General > General Technical Chat
Unusual design of a free-flow hydropower station
IanB:
--- Quote from: Hydro on February 06, 2024, 07:12:39 am ---Another factor.
3 kW at with a depth of 1 m (turbine height) is being actively discussed and no longer seems to raise doubts.
A conventional free-flow turbine (Darier turbine or Savonius rotor) under such conditions according to the Betz limit can theoretically produce only 0.5 kW * 0.59 = 0.295 kW
However, as can be seen from the table, increasing the vertical size of the turbine (depth) increases the turbine power in a cubic dependence.
Thus, by increasing the vertical size to 1.5 m, we will increase the turbine power by 1.5^3 = 3.375
That is, up to 11 kW
And daily energy production is 275 kWh!
Is this not enough for anyone else’s home?
--- End quote ---
There is no such power because all the numbers quoted are fiction and no such device can operate in the manner described.
Hydro:
--- Quote from: Hydro on February 05, 2024, 01:21:08 pm ---
--- End quote ---
pcprogrammer:
--- Quote from: Hydro on February 06, 2024, 05:19:20 am ---Another one managed to multiply 3 kW per millisecond and is proud of it.
Hey dude ! Try multiplying it by a nanosecond! You will get 0.000..... 0000952778KWh.
Your wife will be proud of you!
--- End quote ---
Get your own facts straight. The number I stated is per second. Multiply it by 3600 and you get the alleged 3.4KWh. There is nothing wrong with the math I used there. Converting energy expressed in Joules to KWh means simply divide by 3600000. Look it up on the internet.
And I owned up to the fact that I overlooked the continuous nature of the alleged 3430J/s.
I say alleged because what is on paper is yet to be proven to be correct in real live, and the first video does not show it, no matter the size of that pulley.
Hydro:
--- Quote from: ebastler on February 05, 2024, 08:46:05 pm ---
* We still don't know who that mysterious "professor from Michigan" is, whose analysis Hydro has shared three times (and who just happens to publish in Serbian according to Hydro, so we only get censored English excerpts from his work).
--- End quote ---
Shared even three times ?? ;D
Did you count?
Commendable!
What attention the topic has attracted!
And you say it's not interesting... ;D
For me it is defined as Serbian.
And you ?
ebastler:
I get it that you have no scientific background, man. But could you please learn to adhere to just the minimum of a proper scientific discourse, by disclosing your full sources? No screenshots of partial documents, no blanked-out names, but actual links to the source? It is not difficult.
On a more general note, I don't get your approach to this thread. You seem to look for validation of the technology. (In an electronics forum, which is not the best place to start with, by the way.) But if technical validation is what you want -- why don't you give us the full information? And why do you push back so heavily if someone criticizes the technology? Isn't criticism exactly what you came for?
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version