Small Waterwheel Produces Cheap Electricity for Your Home.

It is clear to me that a decimal, or perhaps two has been misplaced as to the power production. To generate just 1 KW at 18″ of head will require roughly 1 horsepower which is 33,000 ft-lbs/minute. That equals about 4,000 gallons/min…..This stream looks like 200/gpm at best. Certainly not 4,000.

HH McDonald PE, BSME

I think you're right, and there is not a word about what kind of mechanism converts the water power into electrical. 70% efficiency - I wanna se it!

In-Reply-To Message by dkwarner: (Use Copy & Paste or drag text to quote the original text.)

"I think you're right, and there is not a word about what kind of mechanism converts the water power into electrical. 70% efficiency - I wanna se it!"

Answer by HHM:

Some water wheels can be quite efficient.....70% is common. The error in the article is that there is clearly not the energy in the stream to produce the power that is claimed. Wrong by a factor of at least 10.

Also this is no invention!!! Not even an innovation. Just "Google" Microhydro to see similar devices.

The ignorant media keeps printing stuff like this re: Hydrogen power, Wind power, and solar power, keeping the public and the politicians confused. WHERE IS THE SCIENCE EDITOR!!!

HH McDonald PE BSME

70% efficiency in converting water kinetic & potential energy into rotary mechanical, yes. But that still has to be converted into electricity, and I got the impression that the unit was converting 70% of the water's energy into electrical energy - THAT's what I want to see.

Enthusiasm for this needs to be tempered with the provisions of "riparian rights" under UK Common Law, which places duties and restrictions on what a landowner may do with an adjacent watercourse...

As I suspected, the design has been patented (it's still at the international application stage). The patent application has been published, so we can all read how to build one, and look at the diagrams.

For those not familiar with patents, remember that the first aim of these documents is to protect the applicant/holder from infringements, not to provide full and explict engineering drawings. Also, infringement only occurs if you sell the item, building one for yourself is not infringement.

The patent application can be found here.

And the Beck Mickle website is here.

For UK CR4 members with streams in their gardens - look out for the advertising flyers in your electricity bills! At least, that's one of the advertising plans the MBA students working on commercialisation have come up with...would you advertise your rival?!

Still not a word on the conversion from mechanical to electrical energy!

That's not the point of the invention. I've read the patent & they claim for 145mm high "wheel" with 400ml troughs they get 150-250W. Ways to increase this are given (multiple wheels, increased trough size). 80% max efficiency is claimed at 170W and load speed of 35-40 rpm.

The search document shows only two claims (13 & 21) as being novel. The international patent was filed 02 Feb 2006; there is no further action as of today. The main claim, of keeping buckets upright to maximise potential energy conversion is well known and so will not be granted (IMHO).

Perhaps an email to the company addy to ask what dynamo/generator they used would solve the mystery? Or a trip to Lancaster University to search their library for the thesis submitted by the undermentioned PhD student who also worked on this!

I looked at the drawing in the patent application and I would choose to describe the contraption as absurd. The thing is so complex as to be completely unworkable for the long term. If someone is selling these things, it must be to the same people that wear copper bracelets to cure arthritis. There are far superior simple "wheels" that are in the public domain for low head applications. I stand by my assertions made in posting No. 7.

HHM

I thought the purpose of the device was to provide electricity for a home; that is to convert the energy of flowing water into electrical energy. Converting the energy of the water into shaft rotation or other mechanical energy is only the first step. Any measure of efficiency of the device MUST include ALL the conversions involved between flowing water and useable electric energy, either AC or DC.

I agree that the newspaper articles sing the praises of the device as a generator, and I would like to see what they use. The patent makes little reference except to claim that a generator could be attached to the output shaft. <shrug>

I was thinking about this last night - how much filtering would be needed to ensure your wheel wsn't fouled by twigs? How would you provide flow past for the water fauna? Is a payback time of 2 years really economic for householders?

If you want a laugh try reading the comments on the Daily Mail's site - talk about jumping blindly onto band-wagons. I particularly like the suggestions to install one in water main to generate electricity each time you flush or use the tap. I'm a mechie - would such intermittant, low level battery charging be worthwhile? And look out for the perpetual motion comment...

Thank you English Rose for the link to the "Daily Mail" site. I could not resist posting this comment to them:

Where is your science editor? To generate the power that is claimed the stream would must flow 4,000 gallons per minute. I looks less than 400 to me. The laws of thermodynamics have NOT been changed. Like Sir Winston Churchill said: "The best argument against democracy is a 5 minute conversation with the average voter".

Harrison McDonald P.E.

I posted a comment yesterday about the deleterious effect of windfarms on wild birds, but it's not yet been approved :o(

We have quite a few Wind Farms here in Texas. They seem to work well and I have heard no complaint from the "tree huggers" about bird loss. Believe me, if one little tweety bird was killed someone would make a fuss. There is probably much more loss of life resulting from the foul combustion products of coal fired power plants than any number of wind farms. Untill we learn how to control Thermo-Nuclear Fusion to produce electricity, these problems will be with us. The Wind Farms that I have observed are inland. In costal areas bird loss could be more frequent. I think it is something we will have to tolerate. Birds are quite a problem at airports and for aviation in general. I am a pilot and I have a lot of respect for the damage a large bird can cause to an airplane. Not to worry, if Darwin was correct and I believe he was, natural selection will sort this all out. AIDS is doing well to work down the overpopulation issue. This could also have a very positive effect on the IQ of the general population. Eventually, perhaps, all the sucide-prone Muslems will blow themselves up, hopefully before reproduction. Natural selection laws and the laws of thermodynamics.......the politicians would love to change them but they can't.

H.H. McDonald P.E.