Turbinator Technologies Concept Design Review Group C4: Turbinator Technologies April 22 nd and 24 th, 2008 Bryan Delaney, Robert Herzog, John Larson, Michael O’Brien, and Alex Vossler

Turbinator Technologies Purpose Portable source of power (20 W at 12 V for an average wind of 15 mph) Portable source of power (20 W at 12 V for an average wind of 15 mph) Disaster relief Disaster relief –Power a radio, phone and/or light –Reusable –Inexpensive Other Applications Other Applications

Turbinator Technologies Concept Design Requirements

Turbinator Technologies Concept 3 Blade Horizontal Wind Turbine 3 Blade Horizontal Wind Turbine –50% more efficient than vertical wind turbine –Smaller and more portable than a vertical wind turbine

Turbinator Technologies Weight Rationale: One person can carry on back Rationale: One person can carry on back Entire system weighs 47.8 lbs Entire system weighs 47.8 lbs

Turbinator Technologies Size 4 Primary Subsystems 4 Primary Subsystems –Nacelle –Blades –Poles –Base No piece longer than 30” No piece longer than 30”

Turbinator Technologies

Tip-Over Prevention  Trade Study Results  User-supplied weight  Two 60 lbs sandbags  Withstand > 28 lb f  Expected at 30 mph  Trade Study Results  Prototype - Withstood 28 mph gusts  Ratchet straps for triangulation

Turbinator Technologies Electrodynamic Brake User-operated “kill” switch User-operated “kill” switch Shorts generator across terminals Shorts generator across terminals Prevents potential injury and device failure Prevents potential injury and device failure

Turbinator Technologies Band brake actuated by DC motor Band brake actuated by DC motor Prototype – push button activated Prototype – push button activated Generator limited to 3A continuous duty Generator limited to 3A continuous duty –Turbine limited to 900 RPM Ensures safety Ensures safety Mechanical Brake

Turbinator Technologies Band Brake Operation

Turbinator Technologies Blade Design Modified Blade Element Theory Modified Blade Element Theory –Assumes axial induction factors to be negligible Power:Thrust: Blade Element Geometry

Turbinator Technologies Power vs. Blade 15 mph wind

Turbinator Technologies Blade Design Decisions E387 Airfoil profile E387 Airfoil profile 24” radius Blades 24” radius Blades Twist 16.7 o from root to tip Twist 16.7 o from root to tip Cord taper from 4” at root to 1” at tip Cord taper from 4” at root to 1” at tip Source: National Renewable Energy Laboratory

Turbinator Technologies Blade Development PVC PVC Foam and Fiberglass Foam and Fiberglass Outsource Air-X Carbon Fiber Blades Outsource Air-X Carbon Fiber Blades

Turbinator Technologies Performance Testing

Turbinator Technologies Prototype Performance P = ½ηρV 3

Turbinator Technologies Prototype Goals Power Extraction Efficiency: 6% Power Extraction Efficiency: 6% Tip over force: > 28 lbs Tip over force: > 28 lbs Weight: < 50 lbs Weight: < 50 lbs Assembly Time: < 60 min Assembly Time: < 60 min Embedded Intelligence: Embedded Intelligence: –Display RPM –Display Voltage –Display Current BONUS: Brake BONUS: Brake 17% Average Measured 17% Average Measured Tested over full range. Tested over full range lbs 47.8 lbs 22 minutes 22 minutes Intelligence: Intelligence: –RPM with Microcontroller –Voltage/Current Displayed Electrical and Mechanical Brake Installed Electrical and Mechanical Brake Installed

Turbinator Technologies Conclusion Feasible Design Feasible Design –Prototype met all of the performance requirements Final Product Improvements Final Product Improvements –Weatherproof nacelle –Automated mechanical brake –Lighter weight materials –Packaging –Mold Blades or Outsource

Turbinator Technologies Questions ?

Turbinator Technologies Blade Twist Power vs. Blade RadiusPitch Angle vs. Blade Radius