Posted by Gene S. Berkowitz on April 11, 2010, 10:03 pm
> Josepi wrote:
>
> > I am no expert but simply put, RPM speed, like a plane prop. Wide
> > blades cause too much air resistance.
>
> If the goal of a house fan is to generate as much air flow as possible
> with as small a motor as possible (and possibly as weak a motor as
> possible) then the result is fan blades that are wide and fat. When it
> comes to making air move, blades that are wide and fat seem to be used
> in more situations vs blades that are long and thin.
>
> Wide and fat blades seem to be efficient at making air move.
>
> Why isin't the converse true - that wide and fat blades are more
> efficient at being moved by air?
The size and shape of the blades is not determined by solely by
efficiency.
* Wide, fat blades increase the wind load that the tower has to
withstand. You can't put guy wires on a large wind machine, so
the monopole tower is a trade-off between cost and strength.
* Nobody wants to look at giant lollipop disks on the horizon.
Wind machine aesthetics has a lot to do with reducing opposition
to them.
* Big disks cast big shadows. Thin blades cast thin shadows.
--Gene
Posted by Bob F on April 12, 2010, 12:50 am
Gene S. Berkowitz wrote:
>> Josepi wrote:
>>
>>> I am no expert but simply put, RPM speed, like a plane prop. Wide
>>> blades cause too much air resistance.
>>
>> If the goal of a house fan is to generate as much air flow as
>> possible with as small a motor as possible (and possibly as weak a
>> motor as possible) then the result is fan blades that are wide and
>> fat. When it comes to making air move, blades that are wide and fat
>> seem to be used in more situations vs blades that are long and thin.
>>
>> Wide and fat blades seem to be efficient at making air move.
>>
>> Why isin't the converse true - that wide and fat blades are more
>> efficient at being moved by air?
> The size and shape of the blades is not determined by solely by
> efficiency.
And the concept that wide fat blades are more efficient than narrow blades
because wide fat blades are used in cheapo house fans is ludicrous. Larger
commercial pesestal fans, for instance often use a much narrower blade than the
cheap residential fans.
It is an interesting way to arrive at a conclusion, but hardly a sensible one.
Posted by Energy Guy on April 12, 2010, 3:49 am
Bob F wrote:
> And the concept that wide fat blades are more efficient than narrow
> blades because wide fat blades are used in cheapo house fans is
> ludicrous. Larger commercial pesestal fans, for instance often use
> a much narrower blade than the cheap residential fans.
You mean like these:
https://www.northerntool.com/images/product/images/2507403_lg.jpg
http://www.jumpandparty.net/images/pedestal%20fan.jpg
http://www.victorygardensupply.com/inventory/images/APF616.jpg
https://www.horticulturesource.com/images/cache/large_thumbnail/eco-5619B-2.jpg
http://s7.kmart.com/is/image/Sears/03241033000?heiP0&widP0&op_sharpen=1
It's a fact that any fan you can find (industrial, commercial, farm,
etc) will have a larger blade-area to swept-area ratio than the large
3-blade wind power plants.
Posted by Daniel who wants to know on April 12, 2010, 4:48 am
> Bob F wrote:
>> And the concept that wide fat blades are more efficient than narrow
>> blades because wide fat blades are used in cheapo house fans is
>> ludicrous. Larger commercial pesestal fans, for instance often use
>> a much narrower blade than the cheap residential fans.
> You mean like these:
> https://www.northerntool.com/images/product/images/2507403_lg.jpg
> http://www.jumpandparty.net/images/pedestal%20fan.jpg
> http://www.victorygardensupply.com/inventory/images/APF616.jpg
> https://www.horticulturesource.com/images/cache/large_thumbnail/eco-5619B-2.jpg
> http://s7.kmart.com/is/image/Sears/03241033000?heiP0&widP0&op_sharpen=1
> It's a fact that any fan you can find (industrial, commercial, farm,
> etc) will have a larger blade-area to swept-area ratio than the large
> 3-blade wind power plants.
Do a Google image search for "drum fan" and look at the blades. Most have 3
long and skinny blades.
http://images.google.com/images?q=drum+fan BTW only links 1,2, and 4 have
commercial pedestal fans. The other 2 links are fancy residential models.
Drum fans are industrial/commercial.
Posted by Energy Guy on April 12, 2010, 3:39 am
"Gene S. Berkowitz" wrote:
> > Wide and fat blades seem to be efficient at making air move.
> >
> > Why isin't the converse true - that wide and fat blades are
> > more efficient at being moved by air?
>
> The size and shape of the blades is not determined by solely by
> efficiency.
>
> * Wide, fat blades increase the wind load that the tower has
> to withstand.
But your premise in that case is that you take an existing tower, with
it's 3 long, skinny blades, and replace them with 3 fat blades. That
wouldn't really happen. You scale down the 3 fat blades (they wouldn't
be as long as the typical long, thin blade) and the tower wouldn't need
to be so tall either.
> * Nobody wants to look at giant lollipop disks on the horizon.
And as mentioned above, the new tower (with it's 3 fat blades) isin't
going to be as tall, so it wouldn't be as visible from a distance.
I would even argue that 3 fat blades turning in the distance wouldn't be
as visually noticable (from a motion or movement pov) as 3 long and thin
blades.
>
> > I am no expert but simply put, RPM speed, like a plane prop. Wide
> > blades cause too much air resistance.
>
> If the goal of a house fan is to generate as much air flow as possible
> with as small a motor as possible (and possibly as weak a motor as
> possible) then the result is fan blades that are wide and fat. When it
> comes to making air move, blades that are wide and fat seem to be used
> in more situations vs blades that are long and thin.
>
> Wide and fat blades seem to be efficient at making air move.
>
> Why isin't the converse true - that wide and fat blades are more
> efficient at being moved by air?