Mechanical Power Transmission

Do you think this could help jump start wind power generation in the U.S?

hell yes, and reduce the consumption of energy by the end user by using these super gearboxes in their facilities.

Can we come up with enough advances to help wind power application pick up speed?

$150.00/barrel of oil should do it.

phoenix911

50% more torque capacity is great but as far as I know I have not read about the gear boxes being the hold back on wind turbine design and production.

From what I can recall from my mechanical power classes years ago a properly designed inline gear box with full synthetic oil is around 95% - 98% efficient in transferring power from input to output. Granted there are many types with far less efficiency.

Check out your standard issue vehicle or truck manual transmission. they can transfer loads of energy while generating only a small amount of heat. Hence the relatively small size Vs the power they carry.

People can chase and nit pick the mechanics and minute efficiency issues until the end of time but without positive cooperation of politicians, manufactures and environmentalists none of it does any good.

Whats holding back wind power is a combination of storage issues, politics, manufacturing rate limits and manufactures greed. Plus the application and implementation of practical common sense!

There is not enough off peak energy storage systems in place yet to balance the variable output of wind power.

There is too much counter productive politics to allow further and faster development of systems and related issues.

There are not enough manufactures of large or medium sized units so the cost is held high simply by supply and demand and the some what reluctant stand manufactures take in regards to expanding their manufacturing output capacity simply because a little greed goes a long way in keeping the prices higher.

People need to focus on the big issues that stand in the way of how and why wind power does not get implemented more. Compact mechanical size, extremely high efficiency, and capacity is sort of pointless in a way since the power source is free. Why double the time, effort, and money to get a few percent gain in system efficiency when a second unit could have been built for the same cost and provide a higher combined output than what the efficiency gains would accomplish using just one machine?

Many good points but....

Compact mechanical size, extremely high efficiency, and capacity is sort of pointless in a way since the power source is free.

If the unit size (blade length) could be reduced by increasing power transmission efficiency the overall unit cost would too.

Or you could call it competition...

Love your signature. It is unfortunately so true.

Yet, off-shore wind turbines in Holland were reportedly only getting about 18 months life from their gear boxes when they first started running these things- salt air is not very friendly to mechanical systems, either. I don't know if the gear boxes have been imp0roved to give longer life as yet- this information is somewhat dated. But the gear box is most definitely a critical component, and efficiency is not going to be the primary concern...

Gear box is no longer an issue with the turbine sold by Enercon : No gear box at all - Direct drive to the alternator. I believe they toyed with a 6 MW model and currently offer a 5 MW. I am told those bigger models are meant to be installed at sea as they would require cranes too big for the roads. GE was the winder of the early alternator used by Enercon and they may have gotten back together. As far as I know, those are the biggest wind turbines in the world.