
good for pumping water.
Still in an area with low but constant wind it is possible to drive a
generator using such a wind mill.
Tense? Who cares. That is just your excuse to foam at the mouth once more.
You could do with a bit more understanding about the evolution of wind
powered devices. It might have helped prevent you from mounting your's
to low for the best output.
Posted by tim on October 4, 2005, 10:47 pm
> wrote:
>
>
>>> And they are only good for water pumping, not electrical
>>> generation.
>
>>I don't know where you get your info, but in the twenties and
>>thirties it was even money as to whether one of those windmills
>>was pumping water or running a Wincharger generator. They were
>>quite popular, at least in the Plains states where it was a long
>>time before REA (Rural Electrification Authority) got lines out
>>to all those homes way out there.
>
> <sigh>
>
> We already have a resident flake who chose to imagine a
> past-tense reference in Steve's statement. It isn't there.
>
> The type of windmills you're talking about *don't* offer (note
> present tense) any worthwhile advantage for electric power
> generation. If you or the flake have a time machine, or even a
> current source for antique power windmills, then please post
> some links so that we can compare them to readily available
> offerings.
>
>>And BTW, even if they were slower, the prudent owner either
>>cocked the tail a ways to slow the fan down or turned it all the
>>way off if high winds were expected.
>
> Having to take manual action in anticipation of high winds is
> now considered a severe design defect. Which is just one of the
> reasons that many-bladed windmills aren't practical for home
> power.
>
> BTW, Edison cells also *don't* offer (note present tense) any
> worthwhile advantage for home power.
>
> Wayne
I am reminded at this point of a memorable piece of dialogue from
War Games, when the hero is talking to a couple of his hacker
buddies. The sane one says to the other, "Remember when you asked
me to tell you when you were being obnoxious?" "Yes" "Your're
being obnoxious"
Posted by Solar Flare on October 4, 2005, 10:54 pm
He feels very threatened by many things and reacts this way as a result.
I am reminded at this point of a memorable piece of dialogue from
War Games, when the hero is talking to a couple of his hacker
buddies. The sane one says to the other, "Remember when you asked
me to tell you when you were being obnoxious?" "Yes" "Your're
being obnoxious"
Posted by wmbjk on October 5, 2005, 11:19 am
>> wrote:
>>
>>>> And they are only good for water pumping, not electrical
>>>> generation.
>>>I don't know where you get your info, but in the twenties and
>>>thirties
>> <sigh>
>>
>> We already have a resident flake who chose to imagine a
>> past-tense reference in Steve's statement. It isn't there.
>I am reminded at this point of a memorable piece of dialogue from
>War Games, when the hero is talking to a couple of his hacker
>buddies. The sane one says to the other, "Remember when you asked
>me to tell you when you were being obnoxious?" "Yes" "Your're
>being obnoxious"
Being obnoxious might be defined as reading something into a statement
that isn't there, and defending the mistake with silliness rather than
owning up to it. But hey, your critical thinking and reading
comprehension is right up there with Ghio's and Gymmy Bob's (aka solar
flare et al). Feel free to add that to your CV.
Wayne
Posted by George Ghio on September 26, 2005, 1:57 am
wmbjk wrote:
> wrote:
>
>
>>28 MPH in non turbulent air.
>>
>>End of story.
>>
>>http://www.cetsolar.com/windgen.htm .
>
>
>>Specifications
>>
>>Rotor Diameter:
>>46" (1.14 meters)
>>
>>Weight:
>>13 lbs (6 kg)
>>
>>Start up wind speed:
>>7 mph (3 m/s)
>>
>>Voltage:
>>12 & 24 VDC (36/48 VDC available soon)
>>
>>Output:
>>400 watts at 28 mph (12.5 m/s)
>
>
> No, those are the fluff specs, and you should know better than to
> quote them as meaningful or more realistic than the very well known
> and accepted demonstrated results here
> http://www.wind-works.org/articles/sm_AirXtest.html or here
> http://www.nrel.gov/docs/fy03osti/34756.pdf . Although on second
> thought, it makes perfect sense that you'd deny nrel test results. The
> only question is whether you'll call them cowboys, wankers, or some
> thing else equally silly. Or perhaps this will be another case where
> you will claim to have mystery "friends" who have results that differ
> from industry accepted ones?
>
> Unless you have some accredited and verifiable test results to the
> contrary, the undeniable fact is that the AirX brakes at just over 20
> mph, and its output at that speed is below 200 Watts. You could double
> the wind speed, the max will still be the same. If it didn't brake at
> 20, it would blaat just like its predecessor. Anyone with common sense
> would realise that braking the AirX is the only way it was made
> quieter.
>
> The older Air 403 with a similar rotor, but without the automatic
> braking feature, can actually make 400 Watts in 30+ mph winds.
>
> Wayne
Page 5 section 4 paragraph 2
Please note that this test and the test report are not an accredited
power performance test/test
report because parts of the NWTC quality assurance system were not followed.
http://www.nrel.gov/docs/fy03osti/34756.pdf
Still laughing. You really should learn to read.
>
>
>
>>>And they are only good for water pumping, not electrical
>>>generation.
>
>
>>I don't know where you get your info, but in the twenties and
>>thirties it was even money as to whether one of those windmills was
>>pumping water or running a Wincharger generator. They were quite
>>popular, at least in the Plains states where it was a long time
>>before REA (Rural Electrification Authority) got lines out to all
>>those homes way out there.
>
>
> <sigh>
>
> We already have a resident flake who chose to imagine a past-tense
> reference in Steve's statement. It isn't there.
>
> The type of windmills you're talking about *don't* offer (note present
> tense) any worthwhile advantage for electric power generation. If you
> or the flake have a time machine, or even a current source for antique
> power windmills, then please post some links so that we can compare
> them to readily available offerings.
>
>
>>And BTW, even if they were slower, the prudent owner either cocked
>>the tail a ways to slow the fan down or turned it all the way off
>>if high winds were expected.
>
>
> Having to take manual action in anticipation of high winds is now
> considered a severe design defect. Which is just one of the reasons
> that many-bladed windmills aren't practical for home power.
>
> BTW, Edison cells also *don't* offer (note present tense) any
> worthwhile advantage for home power.
>
> Wayne
Wayne