Build A Power Boat , Powered By Wind

You've got to be kidding !

Here, so many people interested in this subject. If you are versatile in knowledge. You will understand the value of our project.

http://tw.myblog.yahoo.com/diypower-boat/archive?l=f&id=1

 

we need NPO funds

Really! Would you give us the names of those funds(interested in prototype).
We have solution to the mileage of our project.

 

Kerosene
actually I was completely open minded when they first presented themselves and simply asked for the offered information, a detailed dynamic analysis, when they did a complete about face I instantly became skeptical and I expressed this skepticism as it was a pretty off move to offer information and then in the next post or something like that refuse to present it. Then in the process of my own research I discovered that the idea wasn't even there's, thats when the brawl began. Rick had unfortunately not presented a very strong argument in favor and we'd both had some gentlemanly fun with each other over it. I tend to look at the source of information as well as the information itself and in that case the source suffered a serious lack of credibility. Sure I was proven wrong in the end but I think we can all agree that the lack of credibility was pretty extreme. Ethics and integrity is a huge part in any conversation

I suppose the best analogy might be that if I thief liar and cheat comes to my door with something to sell, do I consider the product or the salesman before I let him in the house.

my apologies if I appeared difficult or offended anyone over there but I've had ideas stolen from me in the past and even now my patent might not be strong enough to protect me from having another great idea go the way of the dodo. Reality is there are some people who's sense of moral integrity is simply so low they really will steal your ideas and claim them as there own, and profit from them. Really pisses me of

windmills, no, just amazed at how poorly that whole thing was presented.

 

Hmm, I did two animations wrote numerous explanations, other people did their animations that explained that its all about leverage. So on so on. Instead of trying to understand the points being made the skeptics whined about fluid dynamics and more precise calculations (which were totally besides the point)
When people finally get it they complain on how it was explained badly or with "bad ethics". With all respect stinks like a ungraceful loser to me.

Rick has very openly shared credit and used other peoples work to support his arguments. To their credit they built the cart - I really don't see other fault than occasional arrogance but that certainly went more often the other way.

I don't have much problems as I have never been wrong. Once I thought I was wrong but when I checked I realized I was not.

 

You have put your cart in front of your horse windboat. From your posts, not intending to be rude, but I honestly don't think you have a project yet so much as an idea of what you'd like to pursue. By all means pursue it. But before asking anyone to invest in your interest, you need to do much more research and development on your own first. Stumble gave good advice. Money is not plentiful enough for someone to throw you a bag of cash to see what you can start working on in left field with no batting average.

 

No worries but it had nothing to do with winning or loosing and everything to do with lying, cheating and stealing. I don't think we even got into discussing the device before the ethics thing sunk those guys. Kinda puts a damper on the conversation or at least for me it does. I'm also going to have to disagree that they gave any credit until I pointed out that the devise was not invented or designed by them at all. Seemed to really piss them off that I mentioned it actually and if I remember thats when the fireworks really started

I might have bailed out by the time other explanations were offered as I don't recall really speaking to anyone else about it other than I think it was three people, might have been only two. I pretty much figured it out by myself elsewhere after having seriously had enough of those guys antics. If I remember it went down hill pretty darn fast once I mentioned that the idea wasn't even there's and they lied about presenting a detailed analysis. after that it was pretty unlikely anyone was going to consider there position. In the sciences the ethical history of the author is a definite consideration when studying someone's work. Maybe its not that way in engineering but in science its a huge factor.

no sense dredging up the past, I was wrong, no big deal, but lying cheating and stealing has much larger implications and tends to travel with the guilty party. Personally I find that to have been the major issue and not the fact that a counterintuitive device is exactly as its name suggests, counterintuitive.

no worries
there is always more than one lesson to be learned out of every experience.

 

Windboat,

My point was I am one of the guys who searches out and finds ideas, then brings the ideas to investors. There are no funds per se, since every idea has different investors. But for your idea I can think of a half dozen people to bring the idea too. But at this point you don't have enough data to make that type of presentation possible.

I won't kill my credibility with an idea that isn't at least reasonably well thought out. Preferably with a proof of concept if not a proto-type. But at this point you can't even answer basic questions about fundamental issues like range, recharge time, weight, cost, ect... Go back through this thread an email me when you are ready, then we can talk non-disclosures and money. Until then I wouldnt consider this a serious proposal.

 

At the moment your concept isn't a project, it's just an outline idea. It has no value at all, because it is wholly unrealistic. You have no value to an investor because you refuse to accept that all of your calculations and estimates are massively in error. No investor is going to put money into an idea that has such unrealistic performance expectations.

The idea of a wind powered serial hybrid boat has been around a long time and people have built small scale proof of concept boats (up to around 10m LOA) over the years. For a small range of applications the idea works OK, but because of the significant power availability limitations the idea only works for boats that are easily driven, operate at low speed in sheltered waters and can accept the limitations imposed by being reliant on the wind for power, with the consequent energy density per unit area and time restrictions that this imposes.

Potential investors should note that the author of this thread has deliberately ignored every attempt to correct errors in his assumptions and data, be they realistic estimates of range/endurance, motor power requirement, charge/usage duty cycle or even really basic physics, like the time to accelerate to cruise speed. If I were an investor this would sound a very loud warning NOT to invest funds at this stage.

With an injection of technical expertise and some significant changes to the proposed power requirements and consequent performance envelope the idea may have merit, but as it stands it has all the hallmarks of being either an investor rip-off or just the musings of a dreamer.

Jeremy

 

Someone bring out the windmill direct drive boat formula

For the windmill direct drive boat, it must have a Terminal velocity(against the wind)
. In the aspect of perfect windmill efficiency is 59%. Is there someone bring
out the formula.
Many thanks!

 

Manpower & brain

http://www.wretch.cc/blog/doll1027/11704550

Build a boat , by man *power & brain*

 

The Betz limit indicates that an efficiency 0.593 is the best that can be achieved with an infinitely thin disc extracting all the energy available from the wind, but a practical wind turbine will struggle to achieve an efficiency of greater than around 0.45, due to hub, mast and blade related losses. This is an energy relationship though, not one directly associated with velocity.

The concept of a maximum velocity going against, or directly with, the wind is one that has been discussed here before, but in essence it is the relative power relationship that is important. If the turbine can extract more power from the wind than that needed to overcome boat total resistance (hydrodynamic plus aerodynamic drag) then it will accelerate to a speed where the power delivered matches the power consumed. Within reason this can be any speed and direction and can certainly be greater than the wind speed.

There have been quite a few "windmill boats" built over the years; the idea has been discussed here in some depth before: http://www.boatdesign.net/forums/pr...ats-how-many-out-there-they-viable-14182.html . This wind turbine powered catamaran was built a few years ago and sailed around the south coat of the UK a year or two ago, but I've not heard much about it recently: http://www.treehugger.com/files/2007/02/windmill_sailbo.php

Jeremy

 

Re the formula we should focus on against wind olny

Re the formula we should focus on against wind olny. If not, It will too
difficult for brain to understand. In true motion ,The Betz limit is 0.593, So
the boat will not fast than wind speed. But ,people on the boat the wind speed is wind speed plus boat speed. as the boat speed up ,The air resistance will increase quickly , also the water resistance rise. Soon , the
wind energy is not enough to against total resistances , the boat reach Terminal velocity. What is the formula?

 

I don't think you read what I wrote, or at least you didn't understand it.

The Betz limit isn't a velocity limit, it is an energy limit. There is no "terminal velocity" as you describe.

In simple terms, Betz' Law states that you cannot extract more than 59.3% of the energy available in any given section through the wind, even if you have a perfect energy extraction device, the true efficiency will be around 40 to 45%.

You are, once again, wrong when you say that such a boat cannot travel faster than the wind speed. It can and it will, just as I have explained in the post you quoted. To satisfy the law of conservation of energy all that is required is that the power needed to drive the boat be equal to the power extracted from the wind. The relative velocities aren't a factor, other than in the way they effect both sides of the equation. If you make the hull power requirement low and the aerodynamic drag of the wind turbine low, and if you gear the system so that power can be extracted from the wind at best efficiency and power can be delivered to the water at best efficiency then you will be able to get speeds greater than wind speed pretty much in all directions. The interesting case, and one discussed here at great length some time ago, is going down wind faster than the wind. It is perfectly possible and has been proven to be so, but the concept can be difficult to grasp until you can understand the way that the wind turbine is working to extract energy in that case.

Jeremy

 

The formula is quite simple:

Power_in = Power_out​

Power_in is the net power input from the apparent wind, generated by the wind turbine
Power out is the power required to overcome the boat's hydro/aerodynamic drag (wind turbine included), mechanical, propeller and (eventually) electrical losses, and power due to inertial forces (if accelerated motion is considered).
You're the designer of the boat, you should do the math.
Cheers

 

If your turbine is moving upwind, then there is no limit on the power (in Watts) you can harvest, because you interact with a greater volume of air than a stationary turbine. The faster you go the more air passes through the turbine, so its power output increases continuously, even if your efficiency stays well below the Betz limit.

In fact the team that build a maned DDWFTTW land vechicle, want to go directly UPwind faster than wind this year. They started to build a new rotor already:
http://www.fasterthanthewind.org/2011/06/taking-downwind-cart-in-new-direction.html
I'm pretty sure that this turbine will have a quite low turbine-efficiency, below 20%. It is rather optimized to minimize drag for a given power output.